2022.06.15 08:57:44 (1536966169009106944) from Daniel J. Bernstein, replying to "Gok (@Gok)" (1536959642256957440):
1. Idle cores draw much less power even at full speed. 2. Almost all of my power consumption is for servers that I'm buying to get computations done (as opposed to Raspberry Pi etc for benchmarking). 3. The claim I'm disputing is about Turbo Boost, not about slow-down-when-idle.
2022.06.15 08:10:26 (1536954264953573376) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
As someone who happily runs servers and laptops at constant clock frequencies (see https://bench.cr.yp.to/supercop.html for Linux advice) rather than heat-the-hardware random frequencies, I dispute the claim in https://www.hertzbleed.com that this has an "extreme system-wide performance impact".
2022.06.15 08:19:36 (1536956569220308992) from Daniel J. Bernstein:
Using all server cores _while keeping the hardware alive for a long time_ is what gets the most computation done per dollar. My experience running >100 servers of many different types is that the best clock frequencies for this are at or below base frequency, no Turbo Boost.
2022.06.15 08:31:48 (1536959642256957440) from "Gok (@Gok)":
Seems like this also requires you to pay for power to keep your server cores ticking even when doing little-to-nothing?