It's surprising to see that the worst possible performing motherboard in idle/load power was chosen for the Intel CPU tests, whereas the AMD CPU tests were performed using a motherboard that's not the worst possible for that platform, as shown by previous reviews on SPCR. I would've thought the Intel DH55TC to be a better choice for the Intel CPU tests, considering it's more normal idle/load power numbers.
Is it well known that the 1156 board we chose is very inefficient? We only have two 1156 boards and for all we know the DH55TC is the exception rather than the rule. We made the choice because we have had fewer problems with the Asus board and most people don't use Intel branded boards.
"Our timed benchmark results multiplied by the average power consumption during each test gives us an estimate of how much total power was used during testing."
It seems to me that there could be a flaw in the logic here. The above statement assumes that the system will be turned off when a user is not performing the activities in the test (virus scan, iTunes, etc). I think it is more reasonable to assume that both computers will remain on for same amount of time, because that is the way it would work in the real world. The computer that finishes first may be idle while the other one is still working, but I doubt it would usually be turned off.
Yes, this does assume that the system is turned off after using it. However if we add idle time, how much? How long does the average PC stand idle? This varies from person to person, so it's just easier to assume that the user is very energy conscious.
You can also say the test suite isn't representative of average use and throw the power numbers out altogether.
I'm wondering about the AMD mobo; Was the IGP or the Asus 9400 + disabled IGP used? If it's the latter - how efficient is the mobo at shutting down the IGP?
Yes, the IGP was disabled. The difference can be calculated easily since we know the graphics card's idle power. I'll test it next time I'm in the lab.