[mythtv-users] CPU power (was Possible small HD frontend)
Raphael
rpooser at gmail.com
Sat Mar 22 23:52:55 UTC 2008
Michael T. Dean wrote:
> On 03/22/2008 04:56 PM, Raphael wrote:
>> Michael T. Dean wrote:
>>> Oh, and don't get me started on PSU's. I'm starting to think there's
>>> actually something to the whole 80 plus thing ( http://80plus.org/ ).
>>> Though it's interesting how this utility-company-funded "incentive"
>>> program just costs me (an individual) money (since I have to buy the
>>> more expensive PSU). Fortunately, when one of my Myth PSU's blew up
>>> last week, there was a really good one-day sale on an 80-plus PSU. Once
>>> I "borrow" my Kill-A-Watt back from a friend, I plan to see how much of
>>> a difference it makes (and, if sufficient, may start replacing PSU's on
>>> other always-on systems of mine). Of course, doing so may only be green
>>> in the greenbacks sense because it means taking a bunch of working PSU's
>>> to my local hazardous waste disposal facility.
>>>
>> Yeah the PS is a whole other story too. I used to have very inefficient
>> ones. Probably produced more heat than actual power. I do think the
>> 80-plus thing is a good idea, it does seem to be for real, again only
>> from reading some reviews around the net (haven't used any myself). I
>> have a Neo HE from Antec, which was their precursor to their 80plus
>> PSUs. They do say that the efficiency drops off somewhat badly though
>> when the system isn't under load, which would be most of the time for
>> people here who run their systems 24/7. Does the 80plus mean it's at or
>> above 80% efficient all of the time or just at peak power?
>
> That's actually what's making me think 80plus is a good thing. I've
> seen a /lot/ of discussion of how much PSU efficiency changes over the
> various operating loads (where, typically, I think they tend to be most
> efficient around 75%-80% load). However my new PSU--an Antec Earthwatts
> EA-430 (430W PSU)--operates at >80% efficiency from 20%-100% load. I'm
> not sure if that's common of all (or most) 80plus-rated PSU's, but this
> is the first PSU I've ever seen that could say that (and it is the first
> 80plus PSU I've ever looked at).
Then yes, this is definitely a good thing. I'm jsut glad PSU
manufacturers are going in this direction finally.
>
> I figure my slave backend that's using the new PSU must be using at
> least 86W (20% of 430W). It's an Athlon XP 2000+ with 512MB RAM, an
> NVIDIA GeForce 6200 (outputting text only--just there so I can get the
> NVIDIA GLX libs on the system), 2 pcHDTV HD-3000's, 2 750GB HDD's, 1
> 300GB HDD, and one PCI SATA/IDE controller card. It runs athwarm--I
> mean SETI at home--continuously (even while recording). And, that large
> range was a beautiful thing to me because it meant I didn't have to do a
> lot of figuring/measuring to find out what size PSU to get and that it's
> flexible enough to handle future changes.
That is fully stocked. My system when it had a 2400+ and much less
storage was drawing around 60W even when I had athcool running
(disconnecting cpu from NB). So I would say 86W is very very efficient
for that setup, with "athwarm running :) The more efficient PSU must
really be making a difference.
>
> Though the sound of the exploding PSU was scary and the smell took a
> couple of days to dissipate, it may turn out that the PSU's breaking
> saves me money (especially if I find that it's worthwhile to replace
> some of my other PSU's on my 7 other most-frequently-used systems (3 are
> 24/7/52***, 3 are 24/7/when I'm home, and one is whenever I get a chance
> to use it). My other 4 systems are just when I need them systems.
heh, I've had PSUs die three times, but always only with a wimper and
not a bang. They just kicked the bucket and in the middle of whatever
I'm doing, boom, lights out for the system. That's when I stopped buying
cheapo supplies at least! I have to say it would have been more fun if
they would have at least made some sparks and smoke. The smell though,
that was telltale!
>
> Mike
>
>
> ***24/7/52 is what I think people should say rather than 24/7/365. If
> you think about it, you're saying, "24 hours per day, 7 days per week,"
> so why would you then go back to saying, "365 days per year," rather
> than following the series with "52 weeks per year."
lol, well, now that you mention it; does make sense. How about
86400/604800/31449600?
If you're going to
> fall back to the previous unit, it should be 24/168/8736 or something
> (keeping it all in hours). Anyway, completely off-topic ramblings to
> justify my saying 24/7/52. Join me in the 24/7/52 revolution!
> _______________________________________________
> mythtv-users mailing list
> mythtv-users at mythtv.org
> http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
cheers,
Raphael
More information about the mythtv-users
mailing list