3 ms·
> I'd assume that a modern CPU would do the same amount of work with a fraction of energy so that it does not even make economical sense to run such outdated ha
by eadmund 1y ago
> I'd assume that a modern CPU would do the same amount of work with a fraction of energy so that it does not even make economical sense to run such outdated hardware.
There are 8,760 hours in a non-leap year. Electricity in the U.S. averages 12.53 cents per kilowatt hour[1]. A really power-hungry CPU running full-bore at 500 W for a year would thus use about $550 of electricity. Even if power consumption dropped by half, that’s only about 10% of the cost of a new computer, so the payoff date of an upgrade is ten years in the future (ignoring the cost of performing the upgrade, which is non-negligible — as is the risk).
And of course buying a new computer is a capital expense, while paying for electricity is an operating expense.
1: https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.php?t=epmt_5_6_a https://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.ph...
- wang_li 1y agoYou can buy a mini pc for less than $550. For $200 on Amazon you can get an N97 based box with 12 GB RAM and 4 cores running at 3 GHz and a 500 GB SATA SSD. That’s got to be as fast as their current build systems and supports the required instructions.
- 1oooqooq 1y agoif you don't understand bandwidths and how long componenets can run at the 80pctile before failure, you're out of your element in this discussion.
- officeplant 1y agoThose single memory channel shitboxes aren't even fast enough to be usable during big windows updates let alone used in production.