Go Back   Hardware Canucks > NEWS & REVIEWS > Reviews & Articles from the Web

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 08:33 PM
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,628
Default

Interesting article...until the conclusion. Gotta be one of the strangest bits of writing I read in a long time, because they post numbers, but make no real analysis of the data, as the title claims...I mean even an amateur one would be far better than this...this...I dunno WHAT it is...:
Quote:
So, there is nothing frightening about the numbers. Of course, 500 watts is quite a lot. It is about one quarter of an electric iron, but PSUs that can deliver it are widely available for reasonable money, especially if you compare it with the cost of the other components of such a power-hungry configuration. If you want to have a 50% reserve of wattage, a 750W power supply will be sufficient for a system with a Core i7-920 and a GeForce GTX 295.
The other configurations are much more economical. If the graphics card is replaced with a single-chip one, a 500-550W power supply can be used (and it will have a reserve of wattage, too). And an inexpensive 400W PSU will do for midrange gaming PCs.
Note also that this is the power consumption under very heavy tests. No real game can load the computer as heavily as FurMark. It means that a 750W PSU will offer an even larger reserve of power for the most advanced of the tested configurations.
I wonder how many 750w PSUs I can find that would fail running a i920 and a GTX295, simply because they were plugged in wrong, and crossloaded.




Interesting device and software though.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 08:40 PM
Eagle Eye's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Kleinburg, ON
Posts: 2,069

My System Specs

Default

I can appreciate what they're trying to do here, but not one of those "gaming computers" were overclocked or featured 2 or more videocards.

EE
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 09:39 PM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,839
Default

My current system can EASILY pull this from the wall. I peaked at 1383W the other day.

Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 09:40 PM
CMetaphor's Avatar
Quadfather
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 5,002

My System Specs

Default

Ooooh... whats pulling 1.1Kw Sky?
__________________
"Backed by common sense and physics!" -Squeetard
Opteron Server for Sale! http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum...ade-ideas.html
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 09:49 PM
MpG's Avatar
MpG MpG is offline
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 3,144
Default

My i7 920 & single GTX280 pulled almost 900W from the wall!

Of course, a week later, the motherboard power circuits fried, and I've since identified the CPU as being defective...
__________________
i7 2600K | ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z | 580GTX | Corsair DDR3-2133
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 10:02 PM
MonsterSound's Avatar
Allstar
F@H
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: YYZ
Posts: 691

My System Specs

Default manufacturer listed p/s req. seem to be about right

It's definitely an interesting article, device and software, however the assumptions that people are purchasing far greater power supplies (and more expensive) than they require, as well as manufactures "declare overstated specifications", I don't think is true.
Most people I know get the general power requirements from the product manufacturers.
min req. from EVGA:
GTX 285 - 550w
GTX 295 - 680w
The listed power requirements by the card producers fall right in line with the measurements that Mr. Artamonov ultimately produces, allowing for a few extra drives, some overclocking and my USB powered coffee plate.
These manufacturer listed p/s req. seem to be about right.

His seems to give a slight hit to other reviewers (I could be misinterpreting his intent here) stating that "the measurement of real-life consumption, even though mastered by most computer-related media, is often deficient." From what I read, most reviewers try to explain their power measurements in detail along with efficiency caveats etc. and that they are to be considered in a relative context.
__________________
Code:
 my Heatware,  RFD &  eBay
MAIN: i5 3570 @ 4.5Ghz wH100 / evga GTX780 SOC / MSI Z77A-G45 / 8gb G.Skill 2133 1T / 30" 2560x1600 / Antec P280 / PCP&C 950w / Intel 520 SSD 240gb / Eclipse / G3-Lazer / z5300 / Win7 Pro64 / APC Xs1300
HTPC : nMedia6000B / AMD X2 4400+ / M2A-VM / Corsair 4GB 800 / LiteOn Blu-Ray / 8800GT / Samsung 46"LCD / 2x2TB / OCZ500 / ATI550 / Wrless Kbrd & Rmte / z-5500 / Win7Pro / APC700
"You must be the change you want to see in the world" 
- Mahatma Gandhi  
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 10:07 PM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,839
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CMetaphor View Post
Ooooh... whats pulling 1.1Kw Sky?
i7 920 @ 4Ghz + 2x HD4870X2 + CoolIT Boreas while playing Far Cry 2.


Quote:
No real game can load the computer as heavily as FurMark. It means that a 750W PSU will offer an even larger reserve of power for the most advanced of the tested configurations.
I don't do this with other people's work but....

This statement in the article is absolute and complete bullshit.

Oleg seems to forget that games load the CPU AND the GPU. Put Furmark on the same settings as the games and check your CPU usage. I've done it and guess what? 5 - 12% CPU usage.

If a Furmark run causes my system to pull 600W from the wall, Crysis or Far Cry 2 DX10 at 1920 resolution will pull 750W - 775W at certain points.

It is blanket statements like that which really tick me off.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 10:16 PM
jcmaz's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Vancouver, BC
Posts: 2,455

My System Specs

Default

Oh crap, that means i wasted a good $70 on my 600W PSU??
__________________
“Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.”

-Plato
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old June 8, 2009, 11:13 PM
MpG's Avatar
MpG MpG is offline
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kitchener, ON
Posts: 3,144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SKYMTL View Post
I don't do this with other people's work but....

This statement in the article is absolute and complete bullshit.

Oleg seems to forget that games load the CPU AND the GPU. Put Furmark on the same settings as the games and check your CPU usage. I've done it and guess what? 5 - 12% CPU usage.

If a Furmark run causes my system to pull 600W from the wall, Crysis or Far Cry 2 DX10 at 1920 resolution will pull 750W - 775W at certain points.

It is blanket statements like that which really tick me off.
Yeah, I have to wonder about that little point myself. Now, the 500W figure they were getting was a Prime+Furmark number, so the tester's obviously aware of that fact on some level. Now, whether he jsut misspoke, or whether he actually believed that Furmark's excess consumption would equal CPU+GPU in a gaming situation... meh, dunno.

Aside from the obvious, I think this article is inadvertantly doing a great job of illustrating what overclocking does to your power consumption.
__________________
i7 2600K | ASUS Maximus IV GENE-Z | 580GTX | Corsair DDR3-2133
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old June 9, 2009, 12:32 AM
lowfat's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grande Prairie, AB
Posts: 8,120

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MpG View Post
My i7 920 & single GTX280 pulled almost 900W from the wall!

Of course, a week later, the motherboard power circuits fried, and I've since identified the CPU as being defective...
wtf. A 5000+, ATI HD4550, 2GB ram, and 14 HDD's only pulls ~ 325W on load according to my UPS.
__________________
Mael
Big Lian Li
Forever Alone
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
48xx Powerplay and idle power consumption? superj Video Cards 0 March 6, 2009 07:24 PM
Folding power consumption Alwaysrun HardwareCanucks F@H Team 10 February 23, 2009 06:15 AM
Intel Atom Power Consumption Preliminary Tests Hardware Canucks CPU's and Motherboards 0 April 22, 2008 02:31 PM
I DID IT!!!! Serious power consumption SKYMTL Power Supplies 10 February 16, 2008 07:16 PM
F@H vs. Power Consumption cujo HardwareCanucks F@H Team 14 August 8, 2007 08:32 AM