Difference between revisions of "Talk:Pentium M undervolting and underclocking"
(which patch to use?) |
(→which patch to use?) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
---- | ---- | ||
| − | == | + | == Which patch to use? == |
Since I might find the time to fiddle around with reducing the power consumption further, I wonder which of the 3 alternatives works best. Any recommendations? | Since I might find the time to fiddle around with reducing the power consumption further, I wonder which of the 3 alternatives works best. Any recommendations? | ||
--[[User:Spiney|spiney]] 11:05, 21 Dec 2005 (CET) | --[[User:Spiney|spiney]] 11:05, 21 Dec 2005 (CET) | ||
| + | ---- | ||
| + | |||
| + | They all work... I think Alternative 2 is easiest to use. | ||
| + | |||
| + | --[[User:Thinker|Thinker]] 13:06, 21 Dec 2005 (CET) | ||
---- | ---- | ||
Revision as of 13:06, 21 December 2005
Hei Thinker,
according to my notion of the character of this page, i thought it should possibly be renamed to something like "How to lower voltage and clock speed on Pentium M processors" ("lower" might be replaced by "finetune" or "manually lower" or "tweak" or something else expressing more the expert audience of the article). This has the following advantages:
- complies with the naming scheme ;-)
- has words more likely to be found in google (voltage vs. undervolting; clock, speed vs. underclocking)
- Are undervolting/underclocking proper english words anyway?
- Follows a scheme of "from general to specific". The topic of the article is underclocking/undervolting. That it's for Pentium M processors is kind of secondary to that.
What do you think? I can do it if you agree.
Wyrfel 00:21, 21 Oct 2005 (CEST)
Good points. Personally I'm fond of short technical titles, but I agree about accessibility and consistency with the rest of the site. I have a feeling (though no proof) that the underclocking doesn't really work (as I noted recently), so how about "Reducing voltage on the Pentium M processor" for now?
BTW, "underclocking" is pretty standard techie jargon (and a clear parallel of the well-known "overclocking"). "Undervolting" is somewhat less common, though I've seen it in use.
--Thinker 00:55, 21 Oct 2005 (CEST)
Which patch to use?
Since I might find the time to fiddle around with reducing the power consumption further, I wonder which of the 3 alternatives works best. Any recommendations?
--spiney 11:05, 21 Dec 2005 (CET)
They all work... I think Alternative 2 is easiest to use.
--Thinker 13:06, 21 Dec 2005 (CET)
