In article <431c3ec7$0$22097$db0fefd9@news.zen.co.uk>,
abuse@dopiaza.cabal.org.uk says...
> AD C <graphi47uk@y.a.h.o.o.co.uk> wrote:
> [...]
> > I doubt there is nay flaw, but theory do not always work out in
> > practice. Most computers use very little power when they are idle.
>
> What's theory got to do with it? I used a power meter, tried the
> machine with disks running and idle, ditto the CPU.
>
> On a P200MMX, I was getting a base load of about 60W, plus 10W per
> disk, plus another 10W when the CPU was in use. Power factor was about
> 0.6-0.7. So the true power is 90W and it requires 150VA. I was getting
> similar figures for a PII system.
>
> An Athlon XP2200+ system (a bottom-spec Flexiserv 1/2U system, as it
> so happens) drew an astonishing 180W at idle.
>
> My power meter is just left plugged into the input of my UPS, which
> powers my 24/7 Linux box (an 800MHz PIII), router, cordless phone,
> etc. It's clocked up well over 100 quid in the last year.
>
> 100 quid isn't bad for what that Linux box is doing, but I'd have a
> hard job justifying a second machine and another 60 quid a year just
> for Skype.
>
>

As I said, I do not use £60 a year on my computer, so something must be
wrong somewhere. I don't use skype, in fact the only reason I leave my
computer on is because of access. I can come upstairs and acess the net
or do anything else I want to do, without waiting for the thing to boot
up. the other computer is used for the security camera.