Kinect2 and the associated processing was supposed to take an additional 20W over the consumption of a console (according to the suggestion to the EU). And it looks like "voice activated" standby for the mics&jaguar is ~14W. It shouldn't require an immense amount of power.
Xbox One (Durango) Technical hardware investigation
- Thread starter Love_In_Rio
- Start date
- Status
Kinect2 and the associated processing was supposed to take an additional 20W over the consumption of a console (according to the suggestion to the EU). And it looks like "voice activated" standby for the mics&jaguar is ~14W. It shouldn't require an immense amount of power.
Bigus Dickus
Regular
An energy specification makes no sense, as without a corresponding length of time over which that is referenced such a specification is meaningless. Unless in other countries an energy rating like that implies some standard like one hour, in which case shame on those countries for being stupid.
I'm from Spain. Measurement units are pretty European standard, Wh is indeed Watts/hour.
Which isn't a meaningful unit to start with (1 Watt is already energy consumed per time, i.e 1 W = 1 J/s).
Wh is Watts times hours and denotes an energy consumption (1 Wh = 3600 J). That is often given for a fridge for instance to denote the average energy consumption per day (as the consumption isn't continous, it's usually below 1 kWh per day for a somewhat modern one) or for a washing machine for one run or something. It doesn't make sense at all in this context. Specifying something like 250 Wh(/h), with the 1h time unit implied would be simply nonsensical, it should specify simply a 250W consumption. I have never seen such a thing on a power supply, and I live in Europe, too. Must be a Spanish weirdness.
So where does it say Wh again?
I'm not from Spain, yet I'm pretty sure Wh is not Watts/hour.
I'm not from Spain, yet I'm pretty sure Wh is not Watts/hour.
Which isn't a meaningful unit to start with (1 Watt is already energy consumed per time, i.e 1 W = 1 J/s).
Wh is Watts times hours and denotes an energy consumption (1 Wh = 3600 J). That is often given for a fridge for instance to denote the average energy consumption per day (as the consumption isn't continous, it's usually below 1 kWh per day for a somewhat modern one) or for a washing machine for one run or something. It doesn't make sense at all in this context. Specifying something like 250 Wh(/h), with the 1h time unit implied would be simply nonsensical, it should specify simply a 250W consumption. I have never seen such a thing on a power supply, and I live in Europe, too. Must be a Spanish weirdness.
The Wh thing sounds weird for me too, almost all electronic devices in spain just shows "W", dunno about south america countries.
It's strange too we have first photo showing 253 Wh and the last one XXXXX Wh. What's the fake? :smile:
Wh is not part of the IS, but is standard for some notations
http://translate.google.it/translat...=http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wattora&act=url
http://translate.google.it/translat...=http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wattora&act=url
And it is exactly what I described. Wh is in use all over the world, but it is a unit of energy (consumed for something or storage capacity of a battery), not power consumption (and W/h doesn't make any sense as long as we are not talking about a gradient [slowly changing power consumption over time] and how steep power gets ramped).
Those look far more legit than the previous. I guess spanish part is a product requirement for a spanish speaking country.
The first still looks like a knock off label. No standard markings. Composed of elements from two different labels. "For use with the Xbox One" instead of "For use with the Microsoft Xbox XXXX (substitute for "One") console" with Chinese translation in parentheses. Use of different size fonts.
Its either a knockoff label or a poorly produced one.
Last edited by a moderator:
I disagree that is in use for a lot of appliance, actually in France they bills are accounted in KWH.
It is pretty standard, it "speaks" better to the average guy than kilojoule.
So as I said earlier if that PSU is properly designed and really suit the XB1 it hints at a 70Watts sustained consumption under load.
That is quite low, though the HD7750 burns 45 Watts, it could be possible.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think your logic is wrong:
1 watt = 1 joule per second.
1 watt hour = 3600 "watts" (kindof).
In short -> if you run a 10 watt device continuously for an hour, then it uses 10x3600 = 10 watt hours. (Wh is a 'nice' unit of measure for humans)
To understand what the number means, we'd need to know which country requires Wh to appear on power supplies. And I don't think anyone has worked that out yet.
(edit: It's Mexico/LASE and it's the result of testing the *PSU*, likely against the maximum listed output, so it doesn't necessarily imply anything remotely useful - other than it's a decent PSU).
Last edited by a moderator:
They could all be Chinese copies, though the value are the same for both voltage and amperage.
None of those labels are contradicting with them selves, though one could give an extra measurement aka the average energy used (in use and idle) throughout the course of one hour.
No it doesn't work like that, I'm pretty sure it's been a while but I did "electricity" 6 hours a week for 2 year (it is painful...
).When that value is given for an appliance it doesn't described the max power draw but on average (useful for things that are always plugged like a refrigerator).
The doubt I have is between:
1watts device running one hours burns 3600Joules =>3.6Wh
or
1watts device running one hours burns 3600Joules =>3600Wh or 3.6KWh
I looked at my electric counter (which account KWH) and it is barely moving with multiple devices pulling power (refrigerator, 2 computers, etc.) so I think it is the former.
So ~70 watts. I've to check the lower value to see if it is in line with value MSFT gave (~2.5% of the system power draw under use).
Last edited by a moderator:
No it doesn't work like that, I'm pretty sure it's been a while but I did "electricity" 6 hours a week for 2 year (it is painful...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilowatt_hour
(I also had to go and double-check, been a long time since I did physics)
You either misread or misunderstood. I explicitly said that Wh (or kWh as 1000 Wh, a slightly larger company probably pays per MWh) are in use all over the world. A kWh is a unit of energy, and after all, you pay for energy, not for power, aren't you? At least I pay that way.
I don't understand how it can be hard to disentangle the unit for power (energy/time, unit Watt = J/s) and energy (unit J, or as a product of power and time the unit J can be expressed in Ws[=J] and in the non-metric units like Wh [with the metric kilo, Mega, or whatever prefixes it can get kWh, MWh, GWh ...]). It really isn't that difficult.
So, now back to the XB1 hardware. I think one learns too much about it from the power supplies. Consumption is definitely <200W peak. MS stated an average consumption (just for the SoC?) of about 100W. Let's assume a peak of 120-130W for the SoC, add the memory, harddisk, optical drive, southbridge, Kinect, the USB connections and all these small things, and it is easy to see that one really wants a 200W or so power supply.
I know it is a measure of energy I wrote it on the last page. I don't get why you go through metrology one or one.
Dumbo11, hum I might I forgot.. shit so much time spent studying that crap... Anyway I guess I confused how to convert from joule to Wh with how the later are "accounted" for.
I've checked the picture on last page and the idle value makes no sense whatever so 0.11Wh?
Dumbo11, hum I might I forgot.. shit so much time spent studying that crap... Anyway I guess I confused how to convert from joule to Wh with how the later are "accounted" for.
I've checked the picture on last page and the idle value makes no sense whatever so 0.11Wh?
Everything after the first line was not exactly directed at you, more to the general audience.
It is ok I managed to messed up badly on something pretty simple, actually showing that I know how to convert and in the same time acting as if they were replaceable without conversion... and them daring to make calculation from my crap
really sucky, I'm ashamed...Bigus Dickus
Regular
It makes no sense because it is a stupid measure, and if countries are actually using this with an implied reference period of an hour without stating that, they are stupid too because the units should be used unambiguously. This should ONLY be used for devices on constantly but drawing power intermittently (refrigerators) or running cyclicly (dishwasher), and then the length of time should be explicitly stated (ie 100 Wh per day, or per hour, or per average load of laundry, etc.). It certainly makes no sense for a console on an indeterminant period of time, and especially so for a standby mode.
If you ASSUME there is an implied one hour reference period, then 0.11 Wh means the console would draw 0.11 watts at idle, thus over an hour 0.11 watt hours. But the lengh of time is implicit, not explicit, thus ambiguous and stupid. 0.11 Wh could also mean 1.1 watts over a measured time of ten minutes. Or 0.011 Watts over a measured time of ten hours. You can't know which unless you specify the measured period. Which is why sensible countries only list power draw, not ambiguous energy use, for such devices. Just list watts and be done with it.
And it looks like this is the PSU output rating, not expected device (XB1) draw, as the upper number is much to high if a one hour reference is assumed, though I suppose idle draw of 1/10 watt could be possible (but seems low).
AFAIK, it's always an implied reference period of an hour. ...because it makes sense to have a defacto standard on how you can gage how much power an appliance device uses regardless how long you effectively use it. In that sense, you are effectively comparing using the same baseline (the amount of watts over a period of an hour).
If you use it less than an hour, then you can always calculate it from the average draw over an hour number.
- Status
Similar threads
