Re: [coreboot] RISC-V HiFive Unleashed board added to coreboot - has PCI-e slots via exp board
On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net wrote:
"While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map."
and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame.
I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I don't get it.
On 24.06.2018 21:37, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net wrote:
"While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map."
and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame.
I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I don't get it.
I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They really target completely different people and use cases. You could as well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos?
Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform.
I guess the HiFive Unleashed targets people who want something new to play with without further investment* on one side; and on the other side those that really want to make their own chips in the future and would benefit from the free (as in free beer) that RISC-V is. That SiFive actually prefers open systems too, didn't prevent them to provide the Unleashed which was never planned to be fully open. The plan was just to get a Linux capable RISC-V SoC as soon as possible, I guess. It's designed to be open-source compatible at the OS level. We know too well what that means.
Maybe RISC-V failed (to provide an open platform) and is already borked. For me, all hope died when I heard that Linux will require that SMM like nonsense, although I never thought it would change the game per se. You always need somebody to invest into an open chip.
But here is the good news: RISC-V is free (as in free beer). Anybody can salvage all the parts that make sense. If you create an open RISC-V com- petitor, you can use the same compilers, 90% of the Linux support etc. even the better part of the chip design. So investing into RISC-V still isn't all for naught. If somebody wants to try in the future what many people just hoped for (without doing anything), 90% of the work will already be done.
Nico
* For a Talos 2 I would have to refurnish my living room.
I'm still interested in risc-v, just not hifive.
In saying I've lost interest, I'm definitely not saying anyone is a bad person. The sifive people are wonderful, personally and professionally, and I wish them the best success.
But sifive had to make some decisions to get to what they thought was a commercially viable platform, and those decisions result in a platform that I just don't find interesting. A further disappointment is that in spite of a considerable amount of work on the part of coreboot contributors, as well as no small amount of discussion, directed to getting them to use coreboot ... BBL is still in there. I don't see a reason for the BBL, which has applicability to only one vendor, to continue to exist. I don't see the need for yet another architecture-specific firmware code base.
So, I've lost interest in the hifive. I'm looking for a different risc-v implementation to work on.
ron
On 06/24/2018 03:43 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 21:37, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net wrote:
"While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map."
and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame.
I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I don't get it.
I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They really target completely different people and use cases. You could as well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos?
Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform.
I just want to counter this one point. POWER9 is absolutely not power hungry. I've seen the 8-core chips idle at under 10W, with active loads maybe in the 40-60W range. We're dogfooding one machine in a typical office setting, and it dissipates nearly no heat -- it's using less power than the older Xeon it replaced.
On 24.06.2018 23:52, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 03:43 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 21:37, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net wrote:
"While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map."
and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame.
I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I don't get it.
I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They really target completely different people and use cases. You could as well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos?
Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform.
I just want to counter this one point. POWER9 is absolutely not power hungry. I've seen the 8-core chips idle at under 10W, with active loads maybe in the 40-60W range. We're dogfooding one machine in a typical office setting, and it dissipates nearly no heat -- it's using less power than the older Xeon it replaced.
Hmmm, yeah, just twist my words as you wish. I never said that it is power hungry compared to other workstation systems. I did not even state that it is power hungry at all. All I said is that it needs power and somebody has to pay for that too.
Now you show off with random numbers that make things really weird. 10W for what? per chip? or per core? Whatever it is, I hope your office has air conditioning. And than that "it's using less power than the older Xeon", omg really? you're system is better than shit?
Nico
On 06/24/2018 06:35 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 23:52, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 03:43 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 21:37, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net wrote:
"While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map."
and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame.
I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I don't get it.
I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They really target completely different people and use cases. You could as well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos?
Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform.
I just want to counter this one point. POWER9 is absolutely not power hungry. I've seen the 8-core chips idle at under 10W, with active loads maybe in the 40-60W range. We're dogfooding one machine in a typical office setting, and it dissipates nearly no heat -- it's using less power than the older Xeon it replaced.
Hmmm, yeah, just twist my words as you wish. I never said that it is power hungry compared to other workstation systems. I did not even state that it is power hungry at all. All I said is that it needs power and somebody has to pay for that too.
Now you show off with random numbers that make things really weird. 10W for what? per chip? or per core? Whatever it is, I hope your office has air conditioning. And than that "it's using less power than the older Xeon", omg really? you're system is better than shit?
Nico
Did not mean to offend here. Apparently we have very different ideas of "workstation" versus "desktop"; we'd classify some dozens of watts under real world load per CPU as a desktop, not as a workstation per se. I don't see how something using this little power would suddenly put the power bills out of reach for individual use vs. corporate use, but again we may have very different ideas of what a computer should be.
Personally, I would never be able to use something like a Raspberry Pi or other low power SBC for anything other than maybe some minimal text editing. It's not worth my time to put up with a slow, unresponsive system; whatever I would gain on power bills would be lost through unproductive time and then some.
I don't see how providing some real world numbers can be frowned upon here?
On 06/24/2018 06:41 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 06:35 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 23:52, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 03:43 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 21:37, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote:
On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net wrote:
> > > "While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we > cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and > copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map." > >
and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame.
I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I don't get it.
I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They really target completely different people and use cases. You could as well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos?
Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform.
I just want to counter this one point. POWER9 is absolutely not power hungry. I've seen the 8-core chips idle at under 10W, with active loads maybe in the 40-60W range. We're dogfooding one machine in a typical office setting, and it dissipates nearly no heat -- it's using less power than the older Xeon it replaced.
Hmmm, yeah, just twist my words as you wish. I never said that it is power hungry compared to other workstation systems. I did not even state that it is power hungry at all. All I said is that it needs power and somebody has to pay for that too.
Now you show off with random numbers that make things really weird. 10W for what? per chip? or per core? Whatever it is, I hope your office has air conditioning. And than that "it's using less power than the older Xeon", omg really? you're system is better than shit?
Nico
Did not mean to offend here. Apparently we have very different ideas of "workstation" versus "desktop"; we'd classify some dozens of watts under real world load per CPU as a desktop, not as a workstation per se. I don't see how something using this little power would suddenly put the power bills out of reach for individual use vs. corporate use, but again we may have very different ideas of what a computer should be.
Personally, I would never be able to use something like a Raspberry Pi or other low power SBC for anything other than maybe some minimal text editing. It's not worth my time to put up with a slow, unresponsive system; whatever I would gain on power bills would be lost through unproductive time and then some.
I don't see how providing some real world numbers can be frowned upon here?
So it was pointed out to me on IRC that we don't have current power numbers published on the Wiki. That would probably explain the confusion; subsequent firmware updates have dropped the idle power and "normal use" power significantly on the POWER9 chips.
I'll see if we can get some new at-wall measurements of our normal desktop configuration (1 CPU, no SAS, NVMe storage). This should be well under 100W at the wall.
On 25.06.2018 01:55, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 06:41 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 06:35 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 23:52, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 03:43 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 21:37, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote:
On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote: > On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net > wrote: > >> >> >> "While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we >> cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and >> copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map." >> >> > > and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame. >
I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I don't get it.
I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They really target completely different people and use cases. You could as well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos?
Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform.
I just want to counter this one point. POWER9 is absolutely not power hungry. I've seen the 8-core chips idle at under 10W, with active loads maybe in the 40-60W range. We're dogfooding one machine in a typical office setting, and it dissipates nearly no heat -- it's using less power than the older Xeon it replaced.
Hmmm, yeah, just twist my words as you wish. I never said that it is power hungry compared to other workstation systems. I did not even state that it is power hungry at all. All I said is that it needs power and somebody has to pay for that too.
Now you show off with random numbers that make things really weird. 10W for what? per chip? or per core? Whatever it is, I hope your office has air conditioning. And than that "it's using less power than the older Xeon", omg really? you're system is better than shit?
Nico
Did not mean to offend here. Apparently we have very different ideas of "workstation" versus "desktop"; we'd classify some dozens of watts under real world load per CPU as a desktop, not as a workstation per se. I don't see how something using this little power would suddenly put the power bills out of reach for individual use vs. corporate use, but again we may have very different ideas of what a computer should be.
Personally, I would never be able to use something like a Raspberry Pi or other low power SBC for anything other than maybe some minimal text editing. It's not worth my time to put up with a slow, unresponsive system; whatever I would gain on power bills would be lost through unproductive time and then some.
I don't see how providing some real world numbers can be frowned upon here?
So it was pointed out to me on IRC that we don't have current power numbers published on the Wiki. That would probably explain the confusion; subsequent firmware updates have dropped the idle power and "normal use" power significantly on the POWER9 chips.
Sorry, I really still had the wiki numbers in mind (> 100W idle). Which would be notable on a power bill. And then, 10W per 8 core CPU really confused me (with 30W for the 4 core CPU in mind I really anticipated you mean 10W per core). So it can compete with today's average desktop system wrt. idle power. This makes the Talos II even more attractive now (and I'm thinking about the space below my desk again).
I'll see if we can get some new at-wall measurements of our normal desktop configuration (1 CPU, no SAS, NVMe storage). This should be well under 100W at the wall.
I'm really happily surprised by the new numbers. If you keep the max. below 160W, you could sell it with a Pico-PSU ;)
Nico
PS. Trying to shut up now, enough OT.
On 06/24/2018 08:06 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 25.06.2018 01:55, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 06:41 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 06:35 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 23:52, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 03:43 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 21:37, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote: > On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote: >> On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net >> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> "While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we >>> cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and >>> copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map." >>> >>> >> >> and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame. >> > > I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a > thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source > people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people > can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I > don't get it.
I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They really target completely different people and use cases. You could as well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos?
Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform.
I just want to counter this one point. POWER9 is absolutely not power hungry. I've seen the 8-core chips idle at under 10W, with active loads maybe in the 40-60W range. We're dogfooding one machine in a typical office setting, and it dissipates nearly no heat -- it's using less power than the older Xeon it replaced.
Hmmm, yeah, just twist my words as you wish. I never said that it is power hungry compared to other workstation systems. I did not even state that it is power hungry at all. All I said is that it needs power and somebody has to pay for that too.
Now you show off with random numbers that make things really weird. 10W for what? per chip? or per core? Whatever it is, I hope your office has air conditioning. And than that "it's using less power than the older Xeon", omg really? you're system is better than shit?
Nico
Did not mean to offend here. Apparently we have very different ideas of "workstation" versus "desktop"; we'd classify some dozens of watts under real world load per CPU as a desktop, not as a workstation per se. I don't see how something using this little power would suddenly put the power bills out of reach for individual use vs. corporate use, but again we may have very different ideas of what a computer should be.
Personally, I would never be able to use something like a Raspberry Pi or other low power SBC for anything other than maybe some minimal text editing. It's not worth my time to put up with a slow, unresponsive system; whatever I would gain on power bills would be lost through unproductive time and then some.
I don't see how providing some real world numbers can be frowned upon here?
So it was pointed out to me on IRC that we don't have current power numbers published on the Wiki. That would probably explain the confusion; subsequent firmware updates have dropped the idle power and "normal use" power significantly on the POWER9 chips.
Sorry, I really still had the wiki numbers in mind (> 100W idle). Which would be notable on a power bill. And then, 10W per 8 core CPU really confused me (with 30W for the 4 core CPU in mind I really anticipated you mean 10W per core). So it can compete with today's average desktop system wrt. idle power. This makes the Talos II even more attractive now (and I'm thinking about the space below my desk again).
I'll see if we can get some new at-wall measurements of our normal desktop configuration (1 CPU, no SAS, NVMe storage). This should be well under 100W at the wall.
I'm really happily surprised by the new numbers. If you keep the max. below 160W, you could sell it with a Pico-PSU ;)
Just got done doing some initial checks on a Lite system (4 cores, 2x 16GB ECC registered DIMMs, 1TB NVMe drive). Actually having some measurement issues due to how low the DC side load is -- the board only "wants" 50 watts or so at idle, but the Seasonic 1200W Platinum supply being used has terrible efficiency in that range, resulting in at-wall measurements of around 70W at idle. Under full load it only pulls 120W from the wall.
If you have another, more efficient PSU in mind for these light loads I'm all ears. :-) The Pico-PSU might even work here....
Nico
PS. Trying to shut up now, enough OT.
OT is fun! Besides, it's not /really/ OT since we're trying to spin up a coreboot port to these boards, right? ;-)
On 06/25/2018 02:30 AM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 08:06 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 25.06.2018 01:55, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 06:41 PM, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 06:35 PM, Nico Huber wrote:
On 24.06.2018 23:52, Timothy Pearson wrote:
On 06/24/2018 03:43 PM, Nico Huber wrote: > On 24.06.2018 21:37, Taiidan@gmx.com wrote: >> On 06/24/2018 02:59 PM, ron minnich wrote: >>> On Sun, Jun 24, 2018 at 11:47 AM Jonathan Neuschäfer j.neuschaefer@gmx.net >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> "While we’d love to provide you with this information, we believe we >>>> cannot. However, we can’t prevent anyone from disassembling the fsbl and >>>> copying the values sent to the blackbox DDR register map." >>>> >>>> >>> >>> and ... there ends my interest in the hifive. A shame. >>> >> >> I can't understand what their target audience is? who would buy such a >> thing? who do they intend to sell these to? I mean the open source >> people can buy the now very affordable Talos 2L and the cheap-soc people >> can buy one of the many of ARM boards that litter the marketplace...I >> don't get it. > > I don't think you can compare the HiFive Unleashed with the Talos. They > really target completely different people and use cases. You could as > well ask, why produce smart watches, when people can afford the Talos? > > Talos is a workstation it doesn't fit anywhere but a workplace where > somebody else pays the power bill. So you can't even compare it to > cheap ARM SBCs, HiFive aside. It's a professional product, nothing to > play with, but something to work with. And it's open. It is marketed > as open. It is designed to be open. It is based on an open platform.
I just want to counter this one point. POWER9 is absolutely not power hungry. I've seen the 8-core chips idle at under 10W, with active loads maybe in the 40-60W range. We're dogfooding one machine in a typical office setting, and it dissipates nearly no heat -- it's using less power than the older Xeon it replaced.
Hmmm, yeah, just twist my words as you wish. I never said that it is power hungry compared to other workstation systems. I did not even state that it is power hungry at all. All I said is that it needs power and somebody has to pay for that too.
Now you show off with random numbers that make things really weird. 10W for what? per chip? or per core? Whatever it is, I hope your office has air conditioning. And than that "it's using less power than the older Xeon", omg really? you're system is better than shit?
Nico
Did not mean to offend here. Apparently we have very different ideas of "workstation" versus "desktop"; we'd classify some dozens of watts under real world load per CPU as a desktop, not as a workstation per se. I don't see how something using this little power would suddenly put the power bills out of reach for individual use vs. corporate use, but again we may have very different ideas of what a computer should be.
Personally, I would never be able to use something like a Raspberry Pi or other low power SBC for anything other than maybe some minimal text editing. It's not worth my time to put up with a slow, unresponsive system; whatever I would gain on power bills would be lost through unproductive time and then some.
I don't see how providing some real world numbers can be frowned upon here?
So it was pointed out to me on IRC that we don't have current power numbers published on the Wiki. That would probably explain the confusion; subsequent firmware updates have dropped the idle power and "normal use" power significantly on the POWER9 chips.
Sorry, I really still had the wiki numbers in mind (> 100W idle). Which would be notable on a power bill. And then, 10W per 8 core CPU really confused me (with 30W for the 4 core CPU in mind I really anticipated you mean 10W per core). So it can compete with today's average desktop system wrt. idle power. This makes the Talos II even more attractive now (and I'm thinking about the space below my desk again).
I'll see if we can get some new at-wall measurements of our normal desktop configuration (1 CPU, no SAS, NVMe storage). This should be well under 100W at the wall.
I'm really happily surprised by the new numbers. If you keep the max. below 160W, you could sell it with a Pico-PSU ;)
Just got done doing some initial checks on a Lite system (4 cores, 2x 16GB ECC registered DIMMs, 1TB NVMe drive). Actually having some measurement issues due to how low the DC side load is -- the board only "wants" 50 watts or so at idle, but the Seasonic 1200W Platinum supply being used has terrible efficiency in that range, resulting in at-wall measurements of around 70W at idle. Under full load it only pulls 120W from the wall.
If you have another, more efficient PSU in mind for these light loads I'm all ears. :-) The Pico-PSU might even work here....
Follow up to the follow up....there's an oddity I need to track down yet, in that the "master" CPU pulls ~28 watts at idle while the "slave" CPU (if installed) draws 10 watts at idle. There might be some part of the nest active that was involved in bootup that doesn't need to be active after OS start, or something similar. I'd expect that the primary CPU power draw (and, by extension, single CPU power draw) still has some ways to go with future firmware updates and extensions...
-
Nico Huber -
ron minnich -
Taiidan＠gmx.com -
Timothy Pearson