would i need to upgrade my PSU?

[GeneO]

Check here for a wattage calculation. It is pretty accurate. Nailed my setup:

Antec Power Supply Calculator

Antec (though their modular ain't so modular the PSU is good), Seasonic or Corsair are good.

 

[lovewin7yea]

lol just used that and it says my minimum required is 700

the heck?


NM says my minimum is 397 due to me selecting a quad socket and not a single socket.

 

[hjonesMCT]

I'm at 385w. (See my system specs below!!) And with my Corsair PSU at 750w, I'm not going to get anywhere near maxing that anytime soon. Go Corsair!

 

[Tepid]

Regardless of brand, and regardless of what the calcs say, I would not put less than a 550 or 600W PSU in any system that is only going to have 1 hdd, 1 optical, 1 video card and a few USB devices.

Anymore than that and I would not put less than a 750W in.

Why?

A. You are not taxing the PSU as much therefore it should last the life of the system with head room.

That's it. If you start adding multiple internal HDD's and external HDD's, other devices or upgrading Video card or adding anything, at some point you will need to buy a bigger PSU, why not start off at a minimum 750W?

b.) You will need to check that if you do upgrade a Video card that the PSU is the right one for that video card. (ie. is the 12V+ rail pushing enough amps?) If you are going to do crossfire or sli, is your PSU enough to handle 2+ video cards?

The last thing any PC should ever have to worry about is Power.

I will agree that a lot of systems do not require that much power, and I remember when 1100W+ PSU's were being advertised and people were going crazy buying them, now that IS overkill.

 

[cmd187]

I read somewhere that running your PSU at 25% is just as bad as running it at 95% so you need a wattage that is around 50-60% for maximum efficiency. For your system, I would get an Enermax 87+ Gold 750w PSU.

 

[GeneO]

lol just used that and it says my minimum required is 700

the heck?


NM says my minimum is 397 due to me selecting a quad socket and not a single socket.

You must have entered something wrong. Going by your specs I get around 390 watts & I assumed you have a couple of DVD R/W and 6 sticks of DDR3 and 5 120mm fans. You need a bigger supply.

 

[essenbe]

lol just used that and it says my minimum required is 700

the heck?


NM says my minimum is 397 due to me selecting a quad socket and not a single socket.

You must have enterd something wrong. Going by your specs I get around 376 watts & I assumed you have a couple of DVD R/W and 6 sticks of DDR3 and 5 fans.

I think if you read under sockets, 4 sockets means 4 seperate processors. do it again and select 1 socket.

 

[TVeblen]

I read somewhere that running your PSU at 25% is just as bad as running it at 95% so you need a wattage that is around 50-60% for maximum efficiency.

This is generally not true.
One issue is heat. A power supply running at maximum capacity is putting out more heat and constantly. Heat is not good for electronics.

Another issue is performance. When you look at ATX power supply performance graphs for efficiency they tend to go on a relatively level line starting from the lowest power output to some power output near the mid to 2/3 output level then start to take a dive as you approach maximum output. At maximum output the graph is quite steep.
Efficiency (for power supplies) measures the clean conversion of watts of AC power to watts of DC power. Any loss of energy is wasted as heat. So a 90% efficiency power supply converts AC to DC while only generating as much heat as a 10% conversion waste can generate (that amount is dependent on your total electrical draw).

A common misconception is that a larger power supply uses more power to run then a smaller supply. This is not true either. Again it is dependent on your total electrical draw. Theoretically, if your system is drawing 450 watts from a 1200 watt power supply with 90% efficiency it uses 500 watts of AC power. If your system is drawing 450 watts from a 500 watt power supply with 90% efficiency it still uses 500 watts of AC power. The issue then becomes that efficiency graph: that 500 watt supply is not really running at 90% efficiency if you are drawing 450 watts because that conversion efficiency is dropping now. You are now using more than 500 watts of AC power to produce 450 watts of DC power and generating much more heat to do so. At this point you are now "cooking" the power supply!

The only thing you are wasting with a "too large" power supply is money.

 

[Layback Bear]

TVeblen you are correct. I like you and many others have looked at all the charts and grafts. All of them agree that working a power supply at it upper end does nothing but create heat, poor ac to dc signal. Your power supply won't give you more watts than your system demands. I choose for my systems to have a power supply 200w plus over my peak demand. Let me put it this way; Ohio Edison put out a gazzilion watts. Does my house get all them, no no. It only get what my house demand is. IMHO a great power supply that is over the required amount is not a wast of money. It will run in what I call a sweet spot, cooler and more efficient. Their for using less a/c from the wall socket. Most of all the computer and all it's goodies it has will like the less heat and the smooth amps and volts. The power supply is no place to save money when buying.

 

[TVeblen]

Layback Bear I agree with you. I like the sweet spot analogy.

Getting a power supply large enough to supply your total power needs in the peak of the efficiency curve would be that sweet spot I think we are talking about.

What I meant by wasting money on a "too large" PS would be the case where you are paying for a 1200 watt supply for a total draw of 450 watts where an equivalent 750 watt supply could put you in that sweet spot for less money.

 

[lovewin7yea]

hate to bump an old thread, but i uppred to a fatal1ty 550w and it seems my computer is a tad more responsive. awesome PSU. thought id share.