Source: Tom's Hardware UK – Keywords: Skulltrail, QX9775, D5400XS, Octo-Core
Categories: Hardware
Idle Power Consumption higher than AMD 4x4
We measured the power consumption of the CPUs directly at the socket.
At 88 Watts, the combined power consumption of the Skulltrail system’s two Core 2 Extreme QX975 processors in idle is shockingly high. We are fairly certain that this must be due to an error in the board or the CPU. At any rate, Intel’s Speed Step power saving feature did not work.
Even before we began our testing, Intel warned us in an email that enabling the power saving features on the motherboard would cause the system to crash. And it did. As soon as we enabled Vista’s power saving settings, it crashed with a blue screen. We do not know whether the Speed Step functionality will be present and enabled in the final versions of the Skulltrail systems. Our review board used a beta BIOS, and the processors we tested with were still engineering samples.
At present, the dual-socket system draws more power when idle than AMD’s 4x4 counterpart.
- Previous page More Core Voltage
- Next page Power Consumption – 227 Watts under Load
but if you have that much money in the first place... they won't shiv a git about their energy costs
page 14 - two copies of same "Power Consumption 100% Load" graph = boob??!!
Spuddyt you're wrong!!
Anyone buying this board will have problems paying off those maxed out credit cards when their power bill comes in!! (Well we are talking enthusiasts right??)
Bob
I bet the lack of memory speed settings is more than just a beta issue... Intel will use it as a means of preventing ludicrous levels of Xeon overclocking and force anyone crazy enough to buy SkullTrail back onto the crack... er, I mean back to EEs, with their unlocked multiplier, relatively poor overclockability and 500% price premium. Per CPU.
I want this board. Put 2x xenons in there for $250 a piece and get a true 8core system for $1000..
Anyone know where we can buy it in the US ?
see the super gamer at extreme tech.