Quick GFX card advice needed

[MKSheppard]

Do you have anything coherent to add, Stark other than your typical screeching?

Consider:

1.) Most PSUs will output less than their actual rated wattage due to various factors

2.) It's always a good idea to overwatt for two reasons:

A:) Your system will slowly grow over time -- you might add more hard drives in the future, or add a much more power hungry video card in the future --the less you have to screw with your computer, the less chances of something going poof.

B.) You want to keep the overall stress on your PSU as low as possible -- while the quality of the voltage is indeed dependent on how much you've paid for the PSU (IOW, don't buy cheap no name brands); you don't want to constantly be pulling 500W from a 525-550W PSU -- the near maximum load will shorten the life of your PSU; and when PSU lifetime shortens; the chance of a PSU failure increases -- and when PSU's fail, bad things (TM) happen.

In summation, putting a 850-1200W PSU into a system that only needs 400-450W is a clear waste of money; but picking something around 600-650W isn't.

But what do I know, I most certainly haven't been building my own PCs for the last decade or so -- we must clearly bow down before Stark who knows everything.

[Stark]

1) provide quantive numbers or this is meaningless

2) a) is totally unrelated to your original point and is a red herring
b) is arguably irrelevant especially since most people dont' need the 450W PSUs they already have.

Yeah shit sorry dickhead but 'building computers for home use for ten years' doesn't mean when you talk shit you're any more right than some homeless Mexican. I love how you simply ignored my point, which is decent PSUs will have solid and stable volts across all rails and many even have gaurantees to this effect. You go ahead and buy a $30 PSU some guy stuck a '500W' sticker on to make yourself feel better; I'll just use a quality 400W with quality hardware instead of a big number on the side. Guess what? Adding a HDD will not cripple my system, amazingly. The fact you think changing PSU invovles a risk of hardware 'going poof' tells us all we need to know about your PC build skills.

Oh sorry it's 'screeching' to point out that 'buy a better PSU because PSUs undervolt' is only relevant with shit PSUs lol.

Good thing you're immune to board rules, I guess?

[phongn]

Switchmode power supplies tend to have maximal efficiency somewhere well below their maximum load (and well above low-load); thermal loads on the unit may increase drastically (even in a quality unit) as you increase load to near max rating.

For example, the Corsair VX450 has peak efficiency around 200-300W (DC-side) (data here); thermal loads increase as load does (for what should be obvious reasons!) Similarly, the HX850 (data here) peaks around 300-500W load. Noise and voltage regulation also get adversely affected as load increases.

In the case of a server with a bunch of drives you have to plan for peak draw - hard drives typically use a lot of power when spinning up and not so much when spun up. Such systems (unless your controller card does staggered spinup) impose a very demanding load on a PSU when the machine boots up.

[Starglider]

The fact you think changing PSU invovles a risk of hardware 'going poof' tells us all we need to know about your PC build skills.

He didn't say that, he said that a PSU failure can easily kill other components in the system, which is entirely true (for cheap and nasty ones in particular) - I've seen it happen several times. Generally, the PSU is the only component for which this is true.

However it is true that simply overrating the PSU is a very poor way to ensure reliability, compared to hitting some review sites and checking the measured performance. As phongn pointed out is should be overrated anyway for efficiency and thermal reasons.

[MKSheppard]

1) provide quantive numbers or this is meaningless

Just about every site on the internet that does PSU tests? Quality has improved over the past couple of years, particularly among the name brand producers like Antec, Asus, etc; but it's always a good idea to be conservative with the PSU sizing.

2) a) is totally unrelated to your original point and is a red herring

So basically, we should treat our computers like consoles, fixed and incapable of growth?

b) is arguably irrelevant especially since most people dont' need the 450W PSUs they already have.

We must be operating in a parallel universe called Starkworld, where electrical components designed for 25 Amp loads last shorter when only 16 amps get pulled through them (ASUS U-65GA 650W PSU on the 3.3V rail when it's pulling only 532W Link)

Yeah shit sorry dickhead but 'building computers for home use for ten years' doesn't mean when you talk shit you're any more right than some homeless Mexican.

Jesús Ramos, the guy who lives in a shed downtown, is one of the best computer mechanics in my area.

No not really.

But it makes as much sense as your infantile ravings.

I love how you simply ignored my point, which is decent PSUs will have solid and stable volts across all rails and many even have gaurantees to this effect.

PSU's are the only component in your computer where if it fails, it can kill everything else in the computer -- so economizing on your PSU is not a good idea.

A quality 440W mid-end PSU from Antec will set you back about $50 bucks on newegg, with the 550W model costing $20 extra, and the 650W model $35 more.

If you wanted to upgrade to the slightly-upper grade 650W PSU from Antec; it would cost $50 more.

It's worth investing in roughly the price of one computer game during each build to ensure you have a good foundation for your entire system.

For this reason, each time I do a major upgrade of my computer, or get an entirely new one, I also buy a good quality surge suppressor; because over time, the capicators in them lose their ability to stop a surge.

The fact you think changing PSU invovles a risk of hardware 'going poof' tells us all we need to know about your PC build skills.

Each time you open up your computer case and fiddle around with the hardware inside, there is a non-trivial percentage of something going poof. I've never had a major component go "poof" on me other than one or two floppy drives back in the day through reversed power pins or connector pins.

Suffice to say, even though I've been doing this for a decade plus; I'm never entirely comfortable with opening up my own computer, so I trend towards an innate conservatism when I size up the basic components of the system, so I don't have to change them as often.

[Stark]

Switchmode power supplies tend to have maximal efficiency somewhere well below their maximum load (and well above low-load); thermal loads on the unit may increase drastically (even in a quality unit) as you increase load to near max rating.

For example, the Corsair VX450 has peak efficiency around 200-300W (DC-side) (data here); thermal loads increase as load does (for what should be obvious reasons!) Similarly, the HX850 (data here) peaks around 300-500W load. Noise and voltage regulation also get adversely affected as load increases.

In the case of a server with a bunch of drives you have to plan for peak draw - hard drives typically use a lot of power when spinning up and not so much when spun up. Such systems (unless your controller card does staggered spinup) impose a very demanding load on a PSU when the machine boots up.

This is dandy for servers, but this is PCs here. I don't have a failover PSU on my home box either, for obvious reasons. The idea you have to buy a 700-800W wanksupply to protect your components is nonsense and probably not even cost-effective compared to quality. I hear the PSU will draw the rated watts all the time?

Anyway, 'peak' efficiency isn't relevant; efficiency becomes relevant when dumping the inefficient waste is a problem. Thankfully, a quality PSU also has better cooling than a badged 800W piece of crap.

[Stark]

Just about every site on the internet that does PSU tests? Quality has improved over the past couple of years, particularly among the name brand producers like Antec, Asus, etc; but it's always a good idea to be conservative with the PSU sizing.

Thanks for admitting you refuse to provide any evidence to back up your claims. Good thing Phongn actually knows what he's talking about I guess? For you anyway.

So basically, we should treat our computers like consoles, fixed and incapable of growth?

Sorry, upgrading is irrelevant to your claims of reliability. RAR H8 CONSULZ is just hilarious.

We must be operating in a parallel universe called Starkworld, where electrical components designed for 25 Amp loads last shorter when only 16 amps get pulled through them (ASUS U-65GA 650W PSU on the 3.3V rail when it's pulling only 532W Link)

Amazing! To refute the idea that buying a non-crap PSU is a better idea than a high-rated one, you provide a link to a non-shit PSU! lol.

PSU's are the only component in your computer where if it fails, it can kill everything else in the computer -- so economizing on your PSU is not a good idea.

A quality 440W mid-end PSU from Antec will set you back about $50 bucks on newegg, with the 550W model costing $20 extra, and the 650W model $35 more.

If you wanted to upgrade to the slightly-upper grade 650W PSU from Antec; it would cost $50 more.

It's worth investing in roughly the price of one computer game during each build to ensure you have a good foundation for your entire system.

For this reason, each time I do a major upgrade of my computer, or get an entirely new one, I also buy a good quality surge suppressor; because over time, the capicators in them lose their ability to stop a surge.

What an amazing strawman you have here. Sorry, buying a good, quality 500W PSU is going to be more expensive than a piece of shit with '800W' sticker on the side, so I've never advocated 'economising' on PSUs.

Each time you open up your computer case and fiddle around with the hardware inside, there is a non-trivial percentage of something going poof. I've never had a major component go "poof" on me other than one or two floppy drives back in the day through reversed power pins or connector pins.

Oh really? Maybe you just suck? The broken logic of 'I do xyz and abc happened, therefore xyz leads to abc' is a real insight. Turns out I've probably build a hundred times as many computers as you? Let's play ANECDOTE WARS?

Suffice to say, even though I've been doing this for a decade plus; I'm never entirely comfortable with opening up my own computer, so I trend towards an innate conservatism when I size up the basic components of the system, so I don't have to change them as often.

Your anxiety issues would be better dealt with by a quality PSU, than a highly-rated one. It's hilarious when PSU distributors actually ask you what rating sticker you want put on their PSUs.

[Starglider]

This is dandy for servers, but this is PCs here.

PCs tend to have more load variability than servers, largely because of the GPUs.

The idea you have to buy a 700-800W wanksupply to protect your components is nonsense

Correct, but I believe MKSheppard was talking about a 25-50% overspec, not a >100% overspec.

Anyway, 'peak' efficiency isn't relevant; efficiency becomes relevant when dumping the inefficient waste is a problem.

Peak efficiency is entirely relevant unless you are living in your parent's basement and don't pay for your own electricty. A 5% efficiency improvement can pay back the cost of a modest upgrade in PSU capacity quite quickly, unless your computer is for very occassional use.

[Stark]

Peak efficiency is entirely relevant unless you are living in your parent's basement and don't pay for your own electricty. A 5% efficiency improvement can pay back the cost of a modest upgrade in PSU capacity quite quickly, unless your computer is for very occassional use.

I thought Phongn was talking about thermal profiles, where passing peak (thermal) efficiency increases the odds of catastrophic failure.

[phongn]

This is dandy for servers, but this is PCs here. I don't have a failover PSU on my home box either, for obvious reasons. The idea you have to buy a 700-800W wanksupply to protect your components is nonsense and probably not even cost-effective compared to quality. I hear the PSU will draw the rated watts all the time?

I'm not advocating buying a desktop PSU with enormous amounts of headroom but rather "right-sizing" it (e.g. 25% margin or so) for maximum efficiency and lesser stress on the PSU - and with a well-made PSU.

[Starglider]

I thought Phongn was talking about thermal profiles, where passing peak (thermal) efficiency increases the odds of catastrophic failure.

There is no such thing as 'thermal efficiency', as distinct from power efficiency. All the power comes out as heat anyway, either in the PSU or the rest of the system. The relevant metric is operating temperature, which all review sites graph separately from efficiency because it depends on ventilation as well as efficiency and load (and PSUs have widely varying fans, fan speed controllers and airflow setups). Higher rated PSUs usually do have better cooling setups but as previously noted, this is something you should specifically check.

Regardless, saving money on electricity and reducing operating temperature are both perfectly valid reasons to buy an overrated PSU - if you've found some reviews that confirm that that particular model will have those benefits. Obviously it would be silly to buy a PSU with a high rated wattage sticker on the mere expectation that it will be more cool/efficient.

[Bounty]

So.

Right now I have a no-name 250W PSU and a card that draws 35W. If I swap out the PSU for, say, a 400W Corvair, then it should be able to handle a card that draws 60-70W with room to spare, or are there other arcane formulas to consider?

[Zac Naloen]

Where you buy it from?


I know overclockers.co.uk ships to Europe, to answer Ace's name drop earlier in the thread.


Customer service is pretty decent if it fails, but you would need to swallow the cost of shipping it back to overclockers in the unlikely case you need to RMA anything.

400w corsair PSU is £34.77 (no vat for you) + i think about £20-30 to ship it to europe.

[Bounty]

I found a wholesale retailer who sells to private customers. £53 but they have pick-up so it evens out. And I'm wary about buying electronics from the UK - we have different plus.

What's "ATX, PS/2"?

[MKSheppard]

Right now I have a no-name 250W PSU and a card that draws 35W. If I swap out the PSU for, say, a 400W Corvair, then it should be able to handle a card that draws 60-70W with room to spare, or are there other arcane formulas to consider?

Yes, That's actually a pretty good upgrade.

[Zac Naloen]

I found a wholesale retailer who sells to private customers. £53 but they have pick-up so it evens out. And I'm wary about buying electronics from the UK - we have different plus.

What's "ATX, PS/2"?

Shows it meets specific standards of quality or something iirc.

[Xon]

Switchmode power supplies tend to have maximal efficiency somewhere well below their maximum load (and well above low-load); thermal loads on the unit may increase drastically (even in a quality unit) as you increase load to near max rating.

I've got a Corsair HX620W in my home fileserver which generally idles in the zone which gets ~85% efficiency (it pulls 200watt, lots of spinning disks). Sure, it isn't the true sweet spot, but I had to worry about the 5volt line due to the large number of drives I'm packing in and keeping enough room for future expansion.

I needed to upgrade to a Corsair HX650W as my graphics card (hd4870x2) was tripping the Over-Current Protection due to a fucking retarded tripple rail layout design on the formed ~550watt PSU I had in there.

What's "ATX, PS/2"?

It is basicly describing the various connectors for the motherboard the PSU should have.

[Zac Naloen]

Well I got that it showed the standardisation of something

[phongn]

I found a wholesale retailer who sells to private customers. £53 but they have pick-up so it evens out. And I'm wary about buying electronics from the UK - we have different plus.

Did you mean plugs? It's not that big of a deal, IIRC, if you have a spare cord (since pretty much everything uses the standard IEC C14 connector.

Switchmode power supplies tend to have maximal efficiency somewhere well below their maximum load (and well above low-load); thermal loads on the unit may increase drastically (even in a quality unit) as you increase load to near max rating.

I've got a Corsair HX620W in my home fileserver which generally idles in the zone which gets ~85% efficiency (it pulls 200watt, lots of spinning disks). Sure, it isn't the true sweet spot, but I had to worry about the 5volt line due to the large number of drives I'm packing in and keeping enough room for future expansion.

You Australians have 240VAC power so you get higher efficiency anyways

I needed to upgrade to a Corsair HX650W as my graphics card (hd4870x2) was tripping the Over-Current Protection due to a fucking retarded tripple rail layout design on the formed ~550watt PSU I had in there.

Triple rail?! That is dumb.

[Xon]

You Australians have 240VAC power so you get higher efficiency anyways

The only reason the HX620W doesn't have an +80% efficency sticker on it is 110VAC hits 'only' 79% @ 20% load.

Triple rail?! That is dumb.

It is suprisingly common, it was mostly because to get certification from Intel for older ATX2.x spec called for a ceiling (18amp) on the ampage on the 12volt rail. To workaround this ceiling, more rails got tacked on; all with an official 18amp cap. This insanity has since been quitely swept aside, and you are now seeing a single 12volt rail supporting upto 54amps compared to 3x 18amp rails on newer PSU designs.

[Uraniun235]

Did you mean plugs? It's not that big of a deal, IIRC, if you have a spare cord (since pretty much everything uses the standard IEC C14 connector.

Everything except the god damn Gateway 17" LCD monitors we have all around work! They use C12 (if I remember the number right). Who the fuck uses C12 on a monitor? I mean I can kind of understand it on a power brick where you're trying to minimize volume used or some shit, but it makes it such a pain to swap out monitors when you're replacing with a monitor that uses a C14 plug; oh hey now I have to get into the cable management shit and unplug the old cable and get the new cable in there, thanks Gateway. That's almost enough to make me glad MPC/Gateway went fucking bankrupt.

Phew. sorry.

I've got a Corsair HX620W in my home fileserver which generally idles in the zone which gets ~85% efficiency (it pulls 200watt, lots of spinning disks).

I have a quad-core server with eleven WD15EADS disks and a 74GB Raptor, and it pulls only ~140 at idle; it idled at ~95 before I added the disks. I'd wonder if a lot of your power isn't going towards a less efficient CPU; my old server had only six disks yet it idled at around 160, probably because of the P4 that was in there.

[Xon]

I have a quad-core server with eleven WD15EADS disks and a 74GB Raptor, and it pulls only ~140 at idle; it idled at ~95 before I added the disks. I'd wonder if a lot of your power isn't going towards a less efficient CPU; my old server had only six disks yet it idled at around 160, probably because of the P4 that was in there.

It's a q6600 g0 w/ 8gb ram, and an GA EP45 DQ6 for the motherboard (f13a bios revsion, there is a new bios revison I haven't tried yet). It however has; 16 drives in it (12x 1tb drives in a raid6 array, 2x 1.5tb drives, 2x160gb drives) plus an areca 1260 controller.

According to the power metre I've got, it is pulling 249watts from the wall just after boot. This is however with the raid array doing it's weekly check to make sure I don't have any spontaneous flipped bits or bad sectors. This is probably close to worse case; 12 drives doing long continuous reads and the areca controller being pegged. This is with the cpu idling @ 4% cpu usage.

[Xon]

Wow, utter fail on my behalf. I was miss-reading the voltage part instead of having it reading the wattage being used

[Bounty]

This is weird.

The Nvidia control panel says I have a 512MB G100 and a 256MB 9200 in SLI. Which is weird. And seems like overkill for a budget desktop. And what the hell is "FPCI"?

[Ace Pace]

This is weird.

The Nvidia control panel says I have a 512MB G100 and a 256MB 9200 in SLI. Which is weird. And seems like overkill for a budget desktop. And what the hell is "FPCI"?

Having both of them is something called Hybrid SLI or something of the sort. It's pairing up two weak/middle end cards together and have them both compute graphics. This is of some useful performance benefit while saving power when you don't need it. I imagine the nVidia control panel also lets you turn one of them off. Probably the discrete piece.

FPCI seems to be some sort of modification of the PCI standard to speed it up without going to PCI-E. Not sure beyond that.