[rescue] Prices... Amazing
Nathan Raymond
nate at portents.com
Mon May 2 13:22:38 CDT 2005
On Mon, 2 May 2005, Scott Newell wrote:
> At 11:31 AM 5/2/2005 , velociraptor wrote:
>>
>> The E250 is just slightly less than the Ultra 2 in wattage (.4 KVA,
>> which I assume would be 4 A & 350 W), but the 250 is almost
>> double the BTU/hr vs. the U2 (683 BTU/hr). The Ultra [10/30/60/80]
>
> I don't understand what you're getting at here. As I see it, if an Ultra
> 2, an E250, and a FeeCee are each pulling, say, 300W, they're also each
> putting out the same heat.
No, that's not accurate at all to assume they'll put out the same heat
based on power draw. First of all, power supplies vary greatly in their
efficiency (i.e. how much current they draw from the outlet vs. how much
they deliver). On top of that, different power supplies have different
efficiencies at different loads, so that one power supply may be very
efficient under heavy (full) load, another not so much, and vice versa
under low load, while some can be very efficient at both, but without
testing a specific power supply and seeing how much power it actually
consumes and heat it actually puts out at a given load, you won't know.
Second of all, a CPU has two primary types of power loss. The first (and
traditionally prime) one has been the switching losses. This is the power
lost and converted into heat when the transistors move from a 0 to a 1
position, and vice versa (i.e. capacitive losses). The second type is
known as leakage current losses. Up until recently, leakage current
losses have been small enough that they could be ignored in early analysis
of a given design. As process designs have evolved and gotten smaller,
leakage current has been getting exponentially larger. With the shift to
90 nm, the processor crossed that point where leakage current losses get
very large, very quickly. Now leakage current losses are the dominant
cause of heat dissipation. This is due to electrons getting out of the
channel where they are supposed to be following, taking their own path
somewhere else, which causes them to be transferred into heat loss.
Therefore, CPUs with a process size larger than 90nm will actually be more
efficient in terms of using power for switching operation vs. losing power
as heat, and will correspondingly put out less heat per watt of power
going in.
So you can't just look at watts consumed and correlate it to heat output
because the efficiency of various components (power supplies and CPUs in
the two examples I just gave) will vary from machine to machine.
- Nate
More information about the rescue
mailing list