Yet another bulging-capacitors replacement

"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:ipednVJmQcLfkOTRnZ2dnUVZ_h6dnZ2d@earthlink.com...
Jim Yanik wrote:

Odd that BGA processors are using 12V instead of logic level voltages.


Then they would need around 100A at 3.3 volts. The voltage drop
would be a big problem. I'm sure there is a DC to DC converter near the
chip, like used on computer motherboards.
Yes indeed Michael. There are in fact 6 of them. Three on each side of the
board ...

Arfa
 
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:19:44 -0700 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote in Message id: <ebug76lk13plippid57h6q6vacu8ve4om9@4ax.com>:

I don't believe it. The winner of the power hogging consumer CPU
contest was the DEC/Intel Alpha 21364 (EV79):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_21364
which burned 155 watts. Itanium II came close with 130 watts (per
core).
Check again.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=43410&processor=9350&spec-codes=SLBMX

185W! Gotta love that price as well.
 
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:35:00 -0400, JW <none@dev.null> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:19:44 -0700 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote in Message id: <ebug76lk13plippid57h6q6vacu8ve4om9@4ax.com>:

I don't believe it. The winner of the power hogging consumer CPU
contest was the DEC/Intel Alpha 21364 (EV79):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_21364
which burned 155 watts. Itanium II came close with 130 watts (per
core).

Check again.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=43410&processor=9350&spec-codes=SLBMX
185W! Gotta love that price as well.
I stand corrected.
<http://techreport.com/discussions.x/18445>
Some of the reader comments are rather interesting. Still, with any
of these "powerful" processors, a conventional air cooled machine is
going to have a very hot breath and a rather large power supply. I
just don't see this kind of power dissipation in a "dedicated game
machine". Measuring the AC mains power consumption should settle the
matter.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On Aug 27, 6:09 am, Meat Plow <mhyw...@yahoo.com> wrote:
<snip>
You answered your own question. The AMD heatsink / quad core Phenom
II 955
Black Edition package comes with Artic Silver already applied. I'm
using
an Antec server case that has a hole and tube in the side cover.
The end
of the tube fits directly over the CPU heat sink so it draws air
directly
from the outside. In back is a pair of 120mm fans controlled by the
mainboard. If the CPU temp goes up all three fans increase
according to
the temp. Or you can set them to run at full speed all the time.
The 650
watt PSU also has a temp sensing 120mm fan. So the box is really
quiet
most of the time. But when rendering video and the CPU usage hovers
around 50% fan speed increases slightly. Video rendering with an
application that takes advantage of multi-core processors seem to
use the
most CPU percentage. I've never seen it go over 50%. Most of the
time it
doesn't go over 10%.  

--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse
Sony Vegas software will push your processor usage up to nearly 100%
and stay there for minutes. My Phenom II 955 machine normally idles
115-120 Watts but will peak about 100 more while Vegas is rendering a
file. I'm almost tempted to try a 6 core processor to see what
happens.

 
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 10:29:52 -0700, stratus46 wrote:

On Aug 27, 6:09 am, Meat Plow <mhyw...@yahoo.com> wrote: <snip
You answered your own question. The AMD heatsink / quad core Phenom
II 955
Black Edition package comes with Artic Silver already applied. I'm
using
an Antec server case that has a hole and tube in the side cover.
The end
of the tube fits directly over the CPU heat sink so it draws air
directly
from the outside. In back is a pair of 120mm fans controlled by the
mainboard. If the CPU temp goes up all three fans increase
according to
the temp. Or you can set them to run at full speed all the time.
The 650
watt PSU also has a temp sensing 120mm fan. So the box is really
quiet
most of the time. But when rendering video and the CPU usage hovers
around 50% fan speed increases slightly. Video rendering with an
application that takes advantage of multi-core processors seem to
use the
most CPU percentage. I've never seen it go over 50%. Most of the
time it
doesn't go over 10%.

--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse

Sony Vegas software will push your processor usage up to nearly 100% and
stay there for minutes. My Phenom II 955 machine normally idles 115-120
Watts but will peak about 100 more while Vegas is rendering a file. I'm
almost tempted to try a 6 core processor to see what happens.

G²
I use Kino in linux to render raw DV capture. Can't find a suitable linux
app to create dvd containers/structure etc.. in linux so I use a fairly
inexpensive app called DVDtoX from VSO. Fast 10x frame rates on VBR video
encoding usually 2000KB/s. Easy to use nice output. tried Sony DVD
Architect trial, more than I needed. Linux is much more efficient at
processor usage but applications aren't up to par.



--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse
 
"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:phnn76d5fjpcls7lfscj6t40hehqnc9db4@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:35:00 -0400, JW <none@dev.null> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:19:44 -0700 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote in Message id: <ebug76lk13plippid57h6q6vacu8ve4om9@4ax.com>:

I don't believe it. The winner of the power hogging consumer CPU
contest was the DEC/Intel Alpha 21364 (EV79):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_21364
which burned 155 watts. Itanium II came close with 130 watts (per
core).

Check again.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=43410&processor=9350&spec-codes=SLBMX
185W! Gotta love that price as well.

I stand corrected.
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/18445
Some of the reader comments are rather interesting. Still, with any
of these "powerful" processors, a conventional air cooled machine is
going to have a very hot breath and a rather large power supply. I
just don't see this kind of power dissipation in a "dedicated game
machine". Measuring the AC mains power consumption should settle the
matter.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com

Have you any idea just how much processing power it takes to run a
user-interactive story in real time, and then to 3D render the graphics in
real time ? Do you think that they rate the 12v PSU for 23.5 amps in one
version, and 32 amps in the other, for fun ? Those are not real questions,
because I know full well when you stop and think about it, you know the
answers, Jeff.

I've just looked at the rating plate on the bottom of one of the cases, and
it is 240v (nominal UK line voltage) at 1.8 amps. I make that a maximum
input power of around 430 watts. It's a switching PSU, so I reckon that we
can rate that as being at the very worst 80% efficient, so that's still 345
watts potentially going somewhere. I'm prepared to go with 45 watts into
ancillary circuitry on the board, which still leaves around 300 watts going
somewhere. Perhaps I'm being naive, but my best guess is that it's
disappearing into the two bloody great BGAs which the manufacturers are
trying their utmost to heatsink. If you try to run one of these machines
with the heatsinking not in place, it goes into thermal protect in about 5
seconds - and all it's doing then is booting. The heatplates on the BGAs are
at this point hot enough to take your fingerprints off ...

Nope, I'm pretty sure that these two puppies are good for 150 watts apiece,
when the machine is doing some real work.

Arfa
 
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in
news:Q_Xeo.1360$c_6.370@newsfe30.ams2:

"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:phnn76d5fjpcls7lfscj6t40hehqnc9db4@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:35:00 -0400, JW <none@dev.null> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:19:44 -0700 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote in Message id: <ebug76lk13plippid57h6q6vacu8ve4om9@4ax.com>:

I don't believe it. The winner of the power hogging consumer CPU
contest was the DEC/Intel Alpha 21364 (EV79):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_21364
which burned 155 watts. Itanium II came close with 130 watts (per
core).

Check again.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=43410&processor=9350&spec-codes=S
LBMX 185W! Gotta love that price as well.

I stand corrected.
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/18445
Some of the reader comments are rather interesting. Still, with any
of these "powerful" processors, a conventional air cooled machine is
going to have a very hot breath and a rather large power supply. I
just don't see this kind of power dissipation in a "dedicated game
machine". Measuring the AC mains power consumption should settle the
matter.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com


Have you any idea just how much processing power it takes to run a
user-interactive story in real time, and then to 3D render the
graphics in real time ? Do you think that they rate the 12v PSU for
23.5 amps in one version, and 32 amps in the other, for fun ? Those
are not real questions, because I know full well when you stop and
think about it, you know the answers, Jeff.

I've just looked at the rating plate on the bottom of one of the
cases, and it is 240v (nominal UK line voltage) at 1.8 amps. I make
that a maximum input power of around 430 watts. It's a switching PSU,
so I reckon that we can rate that as being at the very worst 80%
efficient, so that's still 345 watts potentially going somewhere. I'm
prepared to go with 45 watts into ancillary circuitry on the board,
which still leaves around 300 watts going somewhere.
that assumes that all the power of the supply is actually used.
I'm sure there is some reserve capacity there.

"max input power" is not "actual used power".

Perhaps I'm being
naive, but my best guess is that it's disappearing into the two bloody
great BGAs which the manufacturers are trying their utmost to
heatsink. If you try to run one of these machines with the heatsinking
not in place, it goes into thermal protect in about 5 seconds - and
all it's doing then is booting. The heatplates on the BGAs are at this
point hot enough to take your fingerprints off ...

Nope, I'm pretty sure that these two puppies are good for 150 watts
apiece, when the machine is doing some real work.

Arfa


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com
 
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 01:26:23 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
<arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Have you any idea just how much processing power it takes to run a
user-interactive story in real time, and then to 3D render the graphics in
real time ?
Well, no. I'm not a power user. What little rendering I do is with
bacon fat.

Do you think that they rate the 12v PSU for 23.5 amps in one
version, and 32 amps in the other, for fun ? Those are not real questions,
because I know full well when you stop and think about it, you know the
answers, Jeff.
Actually, I don't know. I don't have any customers with such machines
and have had zero experience with high power graphic workstations
(other than early 1980's Applicon CAD stations) or game machines. I
have worked on various network servers, which do burn such power
levels. I have looked at a 3D MRI image processor, which had some
manner of dedicated processor inside, but it certainly wasn't belching
400 watts of heat (my estimate by the amount of fan noise).

I've just looked at the rating plate on the bottom of one of the cases, and
it is 240v (nominal UK line voltage) at 1.8 amps. I make that a maximum
input power of around 430 watts. It's a switching PSU, so I reckon that we
can rate that as being at the very worst 80% efficient, so that's still 345
watts potentially going somewhere. I'm prepared to go with 45 watts into
ancillary circuitry on the board, which still leaves around 300 watts going
somewhere. Perhaps I'm being naive, but my best guess is that it's
disappearing into the two bloody great BGAs which the manufacturers are
trying their utmost to heatsink. If you try to run one of these machines
with the heatsinking not in place, it goes into thermal protect in about 5
seconds - and all it's doing then is booting. The heatplates on the BGAs are
at this point hot enough to take your fingerprints off ...

Nope, I'm pretty sure that these two puppies are good for 150 watts apiece,
when the machine is doing some real work.
Ok, I stand corrected. I've been assuming that the CPU's are doing
most of the power dissipation. I didn't think of a dedicated graphics
processor or whatever the BGA chips are doing. Do you have a gun
style IR thermometer? I use that to determine if anything is running
hot. I use a black (non-reflective) cardboard tube attached to the
lens to prevent it from picking up adjacent components. Incidentally,
I have yet to find one where the laser dot actually points to where
the device is measuring when in close proximity. You can also get a
rough idea of how much effort is going into cooling. If the BGA's
burn more power than the CPU's, then they're going to need more
massive heat sinks and better air cooling. At 400 watts, I would
think they would have gone to heat pipes and external radiators or
maybe liquid cooling.

Incidentally, I repaired a P4 motherboard yesterday which used Artic
Silver. My guess is that there was about 5 times as much Artic Silver
smeared over the CPU (and down the sides where it does nothing) as
necessary. The stuff down the sides was still fluid, so at $10 for
3.5 grams, I saved the excess.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 09:35:11 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

ncidentally, I repaired a P4 motherboard yesterday which used Artic
Silver. My guess is that there was about 5 times as much Artic Silver
smeared over the CPU (and down the sides where it does nothing) as
necessary. The stuff down the sides was still fluid, so at $10 for 3.5
grams, I saved the excess.
Heh...reminds me of a previously repaired (not by me) QSC PLX series amp
I opened up and scraped about a pound of white paste out of it.



--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse
 
Hi!

This is quite a bit more dissipation than the average desktop, causing
some things to be more critical.
Well, it used to be. ;-)

The Pentium 4 "Pres-hot" didn't earn that derogatory nickname for nothin'. I
cringe to think of multi-processor systems and how much heat they were
dumping into the air. I had a 3.4GHz Prescott P4 in a Dell Dimension 8300.
On hot days, it had no problem equaling the sound volume of a small canister
vacuum cleaner.

1. The less silicon grease used, the better.
I remember reading that somewhere. I'm not sure that everyone--including
some major manufacturers--got the memo. After removing the STK-2038 II
module from my Techics SA-310 receiver, I found a massive amount of heatsink
compound behind it. Wow.

2. All heat sinks and transistor bases are NOT flat.
Somtimes not by a *long* shot!

3. Compression pressure is important. None of the standard spring
clip CPU heat sink holders come even close to optimum.
Really? I find that extremely surprising, especially as firmly as some of
them hold on. They really do *seem* to be doing a good job.

Sometimes the heatsink compound has established a tight enough bond that the
processor comes out firmly glued to the bottom of the heatsink, without so
much as releasing the ZIF socket lever. I've seen that on Socket 478 and
AM2+ boxen before. It's kind of scary to look down and realize the processor
isn't where it should be!

William
 
"Jim Yanik" <jyanik@abuse.gov> wrote in message
news:Xns9DE5620083A92jyaniklocalnetcom@216.168.3.44...
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in
news:Q_Xeo.1360$c_6.370@newsfe30.ams2:



"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:phnn76d5fjpcls7lfscj6t40hehqnc9db4@4ax.com...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 05:35:00 -0400, JW <none@dev.null> wrote:

On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 20:19:44 -0700 Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com
wrote in Message id: <ebug76lk13plippid57h6q6vacu8ve4om9@4ax.com>:

I don't believe it. The winner of the power hogging consumer CPU
contest was the DEC/Intel Alpha 21364 (EV79):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_21364
which burned 155 watts. Itanium II came close with 130 watts (per
core).

Check again.
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=43410&processor=9350&spec-codes=S
LBMX 185W! Gotta love that price as well.

I stand corrected.
http://techreport.com/discussions.x/18445
Some of the reader comments are rather interesting. Still, with any
of these "powerful" processors, a conventional air cooled machine is
going to have a very hot breath and a rather large power supply. I
just don't see this kind of power dissipation in a "dedicated game
machine". Measuring the AC mains power consumption should settle the
matter.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com


Have you any idea just how much processing power it takes to run a
user-interactive story in real time, and then to 3D render the
graphics in real time ? Do you think that they rate the 12v PSU for
23.5 amps in one version, and 32 amps in the other, for fun ? Those
are not real questions, because I know full well when you stop and
think about it, you know the answers, Jeff.

I've just looked at the rating plate on the bottom of one of the
cases, and it is 240v (nominal UK line voltage) at 1.8 amps. I make
that a maximum input power of around 430 watts. It's a switching PSU,
so I reckon that we can rate that as being at the very worst 80%
efficient, so that's still 345 watts potentially going somewhere. I'm
prepared to go with 45 watts into ancillary circuitry on the board,
which still leaves around 300 watts going somewhere.

that assumes that all the power of the supply is actually used.
I'm sure there is some reserve capacity there.

"max input power" is not "actual used power".
Well Jim, that was why I used the word "potentially", but judging by the
size of the pins used to couple the power supply's output into the board -
if you've been following the thread, you will recall that I previously
described them as being of the size you would find on the line cord for a
kettle - then I wouldn't say that there was too much in the way of reserve.
Anyway, just think about that premise for a moment. When have you ever known
a manufacturer of a piece of domestic grade electronics, to over-rate any
aspect of it, let alone the power supply, by more than the few percent
required to just about let it scrape by? It's all about cost, and they are
not going to rate the rectifiers and magnetics and filter caps and output
connectors and so on, for any more than they have to, to keep the
manufacturing costs as low as possible ...

Arfa
 
"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:60aq76t79k66vhdrm6bl3c85js9u20k70s@4ax.com...
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 01:26:23 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Have you any idea just how much processing power it takes to run a
user-interactive story in real time, and then to 3D render the graphics in
real time ?

Well, no. I'm not a power user. What little rendering I do is with
bacon fat.

Do you think that they rate the 12v PSU for 23.5 amps in one
version, and 32 amps in the other, for fun ? Those are not real questions,
because I know full well when you stop and think about it, you know the
answers, Jeff.

Actually, I don't know. I don't have any customers with such machines
and have had zero experience with high power graphic workstations
(other than early 1980's Applicon CAD stations) or game machines. I
have worked on various network servers, which do burn such power
levels. I have looked at a 3D MRI image processor, which had some
manner of dedicated processor inside, but it certainly wasn't belching
400 watts of heat (my estimate by the amount of fan noise).

I've just looked at the rating plate on the bottom of one of the cases,
and
it is 240v (nominal UK line voltage) at 1.8 amps. I make that a maximum
input power of around 430 watts. It's a switching PSU, so I reckon that we
can rate that as being at the very worst 80% efficient, so that's still
345
watts potentially going somewhere. I'm prepared to go with 45 watts into
ancillary circuitry on the board, which still leaves around 300 watts
going
somewhere. Perhaps I'm being naive, but my best guess is that it's
disappearing into the two bloody great BGAs which the manufacturers are
trying their utmost to heatsink. If you try to run one of these machines
with the heatsinking not in place, it goes into thermal protect in about 5
seconds - and all it's doing then is booting. The heatplates on the BGAs
are
at this point hot enough to take your fingerprints off ...

Nope, I'm pretty sure that these two puppies are good for 150 watts
apiece,
when the machine is doing some real work.

Ok, I stand corrected. I've been assuming that the CPU's are doing
most of the power dissipation. I didn't think of a dedicated graphics
processor or whatever the BGA chips are doing. Do you have a gun
style IR thermometer? I use that to determine if anything is running
hot. I use a black (non-reflective) cardboard tube attached to the
lens to prevent it from picking up adjacent components. Incidentally,
I have yet to find one where the laser dot actually points to where
the device is measuring when in close proximity. You can also get a
rough idea of how much effort is going into cooling. If the BGA's
burn more power than the CPU's, then they're going to need more
massive heat sinks and better air cooling. At 400 watts, I would
think they would have gone to heat pipes and external radiators or
maybe liquid cooling.

Incidentally, I repaired a P4 motherboard yesterday which used Artic
Silver. My guess is that there was about 5 times as much Artic Silver
smeared over the CPU (and down the sides where it does nothing) as
necessary. The stuff down the sides was still fluid, so at $10 for
3.5 grams, I saved the excess.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
All of the processing power is in those two BGAs Jeff. They *are* the
processors. One is a dedicated engine that runs the game (or plays a BluRay
disc), as well as handling all the disc I/O - optical and hard - and
internet / network access. On top of this, it manages all of the
housekeeping tasks, so it's doing a lot of work, especially when it's
actually running a game. Modern games have come a long way since the days of
Doom. Most maintain a highly complex 3D 'reality' in which the game is set,
and the gameplay takes place. Just consider for a moment, the highly complex
calculations that have to go on, to work out how potentially many actions
all at once, interact with the 3D model, and the knock-on effects that these
might have on both the gameplay and the graphical environment. And remember
that this is taking place in real time. The second BGA is a dedicated
graphics engine. Again, consider how these games now look. Most are quite
close to reality, and some scenes would have you hard pressed to tell if you
were looking at a photo, or a piece of virtual reality. Given all that, just
imagine the billions of calculations that are going on, again in real time,
to work out the texturisation and surface rendering of all the visible
objects, and how the light and shadows interact with those objects as they
move within the scene. It really is mind-boggling just how sophisticated all
of this is now. I can recall 25 years ago when I worked on high-end graphics
systems, rendering the famous 3D conch shell image took a dedicated graphics
terminal, hosted by a VAX mainframe, around 20 minutes. That's one image,
not moving. Now think about a moving HD image in an HD background in real
time. That's a LOT of processing power, needing a lot of amps to perform ...

The fan on these things *is* large, as is the heatsinking assembly, and when
the processor finally decides to ramp the fan up, it sounds like a vacuum
cleaner. For this reason, at idle they tend to run it at below what I would
consider a 'sensible' minimum, exacerbating the thermal stresses on the
chips, their (lead-free) soldering, and the board to which they are
attached.

Arfa
 
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:56:37 +0000 (UTC) Meat Plow <mhywatt@yahoo.com>
wrote in Message id: <pan.2010.08.31.16.56.27@hahahahahahahah.nutz.I.am>:

On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 09:35:11 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

ncidentally, I repaired a P4 motherboard yesterday which used Artic
Silver. My guess is that there was about 5 times as much Artic Silver
smeared over the CPU (and down the sides where it does nothing) as
necessary. The stuff down the sides was still fluid, so at $10 for 3.5
grams, I saved the excess.

Heh...reminds me of a previously repaired (not by me) QSC PLX series amp
I opened up and scraped about a pound of white paste out of it.
You sure that someone hadn't left their marshmallows in there?
 
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 05:29:47 -0400, JW wrote:

On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 16:56:37 +0000 (UTC) Meat Plow <mhywatt@yahoo.com
wrote in Message id:
pan.2010.08.31.16.56.27@hahahahahahahah.nutz.I.am>:

On Tue, 31 Aug 2010 09:35:11 -0700, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

ncidentally, I repaired a P4 motherboard yesterday which used Artic
Silver. My guess is that there was about 5 times as much Artic Silver
smeared over the CPU (and down the sides where it does nothing) as
necessary. The stuff down the sides was still fluid, so at $10 for
3.5 grams, I saved the excess.

Heh...reminds me of a previously repaired (not by me) QSC PLX series amp
I opened up and scraped about a pound of white paste out of it.

You sure that someone hadn't left their marshmallows in there?
That's a possibility. The 3402's did get hot enough under full load
to roast them.



--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse
 
Arfa Daily wrote:
Well Jim, that was why I used the word "potentially", but judging by the
size of the pins used to couple the power supply's output into the board -
if you've been following the thread, you will recall that I previously
described them as being of the size you would find on the line cord for a
kettle - then I wouldn't say that there was too much in the way of reserve.

"The size you would find on the line cord for a kettle" doesn't have
much meaning in the US. :)


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.
 
On Wed, 1 Sep 2010 02:40:53 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
<arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:

All of the processing power is in those two BGAs Jeff.
(...)

Thanks for the details. I really don't know anything about such
dedicated game machines. I just assumed that all such machines used
common processors to make development easier.

That's a LOT of processing power, needing a lot of amps to perform ...
I found the Kill-o-watt meter and stuffed it in line with my Dell
Optiplex 960 (E8500 3.2Ghz). 43 watts at idle, 70 watts max when
playing a DVD (not including LCD monitor). Speedfan 4.40 says 31C for
both CPU cores after about an hour. The one large fan is barely
spinning and very quiet (which is why I bought this one). When I set
the fan to run full speed, it's quite loud.

The fan on these things *is* large, as is the heatsinking assembly, and when
the processor finally decides to ramp the fan up, it sounds like a vacuum
cleaner. For this reason, at idle they tend to run it at below what I would
consider a 'sensible' minimum, exacerbating the thermal stresses on the
chips, their (lead-free) soldering, and the board to which they are
attached.
Well, theory suggests that the life of a semiconductor device is
greatly affected by the number of thermal cycles it experiences
(thermal fatigue). I don't know if this also applies to CPU's or
whatever is in those BGA chips (FPGA/GPU?), but might be something
else to worry about. I would guess(tm) that the large aluminum heat
sink would moderate any abrupt changes in temperature, thus making it
less of a concern. However, that might not be the case for the solder
balls supporting the BGA.



--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
"Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terrell@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:m5ednfqzQtE_8ePRnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
Arfa Daily wrote:

Well Jim, that was why I used the word "potentially", but judging by the
size of the pins used to couple the power supply's output into the
board -
if you've been following the thread, you will recall that I previously
described them as being of the size you would find on the line cord for a
kettle - then I wouldn't say that there was too much in the way of
reserve.


"The size you would find on the line cord for a kettle" doesn't have
much meaning in the US. :)


--

Why is that ? You have electric kettles in your kitchens - I've used them.
Or don't you call them kettles ?. OK, anyway, if it's a better description,
the size of the round ground pin on a line cord that has a three pin plug.
Is that more meaningful ? 3/16" diameter maybe ? 4mm ?

Arfa
 
Arfa Daily wrote:
"Michael A. Terrell" ?mike.terrell@earthlink.net? wrote in message
news:m5ednfqzQtE_8ePRnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@earthlink.com...
?
? Arfa Daily wrote:
??
?? Well Jim, that was why I used the word "potentially", but judging by the
?? size of the pins used to couple the power supply's output into the
?? board -
?? if you've been following the thread, you will recall that I previously
?? described them as being of the size you would find on the line cord for a
?? kettle - then I wouldn't say that there was too much in the way of
?? reserve.
?
? "The size you would find on the line cord for a kettle" doesn't have
? much meaning in the US. :)

Why is that ? You have electric kettles in your kitchens - I've used them.

I've never seen one. Even Coffee pots are rare these days.


Or don't you call them kettles ?. OK, anyway, if it's a better description,
the size of the round ground pin on a line cord that has a three pin plug.
Is that more meaningful ? 3/16" diameter maybe ? 4mm ?

3/16" is between AWG 5 & AWG 4. 4 mm is between AWG 7 & AWG 6. How
much current do those kettles draw?


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.
 
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 16:55:34 -0400, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" ?mike.terrell@earthlink.net? wrote in message
news:m5ednfqzQtE_8ePRnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@earthlink.com... ?
? Arfa Daily wrote:
??
?? Well Jim, that was why I used the word "potentially", but judging by
the ?? size of the pins used to couple the power supply's output into
the ?? board -
?? if you've been following the thread, you will recall that I
previously ?? described them as being of the size you would find on the
line cord for a ?? kettle - then I wouldn't say that there was too much
in the way of ?? reserve.
?
? "The size you would find on the line cord for a kettle" doesn't have
? much meaning in the US. :)

Why is that ? You have electric kettles in your kitchens - I've used
them.


I've never seen one. Even Coffee pots are rare these days.


Or don't you call them kettles ?. OK, anyway, if it's a better
description, the size of the round ground pin on a line cord that has a
three pin plug. Is that more meaningful ? 3/16" diameter maybe ? 4mm ?


3/16" is between AWG 5 & AWG 4. 4 mm is between AWG 7 & AWG 6. How
much current do those kettles draw?
Half what a US kettle would draw?



--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse
 
On 9/1/2010 5:15 PM, Meat Plow wrote:
On Wed, 01 Sep 2010 16:55:34 -0400, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

Arfa Daily wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" ?mike.terrell@earthlink.net? wrote in message
news:m5ednfqzQtE_8ePRnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@earthlink.com... ?
? Arfa Daily wrote:
??
?? Well Jim, that was why I used the word "potentially", but judging by
the ?? size of the pins used to couple the power supply's output into
the ?? board -
?? if you've been following the thread, you will recall that I
previously ?? described them as being of the size you would find on the
line cord for a ?? kettle - then I wouldn't say that there was too much
in the way of ?? reserve.
?
? "The size you would find on the line cord for a kettle" doesn't have
? much meaning in the US. :)

Why is that ? You have electric kettles in your kitchens - I've used
them.


I've never seen one. Even Coffee pots are rare these days.


Or don't you call them kettles ?. OK, anyway, if it's a better
description, the size of the round ground pin on a line cord that has a
three pin plug. Is that more meaningful ? 3/16" diameter maybe ? 4mm ?


3/16" is between AWG 5& AWG 4. 4 mm is between AWG 7& AWG 6. How
much current do those kettles draw?

Half what a US kettle would draw?



A good British 240Vac kettle will take 3KW, yes 3KW. No waiting 10
minutes for the lousy thing to boil.

JC
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top