By not overclocking how much power is saved?

[Techno Guru]

I have a desktop computer at my home. It's configuration is i7 Core 920@ 4.0ghz/Coolermaster V8/Asus P6T, 2GB Crucial 1333 DDR2 @ 1850mhz, AMD HD4890 CF 1GB @ 950/1150mhz, Intel 80GB X25M SSD(Primary) /WD 500GB AAKS (Seconday). Now i want to lower the voltage from 1.3V to 1.25V. How much power i will save?? and running my rig at 3.6 or 4ghz doesn't really matter under my current usage.

[Hardwareman]

Basically the central processor unit power will increase and decrease at a rate proportional of the equation: percentage increase of clock speed X (percentage increase voltage)^2 X base consumption (at reference clock). The voltage is squared and applied, and if you dropping from 1.3V to 1.25V would be equal to around 7.5% decrease in power, and by going from 4GHz to 3.6GHz would result in 10% reduction in power. Multiply the 2 (0.9 X 0.92456) = 0.8321 or roughly 83% . So 3.6GHz at 1.25V uses around 17% less energy than 4.0GHz at 1.3V

[Fabian]

I would say that important balance is to have a system powerful enough then for whatever needs you have for it (eg. games at high quality, etc), and spend not more for it on both hardware and overclocking power costs. Also taken into account is life of the system/machine, how long you can use it till the next upgrade cycle. And this balance would be different for everyone. Overclocking makes saving on a short term basis since you receive more performance than you pay for, but eventually, given enough time, the difference in cost will be canceled out by the extra power consumption.

[RoninBlade]

I would like to give some knowledge about overclocking. In today's world, overclocking is useless or pointless, at least from my SETI-driven point of view it is. Overclocking will decrease your average of WU time, and depending on how much you higher your computer’s speed is how much your WU time will decrease. Overclocking also shorten the life of your components.

[deoWo]

You say that it is not that overclocking that wastes power, it is more of all individual choices. An overclocked system can also throttle (i.e downclock and downvolt) to the point where the only time the calculate for additional voltage mentioned are valid, is when it runs at full throttle, and the only times those are valid is until you finish some linear task where it would need to run at full throttle.In that case, the system is will sleeps sooner.
I would tell that if anyone who is thinking about power consumption, and about power usage, will be far away by conservative overclocking than not doing so. Simple reason is that power is not that expensive, and any money saved earns interest.

[T.J.]

I would suggest not to do overclocking. Because PC seems to be as far apart from power saving as it can get. In all, the overclocks employ all kinds of power-guzzling methods to better their CPU's overclock ability, from increasing the CPU core voltage to employing more powerful cooling systems. Even the act of increasing the clock speed increases power consumption. And increases room temperature and there will high electricity bill. But can't tell you much exact amount of power would be save by not overclocking.