To turn the HD200 on and off or only the TV, that is the question

[TorontoSage]

I just installed my first HD200 last night and had it working pretty quickly. My big fear was that I wouldn't be happy with the picture quality on my Panasonic TH-50PX77 Plasma, but have to say whether watching HD recorded at 9mbits/sec from the Hauppauge HD PVR or live TV through the Hauppage that the picture quality is indistinguishable from that coming directly out of my SA 8300HD PVR cable box. I even saw some online HD video through the HD200 that was almost HD cable box quality, which amazed me.

I was wondering, though, is it better to turn the HD200 off when you are finished watching TV or just leave it on and turn the TV itself off? I don't like the delay while waiting for things to load if you turn the HD200 off and on all the time. But, I am also wondering if turning the HD200 off will reduce wear and tear on the box and result in it taking longer to reach the MTBF. But then I am also thinking that the heating up and cooling of the circuit board resulting from turning the HD200 off and on all the time actually increases wear and tear. Does anyone know what the best practice is? I'd rather not wait for things to load all the time.

[paulbeers]

I don't know if anyone has a true answer on this as the HD200 has only been available since December and therefore the longevity question (and more specifically is it better to turn it off or leave it on) is still very much up in the air. To be fair though, I leave my HD200 and my HD100's on all the time and just turn the tv off. They use so little power that it is only a few watts per hour difference. It is just not worth it to me to wait even the 15 seconds it takes to boot up. My HD100's still work just fine after about a year of use and almost 24/7 of being left on. So to answer your question, I just turn the tv off.

[HelenWeathers]

Originally Posted by TorontoSage

I was wondering, though, is it better to turn the HD200 off when you are finished watching TV or just leave it on and turn the TV itself off? I don't like the delay while waiting for things to load if you turn the HD200 off and on all the time.

I have my HD-200 plugged in to the switched outlet on my AV amp. The amp goes on anytime I'm watching TV or Blu-ray recordings thru the HD-200 on the TV. I have others in my household who watch TV incessently and they just use the TV's built-in speakers.

The startup lag is more than I'd like but I'm used to it now.

Don't know whether the on off will extend the life though, but in my case I think it might as it only gets used 4-5 hours daily - longer on weekends.

[TorontoSage]

I am concerned about power consumption, but within reason. I checked the power consumption of the HD200 with a Kill-A-Watt meter and it uses 7 watts per hour. For my 5 TV's that's 35w/hr x 24hrs x 365 / 1000 = 306.6 KWh per year. At 10c/KWh, which is what we pay in Toronto, Canada, excluding fixed montly costs of about $15/month, that's about $31/yr to run the 5 HD200's or about $6 per HD200. So, by turning the HD200's on and off and enduring the wait time, one would hardly save much money over the year. (It's more of an issue to consider if you are on solar or wind power.) By comparison, an SA 4250 HD cable box uses 12w/hour. 5 of those would cost about $53 or $22 more a year. Of course, with SageTV there's a server to run, but I would have my music, videos and music on a separate computer anyway, so that's a sunk cost. Anyway, this power consumption, whether HD200 or cable boxes, pales in comparison to that of the displays.

As for wear and tear, I'd rather prematurely buy a new HD200 every few years than endure the long wait time for the unit to power up and be ready.

[QueOnda]

Originally Posted by TorontoSage

I am concerned about power consumption, but within reason. I checked the power consumption of the HD200 with a Kill-A-Watt meter and it uses 7 watts per hour. For my 5 TV's that's 35w/hr x 24hrs x 365 / 1000 = 306.6 KWh per year. At 10c/KWh, which is what we pay in Toronto, Canada, excluding fixed montly costs of about $15/month, that's about $31/yr to run the 5 HD200's or about $6 per HD200. So, by turning the HD200's on and off and enduring the wait time, one would hardly save much money over the year. (It's more of an issue to consider if you are on solar or wind power.) By comparison, an SA 4250 HD cable box uses 12w/hour. 5 of those would cost about $53 or $22 more a year. Of course, with SageTV there's a server to run, but I would have my music, videos and music on a separate computer anyway, so that's a sunk cost. Anyway, this power consumption, whether HD200 or cable boxes, pales in comparison to that of the displays.

As for wear and tear, I'd rather prematurely buy a new HD200 every few years than endure the long wait time for the unit to power up and be ready.

The unit really takes that long to bootup? I saw a thread (maybe in the beta) that the startup to find server can now be adjusted.

[TorontoSage]

Well when you've had instant on your lifetime and then have to wait, it seems like a lifetime.

[stanger89]

It really depends on how you use Sage I think, and not so much on the unit itself. One of the biggest reasons (IMO) to turn the extender off (soft off/standby I'm talking about) is that that definitively eliminates any usage of files by the extender. If you don't turn it off, you have to remember to press Stop when you're done watching or it will leave the file open. For example if you're not well trained, leaving it on could result in LiveTV running all night.

If you've got yourself and your other users well trained to hit stop when they're done, then I don't see a big advantage one way or the other. But if not, then maybe it's easier to remember to just hit off when they're done....

Originally Posted by QueOnda

The unit really takes that long to bootup? I saw a thread (maybe in the beta) that the startup to find server can now be adjusted.

A cold boot (eg what HelenWeathers describes with power being removed when the amp is off) is rather slow, easily 30 seconds I'd guess, if not longer.

However from Standby/Soft off (just hitting the power button), it can be back up within probably 5 seconds.

TorontoSage, try hitting "Home" to power it back up rather than power, it's probably easily twice as fast. I think when I do that it's either just as fast as my TV to come up, if not faster.

[QueOnda]

Originally Posted by stanger89

TorontoSage, try hitting "Home" to power it back up rather than power, it's probably easily twice as fast. I think when I do that it's either just as fast as my TV to come up, if not faster.

I tried the HOME on my HD100 no dice. But the HD200 and DAMN, it was almost instant on! No SageTV logo!!

stanger89 is this documented? How u find out about this?? I'm reprogram my harmony remote to use HOME instead of Power on.

[Opus4]

The Home button was changed after the HD200 was released to start in the last-used mode when used from from standby. It has been posted on the forum in the past, including in the sticky for manual suggestions.

- Andy

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by paulbeers

...only a few watts per hour difference...

Originally Posted by TorontoSage

...it uses 7 watts per hour...

Nitpick: there's no such thing as "watts per hour". Seven watts is not a quantity of energy; it's a rate of energy consumption. A quantity of energy would be measured in joules (if you're a physicist) or kilowatt-hours (if you're an electric utility). A kilowatt-hour is not a kilowatt per hour, it's a kilowatt (rate of consumption) times an hour, i.e. one thousand joules per second (one kilowatt) times 3600 seconds (one hour) for a total of 3,600,000 joules.

Getting back to the main point: for electronic components with no moving parts, repeated power cycling causes thermal stress that will tend to reduce the total uptime of the unit compared to keeping it powered on at a stable temperature. Notice I said uptime, not calendar time. If you use the unit rarely, its calendar life can be extended (at the expense of total uptime) by powering it off when not in use. But if you use it frequently, then it's better (from an MTBF point of view) to leave it powered on, increasing calendar lifetime by maximizing total uptime. Where exactly the breakeven point occurs will depend on the specifics of the unit and of your particular usage pattern, and nobody has stats on that for the HD200. So use your own judgment.

My guess is that it's probably moot since the technology will be continue to improve and the unit will probably be obsolete before it fails.

[paulbeers]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

Nitpick: there's no such thing as "watts per hour". Seven watts is not a quantity of energy; it's a rate of energy consumption. A quantity of energy would be measured in joules (if you're a physicist) or kilowatt-hours (if you're an electric utility). A kilowatt-hour is not a kilowatt per hour, it's a kilowatt (rate of consumption) times an hour, i.e. one thousand joules per second (one kilowatt) times 3600 seconds (one hour) for a total of 3,600,000 joules.

Wow really? Does it matter?

[GKusnick]

Originally Posted by paulbeers

Does it matter?

Well, I think there's value in using technical terms correctly, but I'm not looking to get into a brawl over it. Sorry if I gave offense.

[freedml]

Originally Posted by stanger89

try hitting "Home" to power it back up rather than power, it's probably easily twice as fast. I think when I do that it's either just as fast as my TV to come up, if not faster.

Thanks!

[valnar]

In a nutshell, I subscribe to both theories and GKusnick is correct.

I leave my main HD200 on all the time (and on the Sage menu) for my main TV, because it gets used every day. It also helps that there is no on/off switch, and I don't feel like getting behind it to unplug it.

I have an older HD100 in the basement that we may use once a week. The on/off switch is certainly used on that one. 7 KWH is 7KWH, period. Wear and tear does not concern me as much. I have a DVD player almost 12 years old, and it has moving parts!

[TorontoSage]

Originally Posted by GKusnick

Nitpick: there's no such thing as "watts per hour". Seven watts is not a quantity of energy; it's a rate of energy consumption.

I realize that but put that in as some people have asked me if it's 7w then how many per hour...

[stanger89]

7W * 1 hour = 7Wh or 0.007kWh if run for one hour

I haven't checked this, but I really doubt there's a difference (thermal, power, or otherwise) between standby and "on", at least not a significant one. The processor is still running in it, as is the OS, you can telnet into it while it's "off" for example.

[MeInMaui]

Originally Posted by stanger89

7W * 1 hour = 7Wh or 0.007kWh if run for one hour

I haven't checked this, but I really doubt there's a difference (thermal, power, or otherwise) between standby and "on", at least not a significant one. The processor is still running in it, as is the OS, you can telnet into it while it's "off" for example.

= 61.36 kWh/year if run continuously.

(I couldn't stay away when math was involved. )