PC Peripherals Power conumption query - To build a HTPC/DL Rig or not ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
m0h1t

m0h1t

drinks like a fish
Innovator
So I'm thinking of turning my present rig into an 24x7 HTPC/Download Rig, but I'm not sure whether I should go ahead w/ this or get a separate htpc or something like a wdtv/popcorn hour because of the power that my present rig might suck.

After the sale this is what is going to remain..

Q9550 2.83Ghz - ~1.12 vCore (1.01v after SpeedStep)
MSI P45 Neo2-FR
Gskill 1066Mhz 2x2GB - 2.1v
MSI 4350
Asus Xonar D1
1x Scythe Slipstream fan (~7w)
5x 7200RPM Drives (Sleeper on)
Corsair CX400

So how much power would the above suck, ~150watts?

1 unit of power = 1kwh (1000watt x 1hour)
Daily consumption = 24/(1000/150) = 3.598 units
Lets assume this to be 4 units/day. 30 days = 120 units.

The price per unit beyoud 400 units is ~Rs.5 I think (BSES Rajdhani), so Effective cost = 120*5 = Rs.600/month

So what do you guys think is it better to pay Rs.600/month for power usage or buy a separate HTPC which might cost somewhere between 7 to 10k? and also loose out on Xonar D1?
..Not forgetting that even the HTPC will have some power consumption (1/3rd Maybe) and the main rig will also run for some time.
 
First, your rig is pretty hungry for a 24x7 machine.

A small atom/Ion box will do pretty much everything you want except high resolution gaming, and as long as you keep the power footprint low you should be able to get by with about a quarter of the power of your current rig.

Trust me, I used a 9950 quad core as a download and 24x7 rig for a long time and I was paying ~Rs 700 extra on bills for almost a year. That's about 13K, and if you factor in average rig life of two years that's 26K over the entire lifetime of the system.

It just makes more sense to save the energy. You can get consumption into the 30-40W range for a headless rig, maybe even less. The saving is not small, the thermal benefits also are probably worth it.

One small laptop hard disk (unless you have a 1GB/s connection) and an Atom/ION board is pretty much all you need, and the entire thing can hook up to your current monitor's second input. Use a mini-itx supply and case, you should be under the 15K mark for the entire setup, and in the 30W envelope, say 40W assuming 60% PSU efficiency.
 
I don't understand the question.

A 24x7 rig may have multiple functions. Mine, for example, was used for Folding (not really the strength of the Atom) and it needed to be always connected to the 'net and always on, plus it was the media server for the entire house. 4 cores was imperative for me, and the energy consumption was balanced by the usefulness of the application. I know of others who would use theirs in home automation/security. Like I said, an Atom can handle pretty much all of this without any issues.

If you are *only* downloading (which I assume is the reason for affixing the connection speed to the list of prerequisites), then maybe a torrentbox will be better with a large (2TB) disk. The consumption will be even lower, but the application extremely limited. Also, I'm not sure what exactly you're planning to do with all the content you 'acquire' on these 24x7 expeditions, but hey, it's your prerogative. You could always affix a large external drive to the system if you wanted to download all of the internet. Eventually, storage space and consumption habits, not connection speed are the limiting factors. This is true for pretty much all 'download' rigs.
 
cranky said:
Trust me, I used a 9950 quad core as a download and 24x7 rig for a long time and I was paying ~Rs 700 extra on bills for almost a year. That's about 13K, and if you factor in average rig life of two years that's 26K over the entire lifetime of the system.
Click to expand...

Firstly thanks a ton for your reply.

Also I know using a Q9550 for a HTPC/DL Rig is overkill, but I really don't see a big enough power saving even if I get a separate atom setup.

The Atom build is still going to be about ~50watts, considering I'll be plugging in 5 HDD's and the soundcard (Xonar).

Spending ~10-13k over 100w saving seems a bit futile to me..

Also I'll probably downclock the q9550 to 2Ghz or something and the vCore it requires is as it is very less.

and 700x12 = 13?
 
Dude save yourself from the hassle. Get a netbook and use it as a download rig, the way I am doing. 40W max power consumption. And it doubles up as your normal web surfing device.

I turn on my PC only when I need to game or watch movies.

Even for that I have a PS3 which consumes like 60W. I am using that one as my music source. The only power hog in my setup is my AV receiver which I turn on quite less, only when gaming/watching movie or listening to the Music.

Netbook is most efficient, hassle free and practical thing. After all the thoughts of a separate download rig / headless servers and what not, I found netbook serving my purpose in more than one way.
 
cranky said:
Trust me, I used a 9950 quad core as a download and 24x7 rig for a long time and I was paying ~Rs 700 extra on bills for almost a year. That's about 13K, and if you factor in average rig life of two years that's 26K over the entire lifetime of the system.
Click to expand...

AMD Phenom 9950+ CPU has a TDP of 140W. Intel's Penryn/Yorkfield CPUs have very low Idle power requirements.

40320686.png


Anandtech-Debunking Power Supply Myths

Anandtech-The Cost of Running Your PC

OP can downgrade to E5200 (4-5w further idle power saving), G31 (cost effective + doesnt require active cooling), Single stick DDR2 (3w saving~), No internal optical drive (5w saving), Single higher capacity HDD (6-8w saving). At idle, this computer requires around 70W~ of power.
 
TDP is peak power consumption, the CPU never reached that. Neither will the 9550 he's using now.

The point is not what hardware will save money, the question was whether a hardware purchase is at all needed. I am of the opinion that energy costs increase year on year and it's better to save that, whereas hardware is (relatively) dirt cheap and reduces in value every year, so eventually your high performance PC is just a white elephant and a rig with low consumption is a long-term asset.

In the short term it is possible to see no saving at all in moving to more efficient hardware. In the long term and with some intelligence, it is possible to realise enough energy savings to offset the initial cost.

@TS: Thanks for pointing out the math boo-boo, it was 16K for two years, not 26K. I agree that a single large drive is usually a much better bet than multiple small drives, and downclocking and undervolting the processor will be worth some savings. At the end of the day, it's a question of what you're willing to give up, now and later.

Good Luck with your decisions :)
 
I went the netbook way.

It is low on power consumption and silent (in my sleeping room). At the same time it lets me do everything which a normal rig permits apart from HD movies and gaming. Plus it is ready out of the box. Maximum a router / wi-fi set up is needed to 'split' your broadband for > 1 connection.
 
Thanks everyone for their valuable suggestions, especially cranky and sudan.

Have decided to stick w/ my current setup for downloading and HD/Music playback because I wouldn't really be downloading 24x7, 50-80 hours a week maybe. Will be buying a Silverstone HTPC case soon to house my 6 hard drives (~5TB) and the DiNovo Mini for browsing. So this takes care of everything, browsing, music, movies.

Lastly the main reason for me not buying a netbook or a small Atom based setup is my unwillingness to spend ~10-13k extra for a not so big saving in energy consumption (or atleast that's what I tell my self since I'm so in love with DiNovo mini the silverstone case :P)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom