computer power consumption

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

  1. 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
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Mainlander Guest

    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
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. 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
    #3
  4. 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).


    > Why is the screen on if you are just downloading? If you are leeching
    > 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
    #4
  5. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    colinco Guest

    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).
    >

    Why is the screen on if you are just downloading? If you are leeching
    that much the laptop will prob run out of disk :)
    colinco, Jan 16, 2004
    #5
  6. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Mainlander Guest

    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
    #6
  7. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    EMB Guest

    "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
    #7
  8. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Mainlander Guest

    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
    #8
  9. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Jay Guest

    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
    #9
  10. 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
    #10
  11. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Jay Guest

    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
    #11
  12. 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
    about that.

    --
    Http://www.Dave.net.nz
    Play Hangman
    Register, and play Space Invaders or Pacman.
    T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz, Jan 16, 2004
    #12
  13. 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 :eek:)

    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
    Headroom-ish. It was all because his intelligence and experience had
    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
    #13
  14. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Jay Guest

    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
    > about that.
    >


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

    Can't you accept praise?
    Jay, Jan 16, 2004
    #14
  15. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Mainlander Guest

    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
    #15
  16. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Jay Guest

    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
    #16
  17. 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
    #17
  18. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Mainlander Guest

    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
    #18
  19. T.N.O. - Dave.net.nz

    Jay Guest

    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
    #19
  20. 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
    >>about that.


    > 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
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    12,856
    CiscoHeadsetAdapter.com
    Jan 25, 2006
  2. Tripp Knightly
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    917
    Toshi1873
    Apr 6, 2004
  3. Albert Grennock

    Intel or Amd, best for power consumption?

    Albert Grennock, Sep 23, 2005, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    392
  4. Canon 10D power consumption

    , Nov 12, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    335
    MarkH
    Nov 13, 2004
  5. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    522
    ASAAR
    Nov 6, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page