# computer power consumption

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Jan 15, 2004.

1. ### T.N.O. - Dave.net.nzGuest

Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor would
use(at most) 500W?

so 1/2 a kwh

we get charged 11c per kwh, so 5.5c per hour?
(well actually its 11.09c)

so thats \$1.32 per day, or \$40 per month.(close enough to)

now this is assuming that it runs at 100% power usage all the time, any
idea what your typical PC would use?

--
Http://www.Dave.net.nz
Play Hangman
Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Jan 15, 2004

2. ### MainlanderGuest

In article <XDCNb.13024\$>,
says...
> Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor would
> use(at most) 500W?
>
> so 1/2 a kwh

500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.

>
> we get charged 11c per kwh, so 5.5c per hour?
> (well actually its 11.09c)
>
> so thats \$1.32 per day, or \$40 per month.(close enough to)
>
> now this is assuming that it runs at 100% power usage all the time, any
> idea what your typical PC would use?

If the household can stand the disruption, turn off everything else in
the house, then time the revolutions of your electricity meter.

Multiply the time for one revolution by the revs/kwH figure written on
the front, giving you the number of seconds to use one unit of power.

Divide 3600 by this number, which gives you the actual wattage of the
appliances. (3600 = the number of seconds in an hour)

This is an interesting point. I think my PC uses somewhat less power, but
enough for me to consider turning it off when I am not at home.

--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/

Mainlander, Jan 16, 2004

3. ### T.N.O. - Dave.net.nzGuest

Mainlander wrote:
>>so thats \$1.32 per day, or \$40 per month.(close enough to)
>>now this is assuming that it runs at 100% power usage all the time, any
>>idea what your typical PC would use?

> If the household can stand the disruption, turn off everything else in
> the house, then time the revolutions of your electricity meter.
> This is an interesting point. I think my PC uses somewhat less power, but
> enough for me to consider turning it off when I am not at home.

yeah, the reason it came up in the household this month is that I have
"got fast net, must leave on to use it"... and we got a ~\$100
bill(around \$20 more than usual)

Unfortunately, I think the woman may be right, and the cause of the
abnormally high bill, will be Beast(my pc's name)... I may have to use
the laptop to download stuff(~70W total power use according to the specs).
--
Http://www.Dave.net.nz
Play Hangman
Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Jan 16, 2004
4. ### T.N.O. - Dave.net.nzGuest

colinco wrote:
>>Unfortunately, I think the woman may be right, and the cause of the
>>abnormally high bill, will be Beast(my pc's name)... I may have to use
>>the laptop to download stuff(~70W total power use according to the specs).

> that much the laptop will prob run out of disk

The screen isn't normally on, but I figured I'd work it out, and then
work it out without it... Don't spread it around, but I enjoy maths

--
Http://www.Dave.net.nz
Play Hangman
Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Jan 16, 2004
5. ### colincoGuest

In article <MTFNb.13190\$>,
says...
> yeah, the reason it came up in the household this month is that I have
> "got fast net, must leave on to use it"... and we got a ~\$100
> bill(around \$20 more than usual)
>
> Unfortunately, I think the woman may be right, and the cause of the
> abnormally high bill, will be Beast(my pc's name)... I may have to use
> the laptop to download stuff(~70W total power use according to the specs).
>

that much the laptop will prob run out of disk

colinco, Jan 16, 2004
6. ### MainlanderGuest

In article <XDCNb.13024\$>,
says...
> Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor would
> use(at most) 500W?

At most, it depends on how much power the computer is actually using.

My calculations:

2 PCs and a screen: 215 W
with the computer running normally and the HDD spinning, no other
peripherals in use. Pentium 1 / MMX CPUs in both machines with standard
CPU fans.

1 PC and screen running: 170 W

1 PC and screen at standby: 108 W

These figures also include the household power consumption of a TV, VCR
and stereo on standby, and three working clock radios with the radio off.
--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/

Mainlander, Jan 16, 2004
7. ### EMBGuest

"Mainlander" <*@*.*> wrote in message
news:...
>> My calculations:

>
> 2 PCs and a screen: 215 W
> with the computer running normally and the HDD spinning, no other
> peripherals in use. Pentium 1 / MMX CPUs in both machines with standard
> CPU fans.
>
> 1 PC and screen running: 170 W
>
> 1 PC and screen at standby: 108 W
>
> These figures also include the household power consumption of a TV, VCR
> and stereo on standby, and three working clock radios with the radio off.

However older electricity meters do not detect low current draws well - when
our meter malfunctioned and was replaced the power board guy said our bill
would be higher now as the old meter probably wouldn't have detected loads
under 150 watts or so. He was right - the bill went up by about \$15 per
month!

EMB

EMB, Jan 16, 2004
8. ### MainlanderGuest

In article <bu7f4l\$88b\$>, says...
>
> "Mainlander" <*@*.*> wrote in message
> news:...
> >> My calculations:

> >
> > 2 PCs and a screen: 215 W
> > with the computer running normally and the HDD spinning, no other
> > peripherals in use. Pentium 1 / MMX CPUs in both machines with standard
> > CPU fans.
> >
> > 1 PC and screen running: 170 W
> >
> > 1 PC and screen at standby: 108 W
> >
> > These figures also include the household power consumption of a TV, VCR
> > and stereo on standby, and three working clock radios with the radio off.

>
> However older electricity meters do not detect low current draws well - when
> our meter malfunctioned and was replaced the power board guy said our bill
> would be higher now as the old meter probably wouldn't have detected loads
> under 150 watts or so. He was right - the bill went up by about \$15 per
> month!

The meter I have is 10 years old and was installed last year when the
underground lines were replaced.

--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/

Mainlander, Jan 16, 2004
9. ### JayGuest

Mainlander wrote:

> In article <XDCNb.13024\$>,
> says...
>> Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor would
>> use(at most) 500W?
>>
>> so 1/2 a kwh

>
> 500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.

Are you sure?
Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

Jay, Jan 16, 2004
10. ### T.N.O. - Dave.net.nzGuest

Jay wrote:

> Mainlander wrote:
>
>
>>In article <XDCNb.13024\$>,
>> says...
>>
>>>Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor would
>>>use(at most) 500W?
>>>
>>>so 1/2 a kwh

>>
>>500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.

>
>
> Are you sure?
> Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

not when referring to power... anyway, for the 1024 versions, people
really should use the correct iso stanard abreiviations for them... they
are...
kibi = ki
mibi = mi
gibi = gi

I dont know if there is anything above that... I couldn't find it anyway.

--
Http://www.Dave.net.nz
Play Hangman
Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Jan 16, 2004
11. ### JayGuest

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz wrote:

> Jay wrote:
>
>> Mainlander wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article <XDCNb.13024\$>,
>>> says...
>>>
>>>>Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor would
>>>>use(at most) 500W?
>>>>
>>>>so 1/2 a kwh
>>>
>>>500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.

>>
>>
>> Are you sure?
>> Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

>
> not when referring to power... anyway, for the 1024 versions, people
> really should use the correct iso stanard abreiviations for them... they
> are...
> kibi = ki
> mibi = mi
> gibi = gi
>
> I dont know if there is anything above that... I couldn't find it anyway.
>

Good work. 10/10.

Jay, Jan 16, 2004
12. ### T.N.O. - Dave.net.nzGuest

Jay wrote:
>>>>500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.

>>>Are you sure?
>>>Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

>>not when referring to power... anyway, for the 1024 versions, people
>>really should use the correct iso stanard abreiviations for them... they
>>are...
>>kibi = ki
>>mibi = mi
>>gibi = gi
>>I dont know if there is anything above that... I couldn't find it anyway.

> Good work. 10/10.

ummm sarcasm?
I just realised how abysmal my spelling and grammar were in my post

--
Http://www.Dave.net.nz
Play Hangman
Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Jan 16, 2004
13. ### Roger JohnstoneGuest

In <E1ONb.13651\$> T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz wrote:
>
> not when referring to power... anyway, for the 1024 versions, people
> really should use the correct iso stanard abreiviations for them...
> they are... kibi = ki mibi = mi gibi = gi
>
> I dont know if there is anything above that... I couldn't find it
> anyway.

Close, but if you're gonna use 'em get 'em right )

It's the first two letters of the traditional prefix followed by 'bi',
so mega becomes mebi (Mi). Kilo->kibi, mega->mebi, giga->gibi, tera-
>tebi, peta->pebi, exa->exbi, umm...looking it up...zetta->zebi, yotta-
>yobi. Yotta is 10^24, yobi is 2^80!

I was reading an Andy Ihnatko column the other day which puts it into
perspective:

http://www.macobserver.com/columns/ihnatko/2004/20040112.shtml

===
I have lived long enough to write the word "terabyte" in a non-ironic
context. Look, I'll do it again: Terabyte. Terabyte, terabyte, terabyte.
As in "LaCie is shipping a one terabyte desktop hard drive."

Let me put this in perspective. The last time I used that word in print,
it was when I was writing for my local user group's newsletter and
spreading the rumor that Bill Atkinson had perished in a fatal zeppelin
accident. See, all of a sudden his "official" Mac icon had changed from
a bushy-haired guy with glasses to something cleaner and more Max
been transferred into a 4-terabyte HyperCard stack and through HyperTalk
he continued to contribute to the ongoing success of Apple Computer.

But now I can say that there's a one-terabyte drive available for actual
purchase. Killing off legendary programmers and replacing them with
enormous...hmm...I suppose today you'd have to replace them with a big
FileMaker database for the expert system and then use AppleScript Studio
to create a Cocoa front-end to a bunch of SQL and Perl stuff happening
in the shell...

Well, anyway, if you're a legendary programmer you need to watch your
ass because the infrastructure for all that is nearly in place.
===

--
Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand

Apple II - FutureCop:LAPD - iMac Game Wizard
http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~rojaws/
________________________________________________________________________

"It would appear that we have reached the limits of what it is possible
to achieve with computer technology, although one should be careful with
such statements, as they tend to sound pretty silly in 5 years."
John Von Neumann (circa 1949)

Roger Johnstone, Jan 16, 2004
14. ### JayGuest

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz wrote:

> Jay wrote:
>>>>>500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.

>
>>>>Are you sure?
>>>>Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

>
>>>not when referring to power... anyway, for the 1024 versions, people
>>>really should use the correct iso stanard abreiviations for them... they
>>>are...
>>>kibi = ki
>>>mibi = mi
>>>gibi = gi
>>>I dont know if there is anything above that... I couldn't find it anyway.

>
>> Good work. 10/10.

>
> ummm sarcasm?
> I just realised how abysmal my spelling and grammar were in my post
>

No I mean it.
Good work. 10/10.

Can't you accept praise?

Jay, Jan 16, 2004
15. ### MainlanderGuest

In article <>, says...
> Mainlander wrote:
>
> > In article <XDCNb.13024\$>,
> > says...
> >> Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor would
> >> use(at most) 500W?
> >>
> >> so 1/2 a kwh

> >
> > 500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.

>
> Are you sure?
> Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

No, you have, troll.

--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/

Mainlander, Jan 16, 2004
16. ### JayGuest

Mainlander wrote:

> In article <>, says...
>> Mainlander wrote:
>>
>> > In article <XDCNb.13024\$>,
>> > says...
>> >> Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor
>> >> would use(at most) 500W?
>> >>
>> >> so 1/2 a kwh
>> >
>> > 500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.

>>
>> Are you sure?
>> Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

>
> No, you have, troll.
>

No, I have argued the exact opposite.
You obviously haven't got a clue.

Jay, Jan 17, 2004
17. ### Lawrence D'OliveiroGuest

In article <E1ONb.13651\$>,
"T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz" <> wrote:

>... anyway, for the 1024 versions, people
>really should use the correct iso stanard abreiviations for them... they
>are...
>kibi = ki
>mibi = mi
>gibi = gi
>
>I dont know if there is anything above that... I couldn't find it anyway.

More details at
<http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/0,,sid9_gci825099,00.html>.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Jan 17, 2004
18. ### MainlanderGuest

In article <>, says...
> Mainlander wrote:
>
> > In article <>, says...
> >> Mainlander wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <XDCNb.13024\$>,
> >> > says...
> >> >> Am I right to assume that my 400W PSU in my PC and my 17" monitor
> >> >> would use(at most) 500W?
> >> >>
> >> >> so 1/2 a kwh
> >> >
> >> > 500 watts will use half a kWh per hour.
> >>
> >> Are you sure?
> >> Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

> >
> > No, you have, troll.
> >

>
> No, I have argued the exact opposite.
> You obviously haven't got a clue.

You are just a troublemaking stirrer

Everyone with half a brain knows that a kWh in this context is 1000 watt
hours. There is no need to fill this newsgroup up with stupid messages
about k meaning 1024 in a different context

--
Full featured open source Win32 newsreader - Gravity 2.70
http://sourceforge.net/projects/mpgravity/

Mainlander, Jan 17, 2004
19. ### JayGuest

Mainlander wrote:

>> No, I have argued the exact opposite.
>> You obviously haven't got a clue.

>
> You are just a troublemaking stirrer
>
> Everyone with half a brain knows that a kWh in this context is 1000 watt
> hours. There is no need to fill this newsgroup up with stupid messages
> about k meaning 1024 in a different context
>

If my posts are so stupid then why do you respond to them?

Jay, Jan 17, 2004
20. ### T.N.O. - Dave.net.nzGuest

Jay wrote:
>>>>>Haven't you argued before that 'k' means 1024?

>>>>not when referring to power... anyway, for the 1024 versions, people
>>>>really should use the correct iso stanard abreiviations for them... they
>>>>are...
>>>>kibi = ki
>>>>mibi = mi
>>>>gibi = gi
>>>>I dont know if there is anything above that... I couldn't find it anyway.

>>>Good work. 10/10.

>>ummm sarcasm?
>>I just realised how abysmal my spelling and grammar were in my post

> No I mean it.
> Good work. 10/10.
> Can't you accept praise?

ummm I can, but sometimes you can't tell when reading it online.
thanks

--
Http://www.Dave.net.nz
Play Hangman
Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.

T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Jan 18, 2004