Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
which audio interface supports Windows hibernate mode, well?
I use Echo gina2496. when my Os(window xp or 2000) goes into hibernate mode. and awaken. the horrible bluescreen appears and my computer downed I should change my audio interface. which audio interface supports Windows hibernate mode, well? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
hibernate mode save electcricity ,therefore save money
thanks |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... hibernate mode save electcricity, Negligible. therefore save money No hibernate saves your work and your business. No business = no money. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Julian wrote:
On 13 Jun 2005 23:36:35 -0700, wrote: hibernate mode save electcricity ,therefore save money thanks Use no screensaver, turn off monitor and hard disks in power settings, saves the same amount of money and doesn't make blue screens of death. That will save some energy, but perhaps not as much as putting the device into Stand By mode. Going in and out of hibernate mode is quite a severe operation, since it involves writing the contents of memory to disk and then totally shutting off power, then restoring memory from disk after power is restored. Importantly, I believe device drivers have to restore a device to a running state after its power in effect been cut, but without a full reboot. I'm pretty sure it's possible to write a device driver that behaves just fine normally but has a fatal bug that is exposed only when going into (or coming out of) hibernate mode. Anyway, the point is that Stand By mode is sort of similar to Hibernate mode, but memory isn't dumped to hard disk, and power isn't removed from the whole system. Still, it should save more power than just having the hard disk spin down and the monitor blank. Doing a quick test, I have a 1.3 GHz Athlon machine running Windows XP with 3 disk drives in it. I hooked it up to my "Kill-a-Watt" meter (which measures how much power it is drawing from the 120V outlet) and tested the power usage of the computer itself in a few scenarios: running normally, but idle: 145W to 160W, but usually 150W all hard disks spun down, display blanked: 124W Stand By mode: 60W Hibernate mode: 2-3W totally "off": 2-3W after I flip power supply's rocker switch to "0": 0W So, it would seem that Stand By mode isn't nearly as good as off or hibernate, but it's a lot better than enabling the hard disks to spin down and so on. On the other hand, it's entirely possible that the system may crash with Stand By mode as well... - Logan |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
yes i already once removed the interface.
no audio interface, no bluescreen my driver is latest 6.08 I hate beta driver like 6.11 but echo's driver is quite good . but does not support hibernate .... but,I am using window2000 sp2 |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
running normally, but idle: 145W to 160W, but usually 150W
all hard disks spun down, display blanked: 124W Stand By mode: 60W Hibernate mode: 2-3W totally "off": 2-3W after I flip power supply's rocker switch to "0": 0W That's a cool set of measurements, and tells us a lot. The only factor that isn't accounted for here is the monitor power. -John O |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
John O wrote:
running normally, but idle: 145W to 160W, but usually 150W all hard disks spun down, display blanked: 124W Stand By mode: 60W Hibernate mode: 2-3W totally "off": 2-3W Hibernate = totally off. after I flip power supply's rocker switch to "0": 0W Now that's what I call *totally off* That's a cool set of measurements, and tells us a lot. The only factor that isn't accounted for here is the monitor power. -John O |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote in message news:OIvre.6653$L65.1618@trnddc05... wrote in message oups.com... hibernate mode save electcricity, Negligible. Not if you're operating on battery only, as in 'laptop'... Mikey Nova Music Productions |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
"Michael Wozniak" wrote in message nk.net... "David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote in message news:OIvre.6653$L65.1618@trnddc05... wrote in message oups.com... hibernate mode save electcricity, Negligible. Not if you're operating on battery only, as in 'laptop'... Mikey Nova Music Productions There really is a large consumption savings, on any type. But if you're at a point where 'hibernate' is an issue, why not simply save and shut down as opposed to caching the memory and risking data loss? DM |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
John O wrote:
running normally, but idle: 145W to 160W, but usually 150W all hard disks spun down, display blanked: 124W Stand By mode: 60W Hibernate mode: 2-3W totally "off": 2-3W after I flip power supply's rocker switch to "0": 0W That's a cool set of measurements, and tells us a lot. The only factor that isn't accounted for here is the monitor power. DPMS monitors can basically be in one of five states. The first four are specified by DPMS: 1. on (there's a picture) 2. stand-by (electron gun not firing electrons at phosphors, but the power supply is on) 3. suspend ((gun's?) power supply is off) 4. "off" (but ready to wake up). And the fifth: 5. unplugged or turned off by a mechanical switch In theory, these could range all over the map, but in practice there is a huge gap between stand-by and suspend. In other words, "on" and "stand-by" both use 90%-100% of the power, and "suspend", "off", and unplugged use 10% or less of the maximum power. Anyway, some tests. First, tests of an old (mid-1990's vintage) MAG Innovision 21" CRT monitor: on, regular desktop color, 1280x1024: 120W on, but with the screen mostly full of white: 144W on, but with the screen mostly full of black: 111W on, regular desktop color, 800x600: 100W on, 800x600, white screen: 125W on, 800x600, black screen: 92W after windows turns it "off" due to no user input: drops to 76W, stabilizes there for ~5s, then drops to 37W (and monitor indicates "POWER SAVING SUSPEND" on its offscreen LCD display) after putting windows into "standby" mode: same 76W, then 37W behavior as above after putting windows into "hibernate" mode: drops to 76W, but then down to 27W; (still says "POWER SAVING SUSPEND") after shutting windows down completely: drops to 76W, then 27W after I flip the rocker switch on the back of the computer: still 27W after I punch the mechanical power button on the monitor: 0W (finally) Conclusions from that: 1. All you people who tell us hacker people we are weirdos for having green or amber text on a black background? Well, now you know that by using that so-called weird color combination, we are actually saving the environment, so THERE! 2. The resolution makes a difference. This is a little surprising since it's still the same area that's being lit up. Apparently making the beam scan faster (even though it's the same strength?) makes a difference. 3. This monitor's power-saving support SUCKS. I did a similar test on a newer CRT monitor once, and it drops down to like 3-5W in situations where the above monitor only drops to 27W. So, this monitor is probably not representative of CRTs in real life. It probably doesn't implement DPMS "off" mode and substitutes "suspend" instead. (But, I only paid $25 for the thing, so I guess I can't complain *too* much.) 4. Since I leave the computer this monitor is attached to off most of the time, the difference between 27W and 0W is pretty huge for me. I pay about $0.10/kW-hr, so this 27W difference costs me something like $2.00 a month! 5. My Kill-a-Watt meter, which was I think $25 or so, just paid for itself by detecting that 27W that I didn't know the monitor was sucking down while it's not doing anything, assuming I can get in the habit of hitting the power switch when I should. And now, some more tests. This time on a new Samsung SyncMaster 213T hooked up with DVI. This monitor is 21" nominal size, but its actual usable display area is actually more than 1" larger than the 21" CRT mentioned above. on, regular desktop color, 1600x1200: 40W on, with screen mostly white: 40W on, with screen mostly black: 40W 800x600: 40W after mac turns it "off" due to no user input: 1W if i turn if "off" with the monitor's front panel button: 1W Conclusions from that: 1. This LCD is using about the same amount of power at its peak usage as the CRT is when it's in "POWER SAVING SUSPEND" mode. 2. If you want to save power and you use the computer a lot, the difference between "on" for the LCD and CRT is *huge*. At my $0.10/kW-hr rate (and having the monitor on about 12 hours a day, since I use it for work and personal stuff both), I probably save $3 a month just by going to LCD. Sure, it's going to take me a while to recoup my $600 investment, but it's nice to know I am at least saving some money. Um, I think that should be enough info to cover everything. If anyone wants to know how much my refrigerator uses let me know... ;-) - Logan |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 03:59:20 GMT, Logan Shaw
wrote: Um, I think that should be enough info to cover everything. If anyone wants to know how much my refrigerator uses let me know... ;-) Great stuff; much thanks; just spared me a bunch of work, and more inportantly a bunch of thinking. Very little of the latter still available. Thanks! Chris Hornbeck "Foster Dulles went inside to order Princess Beatrice a Molotov cocktail. When it was served, she drank it down in one gulp" -JLG _Sympathy for the Devil_ 1969 |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Logan Shaw" wrote in message... Um, I think that should be enough info to cover everything. If anyone wants to know how much my refrigerator uses let me know... ;-) Yup... I'm printing a hard copy of that one for a keeper. Thanks! DM |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Logan Shaw" wrote in message... If anyone wants to know how much my refrigerator uses let me know... ;-) Doesn't that depend on how many children you have? |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Wow, great stuff. A couple comments...
2. The resolution makes a difference. This is a little surprising since it's still the same area that's being lit up. Apparently making the beam scan faster (even though it's the same strength?) makes a difference. Higher resolutions push the sweep circuits much harder, since there's so much more data to put on the screen in the same raster scan. I bet the refresh rate would have a major impact on power consumption as well. 3. This monitor's power-saving support SUCKS. Mid-90's was the early days of "Energy Star," and it took a few years before the manufacturers worked out the bugs. Thanks again, this was very interesting. You clearly confirmed my guess that monitor power savings is just as important as computer power modes. Where did you get this wattmeter? I want one. :-) -John O |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
David Morgan (MAMS) wrote:
"Michael Wozniak" wrote in message nk.net... "David Morgan (MAMS)" wrote in message news:OIvre.6653$L65.1618@trnddc05... wrote in message oups.com... hibernate mode save electcricity, Negligible. Not if you're operating on battery only, as in 'laptop'... Mikey Nova Music Productions There really is a large consumption savings, on any type. Hibernate has the same power consumption as turning the machine off, at the cost of the rather intense but brief power use for saving the contents of memory and registers on the hard drive and then restoring it. But if you're at a point where 'hibernate' is an issue, why not simply save and shut down as opposed to caching the memory and risking data loss? It's work, it consumes time and it takes attention. Most machines that hibernate or sleep don't do so per the user's conscious intention at the time. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
great information
thank u |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Ben Bradley" wrote in message ... On 13 Jun 2005 22:42:00 -0700, wrote: I use Echo gina2496. when my Os(window xp or 2000) goes into hibernate mode. and awaken. the horrible bluescreen appears and my computer downed I should change my audio interface. which audio interface supports Windows hibernate mode, well? I regularly use the Sound Devices USBpre with hibernate enabled and I've had no problems. It's just a two channel mic pre line interface which received it's power via USB see: http://www.sounddevices.com/products/usbpremaster.htm but it does show that it's nothing inherently wrong with the hibernate mode. I would ask your hardware manufacture for more information as to what it takes to reinitialize the device when it's had it's power cut and restored or what might be causing the BSOD's. I've found that standby and hibernation modes in XP are pretty reliable. I did have occasional lockups on a Vaio laptop coming out of hibernate but these were tracked down to video driver issues that were not the fault of XP. Charles Tomaras Seattle, WA |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
common mode rejection vs. crosstalk | Pro Audio | |||
Topic Police | Pro Audio | |||
DNC Schedule of Events | Pro Audio |