Power Usage revisited, a case study.

[TakeFlight]

Originally Posted by stanger89

That's what I thought too, but then when I looked at my usage history, and saw no drop after August, like one would expect after being able to turn off the air, I decided it was time to investigate.

BTW, I looked at my last electric bill and total kWh was 1215 which is one of the lowest months of the year! So, I'm trying to figure out how your average kWh is only 800! My total annual usage based on the last bill is 19319kWh. If you average that out equally over 12 months it's an average of 1610kWh per month (double your average!). Of course, the reality is that the lowest months are a little under 1000kWh and the highest months top out at just under 3000kWh according to the 12 month chart on my last bill. But, I guess I need to keep things in perspective. I don't have a gas or oil bill. My house is all electric. Everybody I know has either oil or gas and if you combine both their fuel and electric bills they always pay more than me averaged out over the year. So, I guess I don't have anything to complain about. Especially since I'm admittedly very wasteful when it comes to electricity. I don't really do much to try to conserve.

[TakeFlight]

Here's a handy calculator I found via google...

http://www.csgnetwork.com/applianceeleccostcalc.html

Based on my last electric bill, this calculator says that the 230W that my SageTV/HomeSeer server (and all the external devices) consumes represents 13% of my bill, is 5.52kWh per day, costs me $19.29 a month and $231.70 a year. This does vary from month to month because what I get charged per kWh varies on time of year and how much is consumed. I think anything over 500kWh is charged at a lower rate in winter months and at a higher rate in summer months. The average rate for my last bill was 11.5 cents.

[Humanzee]

So what do you think would be the optimum server client setup for power usage? I notice that no mater how much storage I have I tend to use 85% of it. I guess when the usage meter turns red I start watching and deleting. Anyway, I could probably get fewer but larger disks.

I'm thinking a server with minimal processing power, as highly efficient a power supply as possible, and maximum storage per disk with fewer overall disks. + a small form factor client with passive cooling and a solid state hard drive which you can put into standby or S3 while not being viewed. If you get a speedy client, you could also use the client to do your commercial detecting on demand while you watch, thus not needing unused cpu potential in the server 24/7.

Else

More powerful server & a future HDTV extender. But I think I just like having a full PC as a client though (gaming, internet etc).

[stevech]

my use of a laptop as a server seems frugal in power use. Lid closed, LCD off. Two USB2 drives. I suspect but haven't measured, that the laptop's Pentium-M (mobile) may reduce power consumption. Maybe not, since it knows it's not on battery power. But maybe that CPU throttles speed anyway due to the small size of the CPU cooling fins/fan.

[stanger89]

I updated the numbers again, I've got numbers for my X2 machine (Manchester) with AMDs Cool 'n Quiet enabled and disabled. CnQ looks like it would save about 20KWH/month.

Originally Posted by Humanzee

So what do you think would be the optimum server client setup for power usage? I notice that no mater how much storage I have I tend to use 85% of it. I guess when the usage meter turns red I start watching and deleting. Anyway, I could probably get fewer but larger disks.

At this point, I'd say the clients (plural being important) are the biggest contributor to excess power consumption with the least benefit. From what I've measured, at least for myself, any one PC is not a big deal to run 24/7, and that jives with what I've thought in the past, but what has "bitten" me, is that I failed to account for the difference between one an many.

I still stand by my thought that powercycling the server often is not an optimal solution, especially with numerous HDDs and their high surge current at startup.

On top of that, a "power hog" server like mine is still only about as expensive as a premium movie package. Also, the server is probably doing something a good portion of the time, or at least at various intervals throughout the day, regardless of if one is home or not.

Now the clients, that's a different issue, at least from my perspective, I use my client only a fraction of the day (<4hrs mostly). That means ~5/6 of it's usage is a complete waste, and when you multiply that by 'n' clients, it starts to add up.

I'm thinking a server with minimal processing power, as highly efficient a power supply as possible, and maximum storage per disk with fewer overall disks.

Actually when you look at the power requirements of the latest generation of processors, you can get a LOT of processing power for very little energy usage. SCPR was recording ~50-60W for Athlon X2 systems, Core2's are probably the same if not better.

Strangely, I'm actually thinking it wouldn't be a bad thing to upgrade my server to a newer, more powerful CPU to get both the performance, and energy benefits.

+ a small form factor client with passive cooling and a solid state hard drive which you can put into standby or S3 while not being viewed. If you get a speedy client, you could also use the client to do your commercial detecting on demand while you watch, thus not needing unused cpu potential in the server 24/7.

Given the duration a client is in use, I think the S3/off is far more important than it's energy use. Though efficient components are one key to having a nice quiet system.

Else

More powerful server

As noted above, with the current generation Core2/X2s, there's almost no energy hit for having a "high powered" server.

& a future HDTV extender.

That would definitely be the most energy efficient client

But I think I just like having a full PC as a client though (gaming, internet etc).

Now that remains to be seen, I reserve any judgment on the HD Extender's ability to replace my HTPC client until I see one. That said, I think it's very promising that it will be...

[TakeFlight]

Originally Posted by stanger89

At this point, I'd say the clients (plural being important) are the biggest contributor to excess power consumption with the least benefit. From what I've measured, at least for myself, any one PC is not a big deal to run 24/7, and that jives with what I've thought in the past, but what has "bitten" me, is that I failed to account for the difference between one an many.

I still stand by my thought that powercycling the server often is not an optimal solution, especially with numerous HDDs and their high surge current at startup.

On top of that, a "power hog" server like mine is still only about as expensive as a premium movie package. Also, the server is probably doing something a good portion of the time, or at least at various intervals throughout the day, regardless of if one is home or not.

Now the clients, that's a different issue, at least from my perspective, I use my client only a fraction of the day (<4hrs mostly). That means ~5/6 of it's usage is a complete waste, and when you multiply that by 'n' clients, it starts to add up.

I completely agree with all those points. This is why I leave my server on 24/7 but I turn off my client PCs when not in use. Well, actually what usually happens is I get home, I turn on a client PC and then it stays on the rest of the night until I go to bed and then I turn it off.

Also, I agree that one PC doesn't add up that much, but multiple PCs is a different story. So, that's why I decided to consolidate my home automation server and SageTV server on one box along with not running my client PCs 24/7. I do run my tablet PC 24/7 (used as a home automation interface) but as I've discovered it only consumes around 16W idle with it's backlight off (which is how it runs 99% of the time).

I've never understood why anybody would want to have their SageTV server go to sleep between recordings. It just makes no sense to me. But, everybody is entitled to their own viewpoints.

[mattdcknsn]

This might be a bit off topic but its the best location I could find. I found this utility that computes how much of a power supply you actually need to run your equipment. There is a lite version which is free and it tells you what you need to know. I was surprised to see that a simple file server with 4 or 5 drives would only need a 250 Watt PS. I dont know the specifics of power supplies but if you get a PS that is overkill it has to suck up some more juice.

Anyway, here is the URL:
http://www.extreme.outervision.com/psucalculator.jsp

[mattdcknsn]

One other question I just thought of, has anybody looked into the cost benefit of a water cooled system? Instead of the 6 fans I have running now on my server I could eliminate 4 of them and replace it with a water cooled system it uses a single 120mm fan and a pump. Not sure of the power draw on those.

Does anybody use a water cooled system?

[trini0]

Originally Posted by TakeFlight

I've never understood why anybody would want to have their SageTV server go to sleep between recordings. It just makes no sense to me. But, everybody is entitled to their own viewpoints.

I guess in my case I like corner cutting too much
I just dont see the sense of a piece of equipment that runs and does nothing.

OT: BTW, like the names you assigned to your PCs. Its a shame SG1 has to end...

[TakeFlight]

Originally Posted by trini0

I guess in my case I like corner cutting too much
I just dont see the sense of a piece of equipment that runs and does nothing.

My SageTV server is recording too frequently during the day to make any sleep time worthwhile. And I would never want to take the chance it wouldn't wake up properly. It might work really well (resuming from sleep), but I know if I leave it running it will be as rock solid as possible.

Originally Posted by trini0

OT: BTW, like the names you assigned to your PCs. Its a shame SG1 has to end...

Thanks! I have another computer in my house (not used for Sage) that is called Valhalla and the old HomeSeer server I just retired was called Daedalus and that tablet PC I've talked about is called DanielJackson. And I too agree it's too bad about SG1 ending. At least we get two movies (maybe more) after the series finale.

[TakeFlight]

Originally Posted by mattdcknsn

I dont know the specifics of power supplies but if you get a PS that is overkill it has to suck up some more juice.

I wouldn't expect one PSU to use more power than another other than one being more efficient than the other. Meaning, the wattage rating of a PSU is just it's maximum load capacity, but doesn't mean it will use more or less than another PSU of a different wattage rating.

[stevech]

Dual-fan Power supplies would use more power than single-fan, unless fans are smart.

[TakeFlight]

Originally Posted by stevech

Dual-fan Power supplies would use more power than single-fan, unless fans are smart.

Sure, but that wasn't what he was saying. And besides, the typical wattage of an 80mm fan is less than 1W! That's hardly much of a difference whether it's a one fan or two fan PSU. The main reason for fans that ramp up or down is for reducing sound, not power consumption.

[Menehune]

Most 80mm fans I've seen are rated 100mA. 12V * 0.1A = 1.2W which is only 0.864kWhr per month. At 25c/kwhr, that's only 21 cents per month.

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by mattdcknsn

This might be a bit off topic but its the best location I could find. I found this utility that computes how much of a power supply you actually need to run your equipment. There is a lite version which is free and it tells you what you need to know. I was surprised to see that a simple file server with 4 or 5 drives would only need a 250 Watt PS.

Perhaps, if you look at my data, you'll see that even with 10 HDDs, the system draws <250W running.

However, I had to get a 600W PSU to spool those 10 HDDs up.

I dont know the specifics of power supplies but if you get a PS that is overkill it has to suck up some more juice.

Not really. As noted, PSU ratings are a maximum, a limit, a 600W PSU won't use significantly more power than a 250W if the system doesn't need it. Could even use less if the 600W is more efficient.

One other question I just thought of, has anybody looked into the cost benefit of a water cooled system? Instead of the 6 fans I have running now on my server I could eliminate 4 of them and replace it with a water cooled system it uses a single 120mm fan and a pump. Not sure of the power draw on those.

Fans are typically 1W a piece (less if they're quiet), The Zalman Reservator (no fan) draws 5W.

Does anybody use a water cooled system?

[jprine01]

Just thought I'd give you guys some idea on what a raid5 server will use. Since I also have one of those Kill-A-Watt thingys.
The gigabyte mobo w/intigrated graphics, memory, and a single system drive my kill-o-watt was reading about 55-65watts. Then I added a Areca 1230 (12 Port SATA2) and 5x500GB 7200x10's. My Kill-o-watt stays at about 135watt now. So the bare computer uses 65watt, the raid card with 5 drives uses 70watts on top of that.

It makes good sense to turn off your sage clients when they are not needed.

One other question I just thought of, has anybody looked into the cost benefit of a water cooled system? Instead of the 6 fans I have running now on my server I could eliminate 4 of them and replace it with a water cooled system it uses a single 120mm fan and a pump. Not sure of the power draw on those.

I have a watercooled case (homebrew with a heatercore from a car etc) The only fans I left on it was the power supply fan, and one on the hard drives. I put a large 160mm fan on the radiator, but its actually 110% stable with the fan & pump turned off!! It is a cool running processor so it just cools itself though convection. Anyway the Pump uses a few watts, your woudn't save any power over fans. I wasn't really going for effiecency as I had a 120watt peltier on there for cooling the cpu down to 5-10*F

[stanger89]

Originally Posted by jprine01

Just thought I'd give you guys some idea on what a raid5 server will use. Since I also have one of those Kill-A-Watt thingys.
The gigabyte mobo w/intigrated graphics, memory, and a single system drive my kill-o-watt was reading about 55-65watts. Then I added a Areca 1230 (12 Port SATA2) and 5x500GB 7200x10's. My Kill-o-watt stays at about 135watt now. So the bare computer uses 65watt, the raid card with 5 drives uses 70watts on top of that.

15 drives == 70W? Sounds about right.

Out of curiosity, do you have any trouble spinning that up? Or are my troubles just due to my crappy PATA WDs not supporting staggered spinup.

[jprine01]

Only 5 drives (dont know if it was a typo)
I just turned it off and unplugged the 5-500gb drives and booted up, its using 105watts now..

So technically 65watt system w/system drive
+40watt for the areca 1230 by itself
+30watt for 5x500gb Seagate 7200.10 drives

I used to have the areca & the 5-500gb drives in my old system along with 3-250gb drives and a raptor 37gb (so 9 total at one time) and the antec 500watt power supply put up with spooling them. I didn't setup staggered start unless it did it on its own. Its been a while so i could be confused but I used the kill-a-watt on that system and it was over 300watts at idle if i remember right(I had a big video card too). The power supply was always HOT.

Looks like I need to load that areca up with more drives to get more efficient use out of it! Its using more then my drives.

[Ryokurin]

I pretty much have a standard computer running as a Sage server. its an Athlon 64 3200+ with a 250gig samsung sata drive, an x700 pro and two pvr-150s and a 1600 I figure using sleep and having sage only turn on when its recording or I'm watching something saved about 7 dollars a month. Thats huge when you consider that usually my power bills has been around 55 dollars a month.

Sleep is pretty hard to setup correctly in windows. I never got it to work right at all until I found the MCE standby tool and sleeper. Even then it depends on the mainboard. I had a cheaper ECS that refused to sleep for instance. You would tell it to and it would power back up within 10 minutes even if it wasn't connected to the network. Speaking of networks, thats another setting you have to check. Some network cards have to be set to allow wake on lan via device manager and then you need to decide on if network traffic will wake it up, or if a 'magic packet' is needed.

There are pros and cons to each one you pick. if you choose network traffic, a pc just sending a broadcast on the network can wake it up which can blow if you legitimately want to leave a machine on for a while to do something. Magic packet is good but you need to have additional software to send the right ping to wake it up. Personally I use network traffic since most of the time I'm on my other computer I'm watching something from sage, and when I'm away I just have to start the placeshifter client, and let it attempt to connect, fail and then try again.

[jprine01]

Curious if anyone has a computer using less then 65watts. (if they can measure)
Mine is GIGABYTE GA-945GZM-S2 w/Celeron D 3.0Ghz & 512 DDR2 & 1x3.5" 120GB PATA Drive