Talk:Dynamic voltage scaling

"Voltage decreases quadratically with power consumption - halving the frequency reduces the power consumption by a factor of four."

...but this does not follow from the equation (and the equation is correct). GregorB 23:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The equation is correct as is the conclusion. If P ~ V^2, then reducing V by a factor of 2 reduces P by a factor of 4 - one half squared is one fourth. Raul654 (talk) 06:55, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Merge in Undervolt/Overvolt

As to the proposal to merge in undervolting and overvolting - I was also thinking that there are several overlapping articles here. I was wondering about merging Dynamic voltage scaling into the CPU core voltage article. Don't see that need separate articles for core voltage and changing core voltage.

As to the proposal of merging undervolting/overvolting. Two details that ought to be dealt with. 1) As I understand it, undervolting and overvolting are often applied in a static, rather than dynamic sense. So perhaps moving the article to Voltage scaling (or merging into CPU core voltage) as part of the merge would make sense. (With appropriate coverage of dynamic scaling, static, etc.)

2) Overvolting is applied to things other than processors. (e.g. RAM, busses, northbridges.) It may be that the same applies to undervolting, although it is not covered in the article. As it stands, the Dynamic voltage scaling article does not appear to cover these usages. Could voltage scaling be extended to cover voltage adjustments to other such systems?

If those two small matters can be dealt with, it seems reasonable to merge undervolting and overvolting into voltage scaling. And possibly to merge voltage scaling into CPU core voltage as well. Zodon (talk) 04:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

I just found another page on a closely related subject - DVFS covers Dynamic voltage and frequency scaling. Seems like this would also be a good candidate for merging. Perhaps Frequency Scaling and Voltage Scaling should both be merged into it? The nice thing about covering the two together is that it gives clearer place to cover the interaction between voltage and frequency. (Saving the problem of where to cover the interaction between them.) Zodon (talk) 06:02, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

On the proposal to merge in Voltage and frequency scaling, see my comments in Talk:Dynamic frequency scaling#Re: Proposed merger from voltage and frequency scaling. Zodon (talk) 02:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Keep as-is/ create a link in applicable fields

1. There is no need to have the same concept reapplied millions of times. An example is in literary writings, there is no word bank as it is assumed that the reader(s) understand the vocabulary.

2. With Links, there is no need to have the audience copying and pasting the keyword into the search box. If a person wishes to further understand the concept of Dynamic voltage scaling, they would just go into the section where the technology is listed as a device to, in my case, save power. 1oooop (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.154.33.140 (talk) 06:06, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Overvolting is done in order to increase computer performance, or in rare cases, to increase reliability.

No, as far as I understand, it is not rarely done to increase reliability, it is always done to increase reliability.

Of course the need to improve reliability normally arises after reliability has been adversely affected by overclocking(which in turn was done to increase performance). Still the overvolting itself is done to increase reliability, not performance. The operating voltage of a CPU does not affect its computational power at all as long as the microchip is stable.