Originally Posted by atanum141 A second comment regarding what we put on this site? Whats Kyle at H trying to do? I swear he's starting a E-Beef.
Bit & H are my two faves, but taking little diggs at Bit are starting to anoy me.
It doesn't surprise me that it made Kyle laugh to be honest because he drives around in a Hummer H2 - that's why I found his comments about R600's power consumption rather amusing too...
It's fair to say that a lot of Americans don't give a damn about the environment - it's the world's largest producer of greenhouse gas emissions. The American Government has turned its back on the Kyoto agreement, so there's not much hope there either. Although, there are some States signing up to Kyoto on their own. IIRC, one of the big motor companies (I believe it's Ford off the top of my head) is in the process of suing the state of California because of the emission requirements the state has enforced.
Quote:
Erm, the article did seem to miss the fact that as eco-friendly and power saving as the C2D chips are, when you throw a little voltage at them, their TDP shoots right back up. Hell, my E6400 is in 150W land with 1.55v @ 3200.
Of course, but you're running the chips out of spec :)
Originally Posted by Nexxo I just upgraded my ATi Radeon 9800Pro. Because my watercooling setup is finely balanced at a ceiling of about 230Watts, I did not want to get anything that would contribute significantly more heat to the system. Imagine my surprise when I found that an ATi XT1650Pro runs about 2.5 times faster than the 9800Pro, but at fewer Watts: about 45W instead of 48W. Gotta love that die shrinkage...
Yet the heatsink on the XT1650Pro is decidedly meatier than on the 9800Pro. What gives?
Marketing gives. Nobody wants to buy a GPU with a weedy-looking heatsink, because they believe it won't perform. People want big-ass cards with big-ass sinks, promising power like steroid-crazed body builders, like people want big PSUs and big radiators and big bore tubing and big pumps with listed flowrates that they simply not achieve in reality.
Let's change the script, guys. Efficiency is a good modding criterion too.
Actually i remember when I had my X800XT with a single slot cooler and much prefer the days of good old single slot GPUs. It was a much simpler life! Then came along the X1800s with their rediculous heatsinks and fans that made more sound than an F16 Afterburner attached to the back of your PC. :( :( And the fact that it renders precious slots unusable, you'd have to be quite foolish to want a crossfire/sli solution when the amount of slots used renders all other hardware impossible to install
More power is better!
Mwaahahah I can't wait in 3 years, when we will 1 000W GPU's and 800W CPUs
You'll need a special cable like your oven, and battery pack for your laptop.
The second looks like a dedicated 45A line for an oven :P (as you suggested)
::edit:: looking at the socket it says 30A!
I totally agree though that power usage is getting out of hand. Specifically for us Europeans where power prices are constantly on the up it matters ALOT.
Is there actually any good/easy way to calculate how much wattage an overclocked CPU uses?
Originally Posted by Tim S It doesn't surprise me that it made Kyle laugh to be honest because he drives around in a Hummer H2 - that's why I found his comments about R600's power consumption rather amusing too...
It's fair to say that a lot of Americans don't give a damn about the environment - it's the world's largest producer of greenhouse gas emissions. The American Government has turned its back on the Kyoto agreement, so there's not much hope there either. Although, there are some States signing up to Kyoto on their own. IIRC, one of the big motor companies (I believe it's Ford off the top of my head) is in the process of suing the state of California because of the emission requirements the state has enforced.
I live in the U.S. and I'd like to comment on what you said. I care about emissions and polution only when regarding air quality and keeping the enviroment clean. I don't think "global warming" is something that we need to worry about. The Kyoto protocol is just a political stunt with no real tangible outcome possible. The earth's temperature is going to increase whether I drive my car to uni or take a bus every day (32 miles to and 32 miles back). It follows a cycle, and it just so happens that the temperature is increasing now.
Besides, the faster we use up all the fossil fuels, the faster we'll have to switch to some alternative. And you're kidding youself if you think we'll stop using them before they actually run out. It doesn't matter how fast they're depleted, they're still going to release X amount of emissions over 25 years or X amount of emissions over 125 years.
Originally Posted by legoman666 I live in the U.S. and I'd like to comment on what you said. I care about emissions and polution only when regarding air quality and keeping the enviroment clean. I don't think "global warming" is something that we need to worry about. The Kyoto protocol is just a political stunt with no real tangible outcome possible. The earth's temperature is going to increase whether I drive my car to uni or take a bus every day (32 miles to and 32 miles back). It follows a cycle, and it just so happens that the temperature is increasing now.
Besides, the faster we use up all the fossil fuels, the faster we'll have to switch to some alternative. And you're kidding youself if you think we'll stop using them before they actually run out. It doesn't matter how fast they're depleted, they're still going to release X amount of emissions over 25 years or X amount of emissions over 125 years.
Anyway, I'm sure my opinions about power usage will change once I actually start paying my own electric bill :P
(I debated posting this, but I clicked submit anyway)
Ok, and did you ever consider an alternative may take years to develop?
so what youre proposing is just go about wasting as much **** as possible, because it will cause us to use all of our available fossile fuels, THEN we can start on a safer alternative?
Thats completely stupid, if we cut down on use of oil etc now, it gives scientists longer to come up with solutions to problems we face, or do you just like putting people under pressure?
Originally Posted by Wolfwood Ok, and did you ever consider an alternative may take years to develop?
so what youre proposing is just go about wasting as much **** as possible, because it will cause us to use all of our available fossile fuels, THEN we can start on a safer alternative?
Thats completely stupid, if we cut down on use of oil etc now, it gives scientists longer to come up with solutions to problems we face, or do you just like putting people under pressure?
I was being partly sarcastic. :P But you have to agree that pressure would be a great incentive...
Originally Posted by legoman666 I was being partly sarcastic. :P But you have to agree that pressure would be a great incentive...
Usually it's good netiquette, when being sarcastic, to at least include a wink.
The reason the US as a whole is the largest contributor to greenhouse gasses is greed. This has been proved time and again by their wanting to be in control of oil fields dotted around the globe.
Originally Posted by completemadness is that in the US or UK ? (sounds US like to me)
UK. The gov. will foot part of the bill. Also if you get big enough panels you can even have a surplus yourself. Which you can sell back to the power company.
Well i think that PSU manufacturers are doing the more watt race better then the cpu en gpu makers combined.
I rather see a realworld benchmark that a 1kw PSU is REALLY needed to power a system with a dual core, one highend graphcard, two 500gb harddisk and a dvdwriter. And then running with a good game or doing desktop applications like burning a dvd or do some hd copying.
I think the outcome will be that you dont need more then a 350w psu.
So bit-people, please test this, you got all those ridiculous psu's laying arround anyway. Call the test: "Do you really need a 1000watt psu?"
Originally Posted by identikit UK. The gov. will foot part of the bill. Also if you get big enough panels you can even have a surplus yourself. Which you can sell back to the power company.
Originally Posted by [USRF]Obiwan I rather see a realworld benchmark that a 1kw PSU is REALLY needed to power a system with a dual core, one highend graphcard, two 500gb harddisk and a dvdwriter. And then running with a good game or doing desktop applications like burning a dvd or do some hd copying.
I think the outcome will be that you dont need more then a 350w psu.
So bit-people, please test this, you got all those ridiculous psu's laying arround anyway. Call the test: "Do you really need a 1000watt psu?"
You don't need a 1kW PSU to power that system - you need about 500-600W for comfort. What you need a 1kW PSU for is a quad-core, SLi/Crossfire top-end setup with a shedload of drives and wasteful chipset'd mobo's, with beefy overclocks. Alright they might not be running at 100% load all the time, but that's never a good idea with power regulation systems anyway.
While I see where this article is coming from, I don't really agree. So long as there is the ability to cool components for a reasonable ammount of money(I.E. not water or phase cooling on stock gear) they will use increasingly more electricity. This has overall, been happening over time, back since the days of CPU's that barely needed even a passive heatsink.
Power consumption imo is pretty much not worried about by companies, so long as the heat that that generates can be taken care off and it's not horrendous. The general gamersphere has been so noobish regarding speccing of PSU's in the last few years that everyone has hundreds of watts to spare anyway - so what company would mind using those up?
Anyone who genuinely thinks that the environment is in serious danger and that the only solution is to stop using electricity shouldn't be using a high end PC, what with all those dangerous metals and unrenewable whatevers - not to mention the power usage. For the rest of us, this isn't really an issue beyond heat and PSUs, and so far, companies seem to be managing to keep that under control, and within the massively overspecced margins 99% of people have.
I don't think (personally) that the whole point of being a bit more frugal with power resources is about saving the environment, or helping the dolphins or whatever, it's about not being pointlessly wasteful. If you can make a product less wasteful, even for that extra bit of effort, why not?
Even if you disregard the possible environmental issues of gamers everywhere running 1kW machines in a few years, what about the personal cost? PC's are expensive enough to run in depreciation as it is, let alone having a massive power bill come through every quarter for your gaming pleasure.
Yeah, but I think if the companies could make products more efficient for a little more effort they probably would. I'd love that, I love efficiency in general.
In the case of high end graphics and CPU's though, I think it would require total redesigns of some of the components, and even then if you're going to limit the wattage they can go through to any real extent I imagine you'd be forced to limit performance too. You can ask: Who wants lower power components? Everyone will say "YES!". Then ask: Who wants lower power components at the expense of performance?" - Not many takers there I imagine.
I'm not asking for power consumption to necessarily drop (although it can be done), I'm asking for it to stop going up. Why do we see higher power consumption every generation? For example, notebook power consumption remains pretty constant and we actually see "better performance per watt in the same power envelope" or even less in some cases - why can't we see that on the desktop at the high-end too?
I'm sure ATI and Nvidia could potentially make 500W graphics cards today that are twice as powerful as current cards, but we all know that's not responsible. By the same token, why do we keep going up by 20-30W every generation - it's costing more to own a high end PC every year (not just in terms of increased component prices and faster technology progressions), even if you don't game 24 hours a day.
You can add some more questions to the "why" Tim...
Why dont they release GPU's after there is actually a game ready to run it on (yet) They can finetune the gpu core into the finist detail and it would probably be more powerfull and energie eficient then ever before.
Why buy a SLI motherboard configuration if one is more then adequate to handle all the games that are released now and propbably the rest of the year?
The simple answer is consumer demand. But its not that simple because consumers are being brainwashed for decades to actually buy something they really dont need anyway...
But that is not the road we folow here in the topic. The fact is that all Highend hardware is consuming an enourmus amount of power that is bad for your wallet (twice!). One when buying hardware and two for the electric bills and in the end also the enviroment.
Why can they fit a 8800 into a freaking laptop and desktop users must buy bigger cases for a 8800 graca that is the size of a laptop? I dont get it... really i dont ;)
edit: to Identikit: I removed the quadcore/software, now try again to answer :o
Originally Posted by [USRF]Obiwan Well i think that PSU manufacturers are doing the more watt race better then the cpu en gpu makers combined.
I rather see a realworld benchmark that a 1kw PSU is REALLY needed to power a system with a dual core, one highend graphcard, two 500gb harddisk and a dvdwriter. And then running with a good game or doing desktop applications like burning a dvd or do some hd copying.
I think the outcome will be that you dont need more then a 350w psu.
So bit-people, please test this, you got all those ridiculous psu's laying arround anyway. Call the test: "Do you really need a 1000watt psu?"
I for one would be most interested in the actual PSU requirements are required as well as the minimum you could A) realistically run with and B) how low you could go!
The test wouldn't need to include overclocked equipment as that's running the hardware out of spec.
Comments 26 to 50 of 84
It's fair to say that a lot of Americans don't give a damn about the environment - it's the world's largest producer of greenhouse gas emissions. The American Government has turned its back on the Kyoto agreement, so there's not much hope there either. Although, there are some States signing up to Kyoto on their own. IIRC, one of the big motor companies (I believe it's Ford off the top of my head) is in the process of suing the state of California because of the emission requirements the state has enforced.
Mwaahahah I can't wait in 3 years, when we will 1 000W GPU's and 800W CPUs
You'll need a special cable like your oven, and battery pack for your laptop.
computer plug now: (US and Canada), slim, light, compact, has a real ground, holds well.
http://www.advin.us/uv-eraser-plug-USA-W512.JPG
Soon:
http://www.handsnclay.com/outlet.jpg
And our power supply will be big has that:
http://www.ottogroup.com/uploads/image_download/erster_computer_1.jpg
:)
::edit:: looking at the socket it says 30A!
I totally agree though that power usage is getting out of hand. Specifically for us Europeans where power prices are constantly on the up it matters ALOT.
Is there actually any good/easy way to calculate how much wattage an overclocked CPU uses?
I live in the U.S. and I'd like to comment on what you said. I care about emissions and polution only when regarding air quality and keeping the enviroment clean. I don't think "global warming" is something that we need to worry about. The Kyoto protocol is just a political stunt with no real tangible outcome possible. The earth's temperature is going to increase whether I drive my car to uni or take a bus every day (32 miles to and 32 miles back). It follows a cycle, and it just so happens that the temperature is increasing now.
Besides, the faster we use up all the fossil fuels, the faster we'll have to switch to some alternative. And you're kidding youself if you think we'll stop using them before they actually run out. It doesn't matter how fast they're depleted, they're still going to release X amount of emissions over 25 years or X amount of emissions over 125 years.
Read this book: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_of_fear
Anyway, I'm sure my opinions about power usage will change once I actually start paying my own electric bill :P
(I debated posting this, but I clicked submit anyway)
Ok, and did you ever consider an alternative may take years to develop?
so what youre proposing is just go about wasting as much **** as possible, because it will cause us to use all of our available fossile fuels, THEN we can start on a safer alternative?
Thats completely stupid, if we cut down on use of oil etc now, it gives scientists longer to come up with solutions to problems we face, or do you just like putting people under pressure?
OMG the topic has changed!
I was being partly sarcastic. :P But you have to agree that pressure would be a great incentive...
Usually it's good netiquette, when being sarcastic, to at least include a wink.
The reason the US as a whole is the largest contributor to greenhouse gasses is greed. This has been proved time and again by their wanting to be in control of oil fields dotted around the globe.
UK. The gov. will foot part of the bill. Also if you get big enough panels you can even have a surplus yourself. Which you can sell back to the power company.
I rather see a realworld benchmark that a 1kw PSU is REALLY needed to power a system with a dual core, one highend graphcard, two 500gb harddisk and a dvdwriter. And then running with a good game or doing desktop applications like burning a dvd or do some hd copying.
I think the outcome will be that you dont need more then a 350w psu.
So bit-people, please test this, you got all those ridiculous psu's laying arround anyway. Call the test: "Do you really need a 1000watt psu?"
Go on, throw a metaphorical custard pie in Kyle's face!
They are in very limited supply though.
You don't need a 1kW PSU to power that system - you need about 500-600W for comfort. What you need a 1kW PSU for is a quad-core, SLi/Crossfire top-end setup with a shedload of drives and wasteful chipset'd mobo's, with beefy overclocks. Alright they might not be running at 100% load all the time, but that's never a good idea with power regulation systems anyway.
Power consumption imo is pretty much not worried about by companies, so long as the heat that that generates can be taken care off and it's not horrendous. The general gamersphere has been so noobish regarding speccing of PSU's in the last few years that everyone has hundreds of watts to spare anyway - so what company would mind using those up?
Anyone who genuinely thinks that the environment is in serious danger and that the only solution is to stop using electricity shouldn't be using a high end PC, what with all those dangerous metals and unrenewable whatevers - not to mention the power usage. For the rest of us, this isn't really an issue beyond heat and PSUs, and so far, companies seem to be managing to keep that under control, and within the massively overspecced margins 99% of people have.
Even if you disregard the possible environmental issues of gamers everywhere running 1kW machines in a few years, what about the personal cost? PC's are expensive enough to run in depreciation as it is, let alone having a massive power bill come through every quarter for your gaming pleasure.
In the case of high end graphics and CPU's though, I think it would require total redesigns of some of the components, and even then if you're going to limit the wattage they can go through to any real extent I imagine you'd be forced to limit performance too. You can ask: Who wants lower power components? Everyone will say "YES!". Then ask: Who wants lower power components at the expense of performance?" - Not many takers there I imagine.
Bottom line is that we're pretty much getting what we want. When we care enough about power usage, efficiency, and less so about performance, I'm sure a company will be along shortly afterward to fill that niché.
I'm sure ATI and Nvidia could potentially make 500W graphics cards today that are twice as powerful as current cards, but we all know that's not responsible. By the same token, why do we keep going up by 20-30W every generation - it's costing more to own a high end PC every year (not just in terms of increased component prices and faster technology progressions), even if you don't game 24 hours a day.
Why dont they release GPU's after there is actually a game ready to run it on (yet) They can finetune the gpu core into the finist detail and it would probably be more powerfull and energie eficient then ever before.
Why buy a SLI motherboard configuration if one is more then adequate to handle all the games that are released now and propbably the rest of the year?
The simple answer is consumer demand. But its not that simple because consumers are being brainwashed for decades to actually buy something they really dont need anyway...
But that is not the road we folow here in the topic. The fact is that all Highend hardware is consuming an enourmus amount of power that is bad for your wallet (twice!). One when buying hardware and two for the electric bills and in the end also the enviroment.
Why can they fit a 8800 into a freaking laptop and desktop users must buy bigger cases for a 8800 graca that is the size of a laptop? I dont get it... really i dont ;)
edit: to Identikit: I removed the quadcore/software, now try again to answer :o
I for one would be most interested in the actual PSU requirements are required as well as the minimum you could A) realistically run with and B) how low you could go!
The test wouldn't need to include overclocked equipment as that's running the hardware out of spec.