[mythtv-users] CPU power (was Possible small HD frontend)

[Raphael]

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