tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20686335.post114801185053318095..comments2023-07-28T07:47:21.081-05:00Comments on Chicagrafo: I still hate LucyUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20686335.post-1148074020433118452006-05-19T16:27:00.000-05:002006-05-19T16:27:00.000-05:00i believe Woodcrest's TDP announced by Intel is me...i believe Woodcrest's TDP announced by Intel is merely a smoke screen to confuse regular Joes.<BR/><BR/>http://www.silentpcreview.com/article169-page4.html<BR/><BR/>Intel's definition for TDP is actually the power dissipation under normal circumstances.<BR/>stated on the site, intel is "relying on the fact that most applications barely use the CPU, assuming that it will remain idle most of the time." as a result, intel's TDP is NOT the actual TDP in reality. <BR/>taking Prescott for example, its TDP advertised is 89W, when under load is 111w.<BR/><BR/>on the other hand, AMD's definition for TDP is the "maximum current the CPU can draw", using default voltage, and under the worst case temperature conditions. this means the advertised TDP is significantly higher than TDP in reality.<BR/><BR/>JohnAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com