[Shifty Geezer]

Originally Posted by babybumb

Are you really going to argue this? It will lead to nothing but dissapointment. All CE devices run closer to 50% than 100% on maximum usage

ToTTenTranz has issued an easily verifiable challenge. Someone measure the power draw running a known AAA title (Uncharted 2 or 3 should be accepted as taxing the system) and it can be proven one way or the other, and someone fed crow.

[ToTTenTranz]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

ToTTenTranz has issued an easily verifiable challenge. Someone measure the power draw running a known AAA title (Uncharted 2 or 3 should be accepted as taxing the system) and it can be proven one way or the other, and someone fed crow.

I'm more confident on the microwave test, lol.

[Scott_Arm]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

ToTTenTranz has issued an easily verifiable challenge. Someone measure the power draw running a known AAA title (Uncharted 2 or 3 should be accepted as taxing the system) and it can be proven one way or the other, and someone fed crow.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3774/w...box-360-slim/3

The slim used around 90W to run games on a 135W supply. (And that's 90W on the outlet side. The brick is at best 94% efficient, but that's highly doubtful, so it's probably supplying a good deal less than 90W to the console)

Those power supplies have to be rated assuming you've got every single peripheral under the sun plugged in. If you're playing a demanding Kinect game (is there one?) while charging multiple controllers over USB, using wireless on a weak signal with the antennae at maximum strength downloading a game at full-rate to an HD in the background, or whatever other power consuming tasks you can think of. Even for that absolute worst case, there has to be some headroom (10% at the minimum, just to make sure you don't exceed the brick).

[AlStrong]

There are also the power spikes from spinning up the optical drive & random accesses. The rate at which the drive reaches nominal speed will have an effect, of course (usually modest for notebook solutions to keep the power down).

[TheWretched]

Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz

The "Security Margin" you speak of is applied in the components themselves (capacitors, rectifiers, resistors, etc.). It's not in an end-product like a console PSU.
A well-built PSU will output its rated wattage perfectly well for as long as you want, because its less-capable component is able to drive that voltage/current with a security margin of 1.5/2.0.

I'm pretty sure your prof will say the same.

Dunno, I switched classes a while ago and graduated in a different course...

Though... but using your logic, if all parts have this margin, then the rated output should effectively mirror this margin too, no?

Also... running your PSU at full load for a longer period of time WILL lead to it dying pretty fast. Just look at PC PSUs. There's a very good reason why 150 Watt GPUs recommend 24A at the 12V rail (i.e. 288 Watt). I know I know, PCs are a different case, but still basic "engineering" logic should still apply.

That's the phat model, right?
Why won't you check the power usage in an AAA game from 2012 and see if it's still 200W?

Dunno, I sold mine... but I highly doubt that current games use more power than the tested ones... like Final Fantasy XIII and GTA4. Current games surely aren't "furmark" to our systems, compared to the older ones... at least not by a larger than negligible difference.

[Scott_Arm]

Yes, I imagine the optical drives can eat a good amount of power as they spin up.

Assuming the Xbox 360 S transformer is able to output 135W, it would have to draw 145W if you assumed 94% efficiency, which is probably high. It's probably between 80 and 90%. In any case, your 360S is not going to draw 145W from the wall, at any point, period.

Like Al said, the Wii uses about 20W during gameplay, and the output on the supply is rated at 40W or something like that.

Edit:
Another thing to consider is that they're not designing these supplies. They're just rebranded off-the-shelf supplies. They're likely to look at quite a few supplies with different ratings depending on what's available. They may end up with one that has a ton of headroom, if it is abundant, cheap and of good quality.

[AlStrong]

Side-note: 15V DC seems a bit unusual.

[Kb-Smoker]

Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz

I see, so you're comparing it to bad PC PSUs.

But no, 80% isn't the "upper limit". Even in PCs, only "bad" PSUs won't be able to handle the rated wattage.

Some PSUs (Corsair, Seasonic, BeQuiet) can even handle sustained wattages well above their rated output, and all the good ones will handle some 5W above its rated specification just fine.


Yes, many uninformed people use the "up to 70%" rule for buying PSUs, without even knowing why.. That's mainly because there's practically no quality regulation for PSUs and their rated maximum output and they'd risk buying a "800W PSU" from "LCPower" or something that won't even do 600W and damage some components due to unstable voltages.

NO one designing a mass market computer produce product would do anything you say. I don't even you believe this non sense. Do you believe they will use more than 60watts?

We are all just uninformed. Even if every other console ever made follows these rules. Lol I mean really if you needed more than 50 w get a bigger power brick. Its not built into the system just get a bigger one....

While in theory you made be correct that they could do this. It is so unlikely it not worth talking about.

Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz

That's the phat model, right?
Why won't you check the power usage in an AAA game from 2012 and see if it's still 200W?

as the other has posted. This is not true at all.

Xbox 360
Slim System .06W
Off Idle 70.4W
Halo 3 87.0W
Rockband 2 82.7W
Gears of War 2 88.0W
Red Dead Redemption 90.4W

Originally Posted by ToTTenTranz

Funny.
So when you turn on your 600W microwave at maximum power, you think the output is actually 300W?

so this microwave will be using 1100 watts to make 600 watts. Not sure how is backs up what you posted.

[Grall]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

Someone measure the power draw running a known AAA title (Uncharted 2 or 3 should be accepted as taxing the system) and it can be proven one way or the other, and someone fed crow.

It's been shown that current consoles use almost as much power at idle as they do at full load, and therefore the power draw in a "single-A" game should therefore be pretty much the same as a triple-A game...

Originally Posted by AlStrong

There are also the power spikes from spinning up the optical drive & random accesses.

This is immaterial. Hitachi Deskstars at 7.5k RPM using five metal platters and a phat metal hub spindle spin up to full speed using only 15W, when standby power is in the 8-10W range. A single, low-RPM carbonate disc isn't going to need a whole lot to spin up. The stepper motor controlling the optical block way, way, WAY less. Seeking is likely in the milliwatt range, IE rounding error pretty much.

[AlStrong]

Originally Posted by Grall

A single, low-RPM carbonate disc isn't going to need a whole lot to spin up. The stepper motor controlling the optical block way, way, WAY less. Seeking is likely in the milliwatt range, IE rounding error pretty much.

No? There are some spec lists for BD drives on google listing up to 22W for said cases while nominal operation was much lower.

http://www.pioneer.eu/eur/products/a...202/index.html
http://www.pioneer.eu/eur/products/a...3BK/index.html

*shrug* Guess I misinterpreted then.

[Grall]

Sure, there could be BR drives using a crapton of power to spin up, but it doesn't HAVE to be that way. A few years ago, Seagate drives regularly guzzled upwards of 50 (!) watts during spinup for example, while at the same time Hitachi drives were much more frugal (as mentioned in previous posts.)

So it would be a design issue, not anything inherent to getting a light platter spinning.

[AlStrong]

Ah. hm... so what makes them different

[function]

Originally Posted by Grall

75W max total system power draw, including optical drives, wireless radios and so on. That's some seriously weak-ass hardware then! Oh well, not as if it's really any news I guess.

4cm case fan. It was always going to be this way!

Think the WiiU has 4 USB 2 ports, right? So that's 10W allocation iirc (or maybe more if they want fast charge over USB). And yeah, not just Wifi but video streaming to two pads.

Originally Posted by AlStrong

Side-note: 15V DC seems a bit unusual.

Running the 4 cm fan at 12v couldn't keep the system cool enough!

[darkblu]

Originally Posted by function

4cm case fan. It was always going to be this way!

Think the WiiU has 4 USB 2 ports, right? So that's 10W allocation iirc (or maybe more if they want fast charge over USB). And yeah, not just Wifi but video streaming to two pads.

Just a note: the number of pads that video is being streamed to is irrelevant - apparently it's all multiplexed in the same stream. We can conclude as much based on the '1x pad @ 60 fps, 2x pads @ 30 fps' info we got some time ago.

[function]

Originally Posted by darkblu

Just a note: the number of pads that video is being streamed to is irrelevant - apparently it's all multiplexed in the same stream. We can conclude as much based on the '1x pad @ 60 fps, 2x pads @ 30 fps' info we got some time ago.

Yeah, I'd worked out that there was some limit on the WiiU meaning 1 x 60 went to 2 x 30. I didn't know what it was, but using the same wireless channel seems entirely reasonable and I guess it's cheaper in terms of hardware.

[Grall]

Originally Posted by function

I guess it's cheaper in terms of hardware.

Yes, but probably only incidentally, as wireless video is probably not trivial to get working reliably, and having two parallel streams would be (at least) twice the engineering headache, risk of interference etc. Plus, as mentioned, power use as well... Damn that tiny little metal tin can!

[AlStrong]

I was thinking a bit more about the CPU setup, trying to reconcile the initial announcements about the Power7 relation, the asymmetric L2, the Wii HW BC, and the supposed ease of 360 portability.

How about a Power7 main core derivitive + 2 "enhanced" Broadways? i.e 4-way SMT + 2 cores -> 6 threads *ahem*

Sounds ridiculous, I know (45nm Broadway would be lol). >_>

[bgassassin]

Originally Posted by AlStrong

I was thinking a bit more about the CPU setup, trying to reconcile the initial announcements about the Power7 relation, the asymmetric L2, the Wii HW BC, and the supposed ease of 360 portability.

How about a Power7 main core derivitive + 2 "enhanced" Broadways? i.e 4-way SMT + 2 cores -> 6 threads *ahem*

Sounds ridiculous, I know (45nm Broadway would be lol). >_>

Don't worry. You're not the only crazy person around here.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...ostcount=12624

LOL. I said that part in bold. And my stupid, crazy idea kinda sounds like this except with one modified POWER7 core and two modified 476FP cores.

[AlStrong]

heh, that's what I get for not following thousands of posts.

[bgassassin]

Originally Posted by AlStrong

heh, that's what I get for not following thousands of posts.

I can't believe you missed that one post out of 100,000.

[Rodéric]

I need to go back making games, I'm bored of even considering to try to guess, I want to know

[Butta]

Could the e6760 be the WiiU GPU?

http://www.em.avnet.com/en-us/design...rocessors.aspx
http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/E676...duct-Brief.pdf

480 shaders
3DMark™ VantageP score of P5870
DirectX® 11, Shader Model 5.0, OpenGL 4.1
35W
40nm

[BRiT]

Still seems a bit to high on the power draw for the WiiU.

[french toast]

Originally Posted by Butta

Could the e6760 be the WiiU GPU?

http://www.em.avnet.com/en-us/design...rocessors.aspx
http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/E676...duct-Brief.pdf

480 shaders
3DMark™ VantageP score of P5870
DirectX® 11, Shader Model 5.0, OpenGL 4.1
35W
40nm

Well if it has that gpu and 2 gb ram I'm buying it..believe it when I see it mind..

[Butta]

Originally Posted by BRiT

Still seems a bit to high on the power draw for the WiiU.

35W is based on GDDR5 memory. Is it possible that GDDR3 would bring it down?