Javier,I wouldn't say I "prefer" powernowd, per se, but I know that powernowd is made for AMD, whereas cpudynd is more generic (afaik). That being said, I use cpudynd in my thinkpad (X40) and it works very well.
YMMV, Zaq Javier Kohen wrote:
Hi guys,is there any reason why you prefer powernowd to cpudyn? I was wondering because I'm using the later on my notebook. I barely use it on batteries, but I like the noise reduction that comes with the reduced speed.Zachary Rizer wrote:Aha! You're right. Works like a charm here as well. Thank you Thomas! --- "T.J. Zeeman" <tjzeeman@xs4all.nl> wrote:Hi, On Fri, 2005-03-04 at 11:06 -0800, Zachary Rizer wrote:Please disregard previous email -- I just realized powernowd is only on XP-M processors, and thatwhatI'm looking for is "Cool 'n Quiet". My mistake!Actually, no mistake at all. I have an AMD64 and run powernowd to have cpu-scaling (as provided by the CnQ-feature in the cpu). I got it to run on a Debian kernel-image after I put powernowd-k8 and cpufreq-userspace in /etc/modules. It was apparently necessary to have these loaded forcedly to get the powernowd daemon to run. regards, Thomas
--"Firefox is both more secure and more modern than IE [Internet Explorer], and it comes packed with user-friendly features the Microsoft browser can't touch." -- Walt Mossberg, The Wall Street Journal.
Find out what all the fuss is about: Get Mozilla Firefox. http://www.getfirefox.com