Bionicpup64 8.0 CE

[Mike Walsh]

@ LateAdopter:-

A-ha. I see.....

From the looks of things this defaults to "performance". I have no problem with that - the thing doesn't appear to run that hot anyway - but it just seems kinda silly having the Speedstep stuff there, and not being able to set the CPU to use it in an orderly fashion, like.

Run one thing by me again, willya? 'processor HWP'....huh?


Mike.

[LateAdopter]

HWP is Intel jargon for hardware power management. With Intel processors from the past few years the clock frequency is controlled by the cpu's internal hardware and they do not necessarily follow what the external governor tells it. The frequency steps are smaller than those used externally and it may trade off CPU frequency against GPU frequency to meet a TDP limit.
I don't think Intel documents publicly what goes on in there.

When running at maximum clock speed the CPU spends more time idle, but the voltage is higher and power consumption varies with the square of the voltage.

[bigpup]

I went down this rabbit hole a few years back.

This is what I found.

intel_pstate offers only two governors: powersave and performance.

1. intel_pstate can be disabled at boot-time with intel_pstate=disable or compile it out
2. the old problem with ondemand (and conservative) governors is and was, that they don't know the specific capabilities of the cpu
3. executing some tasks with highest-frequency possible is consuming less power, than taking more time with lower frequency e.g. arithmetic stuff
4. this is not true for all tasks e.g. loading something from main-memory
5. here comes intel_pstate: it knows how the specific cpu works and does it job better than a generic solution, also it seems to handle "boost" better
6. furthermore intel_pstate offers only two governors: powersave and performance
even "powersave" is faster than the generic acpi based approach with "performance" (maybe handles "boost" better)
also "performance" doesn't enforce the default frequency as "lower limit", like the old generic approch, but performance is anyway only ~ 1% faster

[Mike Walsh]

Hi, bigpup. Thanks for the additional info.

Sounds like I might just as well leave things as they are. As previously stated, she doesn't seem to be running any hotter than the old X2.....despite Intel CPUs generally running hotter, and having a much higher t-case_max than AMDs.

But then she is sipping a lot less power than the old 'dinosaur' used to..!

I'll call this one 'Solved'. I haven't had to do anything, although I'm now far better informed than I was.....and I'm starting to understand just how far CPUs have come on in the 16 years since my previous 'newest' one. Reading about them is far removed from actually using them; the X2 wasn't much more than a pair of P4s strapped together with an on-board memory controller. And that's being kind.

Never mind. That £7 spent on eBay garnered me 5 trouble-free years of excellent, fuss-free service. Can't grumble at that, can I?

Cheers, all.


Mike.

[linuxcbon]

Palemoon 28.8.1 sometimes freeezes for some minutes. Weird, it didn't do that with older versions.

[ProgRob]

I have just started using BionicPup. Running well. A couple of issues, one of which is with Compton.

I am using it to set the opacity of non-active windows to be semi-transparent. However, all I get is a slight change of colour in their background until I hit 50% when the window goes really transparent.

Any reason why?

[bigpup]

Review of Bionicpup64 8.0 on Linux Magazine
http://www.linux-magazine.com/Issues/20 ... uppy-Linux

No reviewers ever seem to understand frugal installs.

two installation methods. The first, Frugal, will install a bare minimum of apps to get you started. The Full installation is self-explanatory.

[ozsouth]

@Mike Walsh
If you're worried about heat, can use intel_pstate powersave to throttle cpu - I max my i3's at 77% & min 38% via script in /root/Startup. Keeps cpu cooler, but responsive. Very useful in long kernel compiles. setpsv3877 script (use at own risk):

#!/bin/sh
L="38"
H="77"
P="/sys/devices/system/cpu"
for C in `ls -1 $P/ | grep 'cpu[0-9]' | tr '\n' ' '`
do
echo "powersave" > $P/$C/cpufreq/scaling_governor
done
echo $L > $P/intel_pstate/min_perf_pct
echo $H > $P/intel_pstate/max_perf_pct

[bigpup]

Deadbeef v1.8.2
http://smokey01.com/OscarTalks/deadbeef ... bionic.pet
OscarTalks has made a pet package for Deadbeef v1.8.2 for Bionicpup64 8.0.

Note:
When you install this Deadbeef pet
Make sure to save.
Use menu-> exit->Rebuild menu (may not need this)
Or do a reboot.

This is required, because Bionicpup64 8.0 has Deadbeef as a builtin program.
So, the new installed Deadbeef, overwrites the builtin Deadbeef, by loading the save.

[bigpup]

Uextract v3.42
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewto ... 57#1049957

[ally]

having trouble setting sound via hdmi on an asus gl10cs tower

it has on-board intel HDA ALC887_VD and nvidia NVIDIA Corporation Device 10f9 (rev a1)

sound card wizard currently selected for the intel analogue but have also tried the nvidia cards shown, unmuted but am still unable to output sound via hdmi to the monitor

have the same issue with fatdog64-810

sound perfectly fine through the hdd installed win10

sound does not play with or without save files, from usb or disc

have had a good google about and tried a number of solutions without success

any assistance appreciated

[linuxcbon]

Bionicpup64 8.0 CE
with a slow CPU, I tried palemoon, firefox and chromium for watching youtube videos.
I noticed these cpu usages :
- very high ~90% in palemoon
- average ~20% in firefox
- low ~5% in chromium
Maybe it's time to change palemoon for another browser ?
I would recommend chromium because it seems that palemoon and firefox don't have any hardware acceleration for videos on linux.

[bigpup]

You Tube videos in Pale Moon.
Pale Moon->Preferences has settings for graphics in several places.
Try changing or selecting some of them.

I just ran a You Tube video at HD 1080p quality and Pale Moon CPU usage is around 30%.
However, actual CPU overall usage is around 10%.

What are you using to get this usage figure?

What is your hardware?
CPU?
Graphics?

Is a browser all that is running and only open to You Tube?

[linuxcbon]

You Tube videos in Pale Moon.
Pale Moon->Preferences has settings for graphics in several places.
Try changing or selecting some of them.

I just ran a You Tube video at HD 1080p quality and Pale Moon CPU usage is around 30%.
However, actual CPU overall usage is around 10%.

What are you using to get this usage figure?

What is your hardware?
CPU?
Graphics?

Is a browser all that is running and only open to You Tube?

Try it with a very slow cpu, a very slow integrated video card and with those 3 browsers and come back again with your results.

[artsown]

Concerning hardware acceleration in Linux, read this:
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums ... -on-linux/

I used to turn on hw accel in chromium and chromium based browsers,
but I learned I had to disable it to prevent crashes.

I notice that palemoon has hw accel checked in preferences but it never
has caused me any problems.

I happen to have comparisons arranged for firefox, waterfox, palemoon
and basilisk. I ran a hd on youtube. My test machine has a i5 and 4gig
ram. I used HTOP to view ram and cpu cores useage. The test macine
has no video card.

Firefox and waterfox are the most demanding. Next comes palemoon.
Finally, basilisk is by far the least demanding. Subjectively, firefox and
waterfox are the fastest at loading web pages.

Art

[linuxcbon]

Concerning hardware acceleration in Linux, read this:
https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums ... -on-linux/

So I was right ? There is no hardware acceleration in linux for firefox and palemoon ? So bigpup is wrong to tell that settings in palemoon can enable hw accel ?
He didnt even explain which settings, I tried them all, and nothing changed.

I used to turn on hw accel in chromium and chromium based browsers,
but I learned I had to disable it to prevent crashes.

I have hw accel in chromium, and still no crash for several days. So it must be solved now.

I notice that palemoon has hw accel checked in preferences but it never
has caused me any problems.

I have hw accel enabled in palemoon, but it doesnt work. Palemoon uses 90% of cpu for me when watching youtube videos. Chromium only 5%.

I happen to have comparisons arranged for firefox, waterfox, palemoon
and basilisk. I ran a hd on youtube. My test machine has a i5 and 4gig
ram. I used HTOP to view ram and cpu cores useage. The test macine
has no video card.

Firefox and waterfox are the most demanding. Next comes palemoon.
Finally, basilisk is by far the least demanding. Subjectively, firefox and
waterfox are the fastest at loading web pages.

Art

My machine has dual core athlon and integrated radeon video card, so its 100 x slower than yours.
So you should do the testings with slower cpus and cards to understand what I am talking about. Your i5 is like a space rocket in comparison to my cpu.
And many puppy linux users have very slow cpus like me.

[artsown]

My machine has dual core athlon and integrated radeon video card, so its 100 x slower than yours.
So you should do the testings with slower cpus and cards to understand what I am talking about. Your i5 is like a space rocket in comparison to my cpu. Laughing
And many puppy linux users have very slow cpus like me.

I think Phil recommends at least a core duo (not the much slower dual
core). You should do your testing with a faster cpu to get meaningful
and useful results. You can't expect the latest browsers to work well
on really old junk machines.

Art

[linuxcbon]

I think Phil recommends at least a core duo (not the much slower dual
core). You should do your testing with a faster cpu to get meaningful
and useful results. You can't expect the latest browsers to work well
on really old junk machines.

Art

Stop spreading misinformation.
With my dual core, chromium works very fast.
So yes, you can expect the latest browsers to work well on really old junk machines.
Only firefox and palemoon are not able to run fast enough and are the problem.

[bigpup]

Thanks for not answering my questions.

So, do not use Pale Moon browser.
Your problem solved.

If Google had their way.
Their browser(s) is the only one that will work.
They seem to have the power to make web sites fully support their browser(s).

Remember the days of Windows Internet Explorer. When they controlled the Internet web sites browser support.

[linuxcbon]

Thanks for not answering my questions.

Most of your questions are already answered. And thanks for not testing youtube with a slow cpu and a slow video card on different browsers.

So, do not use Pale Moon browser.
Your problem solved.

It's not my problem, it's many people's problems, with slow hardware, the majority of puppy linux users actually.

If Google had their way.
Their browser(s) is the only one that will work.
They seem to have the power to make web sites fully support their browser(s).
Remember the days of Windows Internet Explorer. When they controlled the Internet web sites browser support.

It has nothing to do with web sites supporting google or microsoft. The problem is that chromium is well optimized and that firefox or palemoon are not well optimised.