The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    Haswell, Storage Drives and Power Management

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by John Ratsey, Jan 5, 2015.

  1. John Ratsey

    John Ratsey Moderately inquisitive Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    7,197
    Messages:
    28,840
    Likes Received:
    2,165
    Trophy Points:
    581
    I've come across this interesting article which discusses the effect of HIPM and DIPM on the processor package power consumption.

    I've tested the findings of the article on my Dell E7440 with a Samsung EVO 1TB mSATA SSD. When I looked at the settings I found that both HIPM and DIPM were already enabled. I don't know whether this was done by Dell (I had cloned the factory Windows installation), by the installation of the Intel Rapid Storage driver or by the OS Optimization option of the Samsung SSD Magician.

    With the computer on idle, wireless devices turned off and the display on minimum brightness the system power drain is about 3.65W of which the CPU package accounts for 0.8W.

    E7440_HIPM_DIPM_enabled.jpg

    If the Link power management is turned off in the Intel Rapid Storage console

    IRST console.JPG

    then the system power consumption increases to about 5.2W (+ 1.55W) while the CPU package power went up to 2.1W (+1.3W).

    E7440_HIPM_DIPM_disabled.jpg

    This reveals that the main source of increased power consumption when the SATA link power management is disabled is the CPU package staying in higher power states. Only a small part of the increased power consumption is due either to the link staying active or additional power used by the SSD.

    I also tested the link power management on my Sandy Bridge & Ivy Bridge notebooks with SSDs and, for those, there was no significant difference in power drain.

    This issue is something to watch out for if the run time on battery is less than expected.

    John
     
    jaybee83 and Incontro like this.
  2. John Ratsey

    John Ratsey Moderately inquisitive Super Moderator

    Reputations:
    7,197
    Messages:
    28,840
    Likes Received:
    2,165
    Trophy Points:
    581
    I have just put a Crucial M550 into my Dell E7440 alongside the Samsung EVO to see what it did to the power consumption. The CPU idle power went up to about 2.2W which suggested that the already enabled link power management wasn't working for this SSD.

    So I disabled the link power management in the Intel Rapid Storage console, rebooted, re-enabled the link power management and rebooted again. The CPU idle power was then down to ~0.8W.

    The lesson here seems to be that if cloning a Windows installation then it may be necessary to apply the above steps to make sure that the link power management is properly enabled.

    John
     
    jaybee83 and tilleroftheearth like this.
  3. jaybee83

    jaybee83 Biotech-Doc

    Reputations:
    4,125
    Messages:
    11,571
    Likes Received:
    9,149
    Trophy Points:
    931
    interesting! ive manually enabled those two powersaving settings before in my windows installs but wasnt aware that it also contributed to saving power in the cpu package :) good stuff!