3DMarks per Watt?

[madshi]

Just read that IBM added a benchmark for some new PowerPC processors which work like "benchmark result per Watt" or something like that. I guess that's a reaction to Prescott... What do you think? Is that a good idea for graphics benchmarks, too? I mean, NVidia and ATI can't continue to increase the power consumption in the same way they did during the last 2 generations. So in the end (a few graphics card generations further in the future) the winner might be who has the highest computational power with a given power consumption / heat dissipation.

In light of this I think a good graphics card review these days should at least contain a quick check on how high the power consumption of a given graphics card in both idle state and under full load is.

What do you guys think?

 

[Ylandro]

Does anyone here really care how much power his computer uses?

These things only become relevant, when the buyers is forced to update his computer for it.

When you need to buy a new power supply, for one card, and not for the equally performing other card. But if your power supply is sufficient for both, who cares?

The Intel P4 produces much more heat, then a similar performing Athlon. Haven't heared anyone complaining about it...

Intel's solution of simply fitting a much bigger heatsink worked perfectly.
Even better than that, nobody complains about the heat output of the P4, instead people complain about the temperature of the Athlon.

 

[breez]

instead people complain about the temperature of the Athlon.

Yeah, people who are living the year 2000.

 

[thegrommit]

Even better than that, nobody complains about the heat output of the P4, instead people complain about the temperature of the Athlon.

That's a carryover from the Athlon Thunderbird days from people living in the last century. The Athlon 64's are Prescotts current competitors. And there are plenty of quiet computing advocates for whom high temperatures are a bad thing.

Getting back on topic. I for one am contemplating a X800 Pro as the performance difference with a 6800GT isn't worth the hassle and cost of replacing my current PSU.

 

[K.I.L.E.R]

My PSU is 400W, that doesn't mean it uses 400W/h, does it? :?

 

[dan2097]

My PSU is 400W, that doesn't mean it uses 400W/h, does it? :?

up to 400joules a second AFAIK.

A watt is a joule of energy a second so power is the rate of doing work.

 

[no_way]

Does anyone here really care how much power his computer uses?

Yes, especially when im far from power outlets and i didnt take a portable solar panel along to the beach.

 

[Dio]

Nope. The rating of a power supply is it's peak output power before it stops working properly. There may be less current than that drawn. The power supply eats some power itself in conversion, though, as it's not 100% efficient. (I believe there is a drive in the industry to try to increase supply efficiency somewhat).

I run 6 or 7 PC's, one monitor and all the networking infrastructure in my office on a 1000VA (which doesn't mean 1000W, more like 900W) UPS. I'm not sure if I've ever loaded it over 90%. I would say a rough rule of thumb is that a 'typical' PC is eating 120-150W and a 'high end' PC 150-200W.

 

[thop]

Does anyone here really care how much power his computer uses?

I do. I think the industry is heading into a terrible direction. And it took Intel a power monster (Prescott) to realize that, so that they canned the whole line and are bringing the Pentium-M to the desktop now.

The problem is that the customer swallows everything, as long as it gives more 3DMarks. Kinda like the US car industry, who cares about gallons, just make it big!

 

[thegrommit]

I would say a rough rule of thumb is that a 'typical' PC is eating 120-150W and a 'high end' PC 150-200W.

Pretty much, though wattage isn't the whole story. The current mid/high end video cards and CPU's make higher demands on a PSU's +12V rail than in previous generations.

 

[Xmas]

Just read that IBM added a benchmark for some new PowerPC processors which work like "benchmark result per Watt" or something like that.

Didn't Transmeta do the same before?

In light of this I think a good graphics card review these days should at least contain a quick check on how high the power consumption of a given graphics card in both idle state and under full load is.

What do you guys think?

Agreed, a perfect graphics card review should present everything that could be relevant to a consumer, if feasible. Noise is another important issue.

 

[ET]

I've seen benchmarks per watt before. They're probably quite standard in the mobile/embedded industry, where power consumption really matters. There's probably some benchmarking done to this effect even for 3D chips for mobile devices. The power demands do matter, but for desktops they only matter in the sense of "would I have to replace my PSU?" So knowing power demands matters, but scaling a benchmark by them is meaningless. It's not that hard to find power requirements in reviews (especially when they are excessive), and I don't think there's need for much more than this.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Does anyone here really care how much power his computer uses?

I do. I think the industry is heading into a terrible direction. And it took Intel a power monster (Prescott) to realize that, so that they canned the whole line and are bringing the Pentium-M to the desktop now.

The problem is that the customer swallows everything, as long as it gives more 3DMarks. Kinda like the US car industry, who cares about gallons, just make it big!

I care about my hydro-meter. People shouldn't be wasting so much energy just for video games. If you're doing professional work, then that's a bit different. But the industry should be concerned about power, and should be moving away from designs like the Prescott. Having a wasteful computer just to play games is not as stupid as driving an SUV in the city, but it's along the same lines.

 

[Guden Oden]

My PSU is 400W, that doesn't mean it uses 400W/h, does it? :?

No. Watt is the unit for energy expressed over one second. If you want the watt-hour figure for your PSU, you need to multiply output by 3600.

 

[darkblu]

Does anyone here really care how much power his computer uses?

I do. I think the industry is heading into a terrible direction. And it took Intel a power monster (Prescott) to realize that, so that they canned the whole line and are bringing the Pentium-M to the desktop now.

The problem is that the customer swallows everything, as long as it gives more 3DMarks. Kinda like the US car industry, who cares about gallons, just make it big!

I care about my hydro-meter. People shouldn't be wasting so much energy just for video games. If you're doing professional work, then that's a bit different. But the industry should be concerned about power, and should be moving away from designs like the Prescott. Having a wasteful computer just to play games is not as stupid as driving an SUV in the city, but it's along the same lines.

i share that opinion, that's why i do most of my gaming on a much better power-efficient gaming platform - my console. yet there's more to this topic that just being energy conscientious - soon people will be doing most of their computing work on their pocket machines, where the matter of power-efficiency is essential, so performance-per-watt will only be gaining importance in the years to come.

 

[madshi]

Noise is another important issue.

Yep!!

The power demands do matter, but for desktops they only matter in the sense of "would I have to replace my PSU?"

If that would be true why were there so many complaints about the dustbuster? You seem to be forgetting that high power consumption results in high heat dissipation, and that usually results in high noise. If you're trying to build a silent PC you'll want to replace the default graphics card fan/cooler with a big passive heatpipe. And then the more power consumption the graphics card has, the faster the case fan(s) will have to run, which results in more noise.

It's not that hard to find power requirements in reviews (especially when they are excessive), and I don't think there's need for much more than this.

There is need for more than this - for everyone who wants to build silent PCs at least.

 

[karlotta]

well so much to say but better to just let you guys live the myth...
for a silent PC, the best investment is a AC. For all the work and parts to get a PC to shut up, you can just buy a AC and run your ambient lower.

 

[Cryect]

Does anyone here really care how much power his computer uses?

When you are making a super computer that uses tens of thousands of processors you do. Which is why IBM has benchmark result per Watt. IBM tries to keep their processors for super computers under 10 watts to try to stay below thousand KW's of energy to cool off. For their current super computer aiming to be number 1 (which it should excede assuming it scales as planned by 4 fold if I recall ccorrectly), the power per processor is 8 watts currently. And the performance in comparison to today's chips is pretty similar kinda (believe it was like half the performance of top end processors, of course this is a RISC design IBM is using).

It would make sense do also do something similar with PowerPC processors since people are looking at making more super computers out of them after VTech. Will help give people how they can get the best performance out of their current room cooling systems (unless they want to spend a lot more money on a more powerful cooling system for a room of course).

Also, companies like Dell care since they like being able to put 70 watt PSU in computers if they can (first time I opened up one I was like how the hell did they do that).

 

[madshi]

well so much to say but better to just let you guys live the myth...
for a silent PC, the best investment is a AC. For all the work and parts to get a PC to shut up, you can just buy a AC and run your ambient lower.

Sorry, what is a "AC"?

 

[Cryect]

Air Conditioning, only big issue with trying to cool better that way is it costs a lot more per month to lower a large area by a degree than to just try to lower the temp of a processor by several degrees in a small confined area (heh what we need are heat pumps and huge radiators for cooling are PC's)