Power Supply Calculator

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vaerilis

That's more accurate than most wattage calculators out there, but not at all flawless. Accoring to them, the 5900XT consumes more juice than the 5900..

---

This is true, from a brief googling I did. The XT looks to be comparable to a 5900Ultra, so it should definitely be way more power hungry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vaerilis

...and that an E6300 Core 2 Duo consumes almost as much as a 2.8C Northwood...

---

Oh?? I thought it'd be really funny if this was the case, I'm going to have to find some hard CPU only numbers... But I think this one is either true or pretty close to being true. This Northwood has almost no power saving tech, and speedstep doesn't work on this model because Speedstep back then would only drop the clock rate to 2.8ghz at it's lowest. Factor in that it's a Netburst, that it is a 130nm die size CPU, that the E6300 is two cores fused into one on a 65nm die size with some very advanced power saving features, with half of the 4mb L2 cache disabled then I can believe it is true. ;)

[QUOTE=Kougar]This is true, from a brief googling I did. The XT looks to be comparable to a 5900Ultra, so it should definitely be way more power hungry.

:shock: The 5900XT is a downclocked 5900 (400/700 vs. 400/850), so it consumes less power. In the nVidia world, XT means inferior edition (I have a 5900XT).

Regarding the CPUs: I meant that the Northwoods need a lot of juice and the Core 2 Duos consume a lot less than the P4s. http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=get...35&articID=470

Okay, I found another review this time from Firing Squad and read through it, yer right. Maybe I saw 5700 Ultra listed and read it wrong, I'm not sure ;)

Quote:

---

The 5900 XT’s memory operates at 350MHz (700MHz effective), 75MHz below the 5900 Ultra and 125MHz slower than the 5950 Ultra. This provides the 5900 XT graphics core with up to 22.4GB/sec of peak memory bandwidth, the same figure as ATI’s RADEON 9800 PRO 256MB and 8GB/sec more than GeForce FX 5700 Ultra, which was the previous leader in this category in the mainstream segment.

Despite the slower memory frequency (700MHz effective versus 850MHz), the 5900 XT is able to keep up with the GeForce FX 5900 128MB in many benchmarks thanks to the lower memory timings its 2.8ns BGA memory boasts.

Due to the reduced frequencies of the graphics core and memory, 5900 XT board manufacturers are able to utilize a simpler board design with reduced power and heat requirements. An external power source is still needed, but the board requires significantly less power circuitry and smaller coolers. Video input and hardware monitoring functionality are also sometimes left out in order to further reduce production costs. Souce

---

Great site... Everything you can think of is covered me thinks :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vfrex

I understand that. Now I'm asking, what is the difference? Why not just include startup power necessity in the 100% utilization figure. The note on the calculator is confusing.

PSU peak load reliability? Like, whether the PSU can actually put out what it claims it can? Shouldn't the surge compensation be based on the other components in the system? Also, isn't it murky to determine the current a PSU is capable of putting out based entirely on the voltage?

---

Outstanding questions...

You asked the kind of questions good engineers would have asked. I noticed your profile said you're a student, please try for engineering or science as most real engineers and real scientists nowaday are imported from overseas or first/second generation Americans, and there aren't enough engineers and scientists right now.

Thanks, great calulator, I need something like this to help me with my new computer build. Helps to look at all the needs not just one aspect.

This really is an awesome tool....I'm not surprised they included a pay version.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Santa

Thanks, great calulator, I need something like this to help me with my new computer build. Helps to look at all the needs not just one aspect.

---

Yeah, it's a really GREAT PSU Calulator and I've used it many times and found it very useful. :grin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by elkmanwsu

This really is an awesome tool....I'm not surprised they included a pay version.

---

It's not surprising at all, but I find the FREE version enough for my needs. ;-)

You can also use the Antec one online here

http://www.extreme.outervision.com/powercalc.jsp

I like this one very much and use it all the time. Plus no worries about having to buy something.

A while back, I was worried 600 watts wouldnt be enough for my rig.. but the calculator showed I needed no more than 300. Of course, it turned out that 600 was way more than enough. great calculator! tons of options.. but obviously better than some of the other PSU calc's i've run into :ahhhhh:

It tells me I need a 300W PSU, but how many 300W PSU have a 20AMP+ 12v rail?

it says i only need like 130 something LAWL but i have a 500w so no worries

I wasn't sure if I had a big enough power supply but I found out that I should be good, just no more upgrades

My new core i7 GTX 295 says I need 607 watt. If I don't use the GTX 295 and use the GTX 260 it says I need 484watts. Either way I am good to go with my PC P&C 750.

Beats the heck out of putting your tounge on the rail.