Amperage pull of a computer?

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 07:11:17 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:

I quoted your entire post in that reply, dipshit.

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 07:20:22 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:

"An approximation" requires NO instruments whatsoever, dipshit.

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 07:34:19 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:

200 mA times 120 Volts is 24 watts. He might want to resolve tighter than that, he might not. You don't know, dipshit.

message

RoachMatter says "A shoot you with my PoopRailGun" Ok Bud Dickman....you have proven your IQ once again!

Talk about being all over the map! What do you do...just lay your hands on the device and guess??? If all the devices were labeled, the OP would not have had to ask. You are dumber than you seem!!

Thanks for proving my point! As for DarkMatter....Round and round the bowl it goes and when it stops....Only the sewer will know!

Can you spell "Approximation"....oh clueles one!

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:13:25 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:

What part of "THERE WERE NO SNIPPETS" do you not understand, you retarded twit!?

On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 16:14:37 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:

What part of "now we are back to no metering needed at all again" do you not understand?

Uh....PinheadMatter.....didn't you say that the plate on the power supply wasn't even close????

message

Look again BongMatter.....you snipped it out of context... the usual boring troll tyrade...yawnnnnnnnn

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:01:13 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:

Name one reputable peripheral card maker that doesn't have a web page with product details?

I won't buy their shit, if you do find one. It's real simple.

You lose. I win. A two dollar resistor, and a good proper multimeter. If your going to break the line to read it, you may as well do it right.

He did also say "low cost".

On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 00:02:29 GMT, "Ross Mac" Gave us:

Bullshit. I quoted the entire post, and replied. You look again, you retarded Bat's Turd!

You're clueless.

Quite *obviously* not.

You can't read, obviously.

You're wrong. ...as usual.

Ross? Is that you? ...or are you a plagiarist too, DimBulb?

That could be. ...seems like it's using cycles even when it has no need to. Perhaps it has a system call in it's idle loop? I've never noticed this with Acrobat though.

Sure. There is much there that software doesn't need to know about, as well. Processors do shut down units that aren't in use. Power is such a problem that the processor developers are getting *very* aggressive in turning off logic that isn't being used *this* cycle. Am there - do that.

YOu're the moron, DimBulb (or is that DipBulb, today?).

It certainly *is*, you complete moron! UNits that aren't used this cycle *are* shut down. Processors that have no work queued

*are* HLTed. It's getting so that even a pipe-stage that isn't being used is shut down. I do this for a living dickweed.

Your system is screwed. Get with the program!

Certainly they do! You're a moron. Dump NT and get a recent OS. Win2K would be my choice (if you must stick with WinBlows).

The OS is in there. Certainly the APIs get into BIOS, but the OS must recognize the opportunity to sleep.

Same deal. The intermediate power-saving methods are somewhat different, but the napping is pretty much the same thing.

As do Hector's AMD guys and Sam's IBM guys,

Of course. You have your clue. DimBulb is like Diogenes, except that he's carrying, well, a DimBulb, in search of his first clue.

The drugs are kickin' in tonight I see.....such a witty post! The boots are on ... the roach is in the corner.... SQUASH......one missing RoachMatter.....no one will miss the multilegged creature!

ONce again you *lie*. YOu said it *all* runs, and *constantly* executes instructions. This is patently *false*. Some parts must run to maintain system state (cache coherency, timers, interrupt logic, etc.), but there are *no* instructions executed.

False! In the napping modes there are *no* instructions executed. The processor is simply waiting for an interrupt.