|
+ Show Spoiler +On September 18 2012 00:23 Myrmidon wrote:
(Yes, I think everybody knows what you mean, but...) "Transformer" is not really the correct term, since there's nothing of the sort on the motherboard. Transformers are for AC/AC conversion via the magnetic coupling of the two sides. The motherboard does DC-DC conversion with a multiphase synchronous buck converter. There are inductors but not transformers.
The higher power draw causes higher temperatures for the CPU as well as the voltage regulators, and more current passes through. All these increase the stress. i5-2500k to 4 GHz is so close to spec that there's hardly any additional stress, certainly way below what the motherboard can handle on pretty much everything that allows overclocking.
It's not exact, especially considering that temperature is not constant, but the increase in frequency should very roughly be proportional to the increase in power. On September 17 2012 23:38 Rannasha wrote:Show nested quote +On September 17 2012 23:17 minitelemaster wrote:
If I overclock a cpu without increasing any voltages (say, 2500k -->4.0GHz) is there any increased stress on the cpu/mobo? Where causes this stress? Your CPU will use more power and produce more heat if you overclock. The mobo isn't really affected. The increased power requirement from the CPU may stress the voltage transformers on the motherboard a bit more, but this should be well within their capabilities.
Thanks for the answer and explanations!
|
have a quick question regarding an HD7850 and if the 400w antec high current PSU would be enough?
|
On September 18 2012 13:41 SpaceFighting wrote:have a quick question regarding an HD7850 and if the 400w antec high current PSU would be enough?
It depends entirely on what other hardware components you have. But in general a 400watt PSU is sufficient for most PCs.
|
On September 18 2012 13:58 TheToast wrote:It depends entirely on what other hardware components you have. But in general a 400watt PSU is sufficient for most PCs.
yeah i figured it would be enough, but a friend at uni said i might need a whopping 600W, so before i ordered the 7850 i had a google, and i found a few threads and what not about 400 being bare minimum you would want if u want to run a 7850. Just thought there was something i didn't know about the card, anyway thanks.
|
On September 18 2012 14:04 SpaceFighting wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 13:58 TheToast wrote:On September 18 2012 13:41 SpaceFighting wrote:have a quick question regarding an HD7850 and if the 400w antec high current PSU would be enough? It depends entirely on what other hardware components you have. But in general a 400watt PSU is sufficient for most PCs. yeah i figured it would be enough, but a friend at uni said i might need a whopping 600W, so before i ordered the 7850 i had a google, and i found a few threads and what not about 400 being bare minimum you would want if u want to run a 7850. Just thought there was something i didn't know about the card, anyway thanks.
As I said, it entirely depends on what other hardware you have. If you have like 4 7200 RPM HDDs in RAID, no a 400watt PSU may not be enough. A decent wattage calculator can be found here: http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp Put in your hardware and it should give you a rought idea of your power consumption.
The one on new egg works too, but just note that it overestimates by a pretty large margin.
|
yeah sweet thx, could i get a few quality PSU's that are affordable around the 500-600W range recommended by you guys?
|
A 7850 uses roughly 130w and a core i5 is around 50w, core i7 and older processors will use closer to 100w. Unless you are running a dozen HDDs, Sandybridge-E, some absurd overclocks, or some other non-typical consumer scenario, you're going to be fine with an Antec High Current Gamer 400 or any other quality 400 unit.
|
On September 18 2012 14:58 skyR wrote:
A 7850 uses roughly 130w and a core i5 is around 50w, core i7 and older processors will use closer to 100w. Unless you are running a dozen HDDs, Sandybridge-E, some absurd overclocks, or some other non-typical consumer scenario, you're going to be fine with an Antec High Current Gamer 400 or any other quality 400 unit.
oh yeah i knew it'd be enough but the every single store i can find is out of stock or sell it for 100+ X_X if there's something similar quality for around that price id probably go for that or just have to wait for stock for the antec.
|
On September 18 2012 16:56 SpaceFighting wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 14:58 skyR wrote:
A 7850 uses roughly 130w and a core i5 is around 50w, core i7 and older processors will use closer to 100w. Unless you are running a dozen HDDs, Sandybridge-E, some absurd overclocks, or some other non-typical consumer scenario, you're going to be fine with an Antec High Current Gamer 400 or any other quality 400 unit. oh yeah i knew it'd be enough but the every single store i can find is out of stock or sell it for 100+ X_X if there's something similar quality for around that price id probably go for that or just have to wait for stock for the antec.
You could just link a store you like
|
On September 18 2012 14:58 skyR wrote:
A 7850 uses roughly 130w and a core i5 is around 50w, core i7 and older processors will use closer to 100w. Unless you are running a dozen HDDs, Sandybridge-E, some absurd overclocks, or some other non-typical consumer scenario, you're going to be fine with an Antec High Current Gamer 400 or any other quality 400 unit.
Hmm, when I measured my system from the wall (prime95 + furmark), I got a steady current draw of just over 2 amps, and it was reading a voltage of 235V here, which happened to be about 500W. Thing is I only have a 2500k at 4.4gHz, 1.24V, and a 560ti at 900mHz core, 1.00V, and nothing else of interest, and that means the computer iteself is using almost 400W (assuming a fairly low efficiency of 75%). Perhaps my powersupply is just less efficient than 75%? ^.^
EDIT: It's some coolermaster crap (maybe extreme power from memory?), but I think I had a rather limited selection from my chosen source at the time.
|
On September 19 2012 03:48 Rollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2012 14:58 skyR wrote:
A 7850 uses roughly 130w and a core i5 is around 50w, core i7 and older processors will use closer to 100w. Unless you are running a dozen HDDs, Sandybridge-E, some absurd overclocks, or some other non-typical consumer scenario, you're going to be fine with an Antec High Current Gamer 400 or any other quality 400 unit. Hmm, when I measured my system from the wall (prime95 + furmark), I got a steady current draw of just over 2 amps, and it was reading a voltage of 235V here, which happened to be about 500W. Thing is I only have a 2500k at 4.4gHz, 1.24V, and a 560ti at 900mHz core, 1.00V, and nothing else of interest, and that means the computer iteself is using almost 400W (assuming a fairly low efficiency of 75%). Perhaps my powersupply is just less efficient than 75%? ^.^ EDIT: It's some coolermaster crap (maybe extreme power from memory?), but I think I had a rather limited selection from my chosen source at the time.
Meters often aren't that accurate with weirder waveforms or lower levels.
Keep in mind that Ivy Bridge uses quite a bit less power (30%?), and Kepler does as well compared to Fermi (in Furmark, GTX 680 is under about the same as GTX 560 Ti).
At higher loads, about 75% may be right, or even slightly optimistic for some of the models.
But also note the power factor. If it doesn't have PFC, power factor may be something like 0.6 or 0.7 for an older computer SMPS. 500 Volt-Amperes with a pf of 0.7 would be 350W...
|
On September 19 2012 04:01 Myrmidon wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 03:48 Rollin wrote:On September 18 2012 14:58 skyR wrote:
A 7850 uses roughly 130w and a core i5 is around 50w, core i7 and older processors will use closer to 100w. Unless you are running a dozen HDDs, Sandybridge-E, some absurd overclocks, or some other non-typical consumer scenario, you're going to be fine with an Antec High Current Gamer 400 or any other quality 400 unit. Hmm, when I measured my system from the wall (prime95 + furmark), I got a steady current draw of just over 2 amps, and it was reading a voltage of 235V here, which happened to be about 500W. Thing is I only have a 2500k at 4.4gHz, 1.24V, and a 560ti at 900mHz core, 1.00V, and nothing else of interest, and that means the computer iteself is using almost 400W (assuming a fairly low efficiency of 75%). Perhaps my powersupply is just less efficient than 75%? ^.^ EDIT: It's some coolermaster crap (maybe extreme power from memory?), but I think I had a rather limited selection from my chosen source at the time. Meters often aren't that accurate with weirder waveforms or lower levels. Keep in mind that Ivy Bridge uses quite a bit less power (30%?), and Kepler does as well compared to Fermi (in Furmark, GTX 680 is under about the same as GTX 560 Ti). At higher loads, about 75% may be right, or even slightly optimistic for some of the models. But also note the power factor. If it doesn't have PFC, power factor may be something like 0.6 or 0.7 for an older computer SMPS. 500 Volt-Amperes with a pf of 0.7 would be 350W...
Hmm ok thanks, I had no idea what kind of phase angle it would have, so I just assumed it would be fairly close to all real power. I guess even 350W was a lot higher than I was expecting for some reason.
|
Nah, that's why modern power supplies have APFC. They wouldn't have APFC unless the power factor was bad and worth correcting.
350W AC would be 262.5W DC at 75% efficiency. To be honest, that's on the low side (or the GTX 560 Ti is throttling itself when seeing FurMark, which they should do). Maybe the efficiency is a little better or the power factor higher, or that meter is off.
|
On September 19 2012 12:43 Myrmidon wrote:
Nah, that's why modern power supplies have APFC. They wouldn't have APFC unless the power factor was bad and worth correcting.
350W AC would be 262.5W DC at 75% efficiency. To be honest, that's on the low side (or the GTX 560 Ti is throttling itself when seeing FurMark, which they should do). Maybe the efficiency is a little better or the power factor higher, or that meter is off.
Mmm could be my 560ti, it has being behaving oddly these days... It was throttling sporadically in furmark (dropping to 80% usage, generally at ~95%, still in 3d mode though), which it never used to do, and bf3 likes to crash to desktop or restart a lot, regardless of clocks, temperature or voltage ^___^.
|
I was wondering about the difference between 3.0 and 2.0 for GPU's. I am currently runnin a 5770 with a MB that supports 2.0 but not 3.0. I want to get a new GPU but in order to do that I would have to upgrade my MB and my CPU to ivy bridge to support the 3.0 GPU. Is it really worth it to upgrade the MB and CPU just to run a GPU at 3.0? Or can I just get a new GPU and let it run at a lower speed and get better results then my 5770? I guess some basic knowledge between the two would be nice.
|
On September 19 2012 17:48 saltywaffles wrote:
I was wondering about the difference between 3.0 and 2.0 for GPU's. I am currently runnin a 5770 with a MB that supports 2.0 but not 3.0. I want to get a new GPU but in order to do that I would have to upgrade my MB and my CPU to ivy bridge to support the 3.0 GPU. Is it really worth it to upgrade the MB and CPU just to run a GPU at 3.0? Or can I just get a new GPU and let it run at a lower speed and get better results then my 5770? I guess some basic knowledge between the two would be nice.
No current cards have noticeable differences between x16 2.0 and x16 3.0. Maybe in a couple more generations (a la 800/9000 series) a 2.0 x16 slot may be noticeably worse. It's currently just a marketing gimmic to make you want to upgrade.
|
On September 19 2012 18:29 Rollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 17:48 saltywaffles wrote:
I was wondering about the difference between 3.0 and 2.0 for GPU's. I am currently runnin a 5770 with a MB that supports 2.0 but not 3.0. I want to get a new GPU but in order to do that I would have to upgrade my MB and my CPU to ivy bridge to support the 3.0 GPU. Is it really worth it to upgrade the MB and CPU just to run a GPU at 3.0? Or can I just get a new GPU and let it run at a lower speed and get better results then my 5770? I guess some basic knowledge between the two would be nice. No current cards have noticeable differences between x16 2.0 and x16 3.0. Maybe in a couple more generations (a la 800/9000 series) a 2.0 x16 slot may be noticeably worse. It's currently just a marketing gimmic to make you want to upgrade.
So basically there is no point in me buying a new CPU/MB right now? Then it would be okay for me to just get a new GPU like the 7950 and install it and it wouldn't cause any problems with my older MB/CPU?
|
5930 Posts
If your psu is not bollocks hen yes there will be no problems.
|
Ey guys.
My question is about an election that i have to make...
My computer's spec are
AMD A8-3870 APU with Radeon(tm) HD Graphic 3,02 GHz
RAM (GB):3,48 Gb
Video CARD: AMD Radeon HD 6550D 2GB
And the question is. What may i improve first? Would it be better to buy 4gb ram or a Video Card ( 6670 to do hybrid Crossfire )?
Sc2 is running on low Fps and i want to change it... My computer is game based, so think that i wouldn't use any 3d programs or something like that.
|
Made a thread, but no reply, figured more people see this thread so I might get a reply here.
This is my PC, except the SSD.
http://www.diskusjon.no/index.php?app=core&module=attach§ion=attach&attach_rel_module=post&attach_id=498056
Basically after I've started streaming and I'm 5minutes into the game, the stream just collapses. On xsplit it says i am still streaming but the xsplit broadcasting display is completely white, and on twitch it says I'm offline.
My upload is around 4, but it averages at 3.1 Mb at the location I'm using on twitch.
Streaming resolution is default/720p
Quality - 7
Stereo audio - 120 000
Game source enabled
max kb 3k
veryfast/superfast
fps 25
I'm running sc2 at medium.
Plese tell me if you want some addition information that I forgot, and thanks for any help!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
