Power Consumption Of My X3360 (kill-a-watt)

[graysky]

Got bored yesterday, so I ran checked out the power consumption of my X3360 system for crap and giggles with my kill-a-watt.

 

Powered Hardware Details:

Intel X3360 (C1 stepping) @ 8.5x400=3.40 GHz
266/667 MHz Strap  CPU Vcc=1.12500
NB Core=1.370	  CPU VTT=1.310

DFI LT P35-TR2 (no modifications)

eVGA 8800 GTSG92 512 meg 
(770/1,923/2,000 MHz : Core/Shader/Memory)

Corsair Dominator DDR2-1066 (TWIN2X4096-8500C5DF)
2x 2Gb @ 5-5-5-15 (performance level 6) @ 1,000 MHz (4:5) @ 2.100V

Corsair HX620
2x HDs (seagates, one a 10th generation and the other an 11th)
1x DVDROM
4x120 mm Tricool fans (came with the p182 case) all on low
1x120 mm S-Flex SFF21F (1600 RPM) on the HS
1x40 mm silent fan on the NB

 

That's it... no other hardware (speakers, monitor, etc.) was in the loop.

 

Kill-a-Watt Readings

Idle in BIOS screens - 158 W

Idle in BIOS screens with both HDD's unplugged - 144 W

 

Idle (with speedstep active in XP x64) - 137 W

Load (prime95 v25.6 small FFT) - 213 W

Load (prime95 v25.6 large FFT) - 216 W

Load (prime95 v25.6 blend) - 210 W

Playing Crysis - 237-241 W

x264 encode - 197 W

Standby - 0 W

 

No real point to this post beyond just trivial information! It is interesting to me that the large FFTs consistently read 3-4 watts higher than the small ones did which is inline with the software's description of the large FFTs as generating the max heat/power consumption. Here is the similar analysis of my older Q6600-based system, but there are too many changes (MB, settings, video board, memory, etc.) for a "which processor is more power efficient" comparison.

 

What is little bit crazy is that both systems draw the same while idle, and even @ 3.4 GHz, and faster memory, the X3360-based system uses less wattage on p95.

[kingdingeling]

This is why most people around here tend not to recommend 1000W PSUs, as they're absolutely useless

[Guest ajmatson]

a good one around 500 - 600 watts is plenty for just about any system (unless hard drive crazy. )

[Puck]

a good one around 500 - 600 watts is plenty for just about any system (unless hard drive crazy. )

Agreed.

 

A psu like the pcpc 750 with a single massive 12v rail is plenty for all but the most extreme of todays systems. Many companies are cashing in on the big numbers game, feeding the more is better ideology of many enthusiasts. My powerstream 520 has lived through three systems and many tech generations and is still plenty for my current dual gpu rig.

[wevsspot]

My powerstream 520 has lived through three systems and many tech generations and is still plenty for my current dual gpu rig.

 

Quite possibly one of the finest power supplies ever made in it's day. I almost cried the day I sold mine.

[davidst]

Those kill a watts are cool , hey did you fire up a game and see how much the watts went up?

[jammin]

Those readings are actually even lower than I would have expected. :thumbs-up:

 

Assuming around 83-84% efficiency (which is around what you'd expect from the HX620) then you are looking at a maximum of just over 200W DC.

I think you could probably get that up a bit more with gaming + a CPU loading program (even though that won't be likely under normal use).

Edited May 17, 2008 by jammin

[graysky]

Quite possibly one of the finest power supplies ever made in it's day. I almost cried the day I sold mine.

 

Yeah dude, look again at the first post (crysis).

[hardnrg]

that's pretty cool how little power you can need if running low voltages and sensible air cooling

 

I know it's a bit of a pain to power down to insert the Kill-A-Watt, but if you do it again, could you try OCCT v2 (CPU test) ? My load temps are ~5-10

[six]

Got bored yesterday, so I ran checked out the power consumption of my X3360 system for crap and giggles with my kill-a-watt.

 

I used to crunch UD with anywhere from a dozen to two dozen machines depending on what I needed on my network... I loaded UD on a webserver in my rack one day and the UPS software went a little crazy. Investigation showed me that it was costing about an extra 100 to 110 watts to crunch UD on that server. An XP-2600 needed about 80 extra watts to crunch and even a lowly PIII 1Ghz required 75 extra watts when UD was running. When the UD project ended, my power bill literally dropped in half. I decided it was easier to save mankind by saving power than it was to dedicate all of my CPUs to FAH or similar ;-)

[Verran]

I just ran some stuff on my system. (Q6600, 8x400, 1.325v in BIOS, 4x1GB DDR2-800 at 2.1v, 8800GTS 512 at 678/972/1728)

 

In XP

Idle: 177W

OCCT: 283W

P95: 272W

OCCT + P95: 280W

Ati Tool: 264W

RTHDRBL: 257W

Ati Tool + RTHDRBL: 264

All four: 345W

 

Also out of curiosity, I ran the ones I could in Vista as well:

 

In Vista

Idle: 181W

OCCT: 292W

P95: 278W

OCCT + P95: 291

RTHDRBL: 255W

 

For the record, I just ran each test for a few minutes and recorded the MAXIMUM reading on the Kill-A-Watt that I saw. None of these have been converted to DC. Just AC readings at the wall.

[paulktreg]

a good one around 500 - 600 watts is plenty for just about any system (unless hard drive crazy. )

 

Illustrated above is the fact that unplugging the two hard drives only reduced it by 14W.

 

Perhaps that should be changed to "unless graphic card crazy"!