The quest for the low energy consumption gaming computer

[tvih]

First a little background (and sorry for the looong post). I'm not the first nor the last to embark on an endeavor such as this, that's clear enough. It all started with wanting to get rid of my power-hungry, oven-warmth, barn-sized, noisy desktop computer. At first I looked at an Ion-based solution. After all I have huge backlog of older games I've managed to neglect, most of which such a computer would run fine while also performing admirably as a HTPC.

After taking a closer look at how much such an Ion system would cost (especially with Blu-ray capabilities - the figure ended up being around 550 euros for a self-assembled system, seeing as the ASRock Ion330-BD is nowhere to be found and does lack some features), and how it would prohibit playing new games should I feel like it, not to mention less than stellar performance in Photoshop etc, I started looking at laptops, which could offer more processing power and of course portability at a better performance/cost ratio. However, to get good enough gaming performance, the price would rise to a minimum of 1000 euros, but more realistically to 1500 euros. Now, it would have many upsides, such as indeed a very low energy footprint and nice portability, but the price is quite steep. But the performance of the 1500 euro laptop would be on par with my current Q6600 + 8800GT rig with just a fraction of the heat, size and power consumption.

But then there was of course the more cost-effective option of a more traditional low energy consumption desktop with discrete graphics. So the logical thing was to look into this option as well. The machine should be able to handle even modern games reasonably, and be good for multitasking, Photoshop, web coding, and HTPC use. And as silent as possible while not bankrupting me.

After some intensive reading, here's what I'm looking at right now:
- CPU: Intel Pentium Dual Core E5200 @ 2.5GHz with Scythe Ninja II cooler (without the fan if the CPU stays cool enough without it)
- Sapphire HD 4670 (passively cooled)
- Gigabyte G31M-ES2L motherboard, since the features are adequate and the price is low
- 4GB DDR2 800MHz Dual Channel
- 320GB WD Scorpio Blue 2.5" drive with any appropriate adapters (to stay low-power, and the performance should be good enough)
- BD-ROM optical drive
- Fortron FSP220-60LE PSU, pending favorable comments on another thread I made

Case is still a bit undecided. I'm not sure how much airflow I'll end up needing for example - I guess a reasonable amount, given the fanless GPU and possibly fanless CPU. But small microATX cases with good ventilation aren't that common, or that affordable from what I've seen so far (and I'd rather avoid full ATX cases because as stated earlier, I'm sick of the huge cases, even microATX is larger than I'd like, but in a desktop computer can't really go much smaller while being able to fit all the pieces).

The E5200 seems to be the winner in the low power consumption category on any reviews I've found. E7200 is very close, and slightly faster, but costs over twice as much where I live (Finland). Similarly the HD 4670 offers fantastic idle power usage, and quite reasonable maximum power usage, while offering similar graphics performance to the 1500 euro laptop.

The price for the desktop system as listed is roughly 520 euros.

3Dmark 06 scores for the 8800GT and HD4670 are 13800 and 9251 respectively. A drop of 33%. However power consumption drops from (idle/load) 35/110W to 9/65W. Not a bad tradeoff given my goals. No overclocking factored in.

The PassMark scores for the Q6600 and E5200 are 2892 and 1614, respectively - a drop of roughly 44%. Power use drops significantly, although exact numbers are harder to come by for CPUs. No overclocking for either one factored in.

The performance to power consumption ratio in these cases would seem beneficial towards the new components.

However I also noticed the Q8200S, which in one Techgage test used only slightly more power than the E5200 at idle. But some other tests suggests it might not be that power-friendly. Any experiences on this? The extra computing power reserve wouldn't hurt if the impact on system power consumption isn't too huge. The Techgage article suggests 2W/24W difference at idle and load, and with the Q8200S being effectively equal to Q6600 (and the Q9000 the laptop would have) in performance at stock speeds. Price difference is rather hefty between the E5200 and Q8200S however, 55 euros vs. 209 euros. Any experiences on "real world" power consumption of the Q8200S?

In general I'm having a bit of a hard time trying to figure out the exact idle and max load power consumption figures of this entire theoretical setup. My current desktop idles at around 150W, with heavy stress on both CPU and GPU resulting in 250+ W of consumption. It would seem this new system would vary between around 45-150W. Does this seem like a reasonable estimation? It would seem to be only slightly more than the laptop would (if not factoring the laptop's more power-efficient display), with more upgradeability but no mobility.

I've tried to read up on this stuff as much as I could, but now I felt like it's time to ask for some direct input. Is there anything critical that I have overlooked? Improvement suggestions? I'd rather not go too much over this current 520e price figure for the desktop system (with the possible exception of the CPU change), if I do in fact decide to go with it rather than the laptop. The whole idea would be to stay low-cost compared to the laptop, otherwise the laptop would make more sense due to its benefits, despite said price issues.

So, finally - any insights are more than welcome - though if anyone bothered to read this far, I'll be surprised

 

[yh125d]

If you can find one, a 4770 might be a better choice for GPU. It's be more like a 5% drop from the 8800, and I think it uses about 50w at load


As for the CPU, theres a new "celeron" coming out, the e3300 which is supposed to have performance ~10% under the e5200, while only using like 20w under load compared to 30w of the e5200

More info on celeron
http://forums.anandtech.com/me...=2324981&enterthread=y
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...lay/celeron-e3300.html

 

[ChaiBabbaChai]

OCZ Z series Gold PSU supposedly >90% efficiency

 

[tvih]

Thanks for the replies.

The HD 4770 is indeed better in performance, but it's not really all that low-power. Look at http://www.tomshardware.com/re...n-hd-4770,2281-13.html for example, it has the figures in comparison to 4670 as well. Especially the idle power consumption is disappointing, and is nearly the same as on the 8800 GT. According to some charts I found, it doesn't downclock as much as the 4670, which is probably why it idles at a higher wattage.

The E3200 is a more interesting find though. The power consumption at load is indeed phenomenally low. And performance is still decent. Though in gaming use the E5200 remains clearly better... still, something worth considering, definitely.

As for the OCZ Z Gold PSUs, the problem is that aside from apparently a very hefty price they are 850-1000W units, and therefore the efficiency with the low 40-150W load levels on this system would most likely suffer considerably.

 

[Zap]

Pretty good start at spec-ing a low power draw computer.

I'd go with the Gigabyte G31 chipset board. It allows undervolting your CPU. You can likely keep default core clocks with slightly lower volts.

Passive is good, because fans do use power. One thing to note is that "passive" does not mean "no airflow." The Ninja will "passively" cool the E5200, but only if air is moving through the case. I guess you've already figured it out based on your case comments.

You can make most lower to mid-range graphics cards passive (with the above caveat). My favorite coolers to do this are the Arctic Cooling Accelero series.

For micro ATX cases with good ventilation, just look for ones with bigger fans and less restrictive fan grills. Yes, some are expensive, but it might be worth it. Are Antec cases available for you? If so, take a look at the NSK3480. Not only is it pretty small (even compared to other micro ATX cases) it uses a 120mm Antec Tri Cool exhaust fan with a grill that is not too restrictive. It uses really soft grommets for HDD mounting to quell noises, and even comes with an Antec EarthWatts 380W PSU which should retain at least 80% efficiency at least down to around 76W.

For graphics card, you can also consider the new 9800 GT "low power" models. They use around 65W peak and clock down in 2D mode for low idles. You can identify them by their lack of a 6-pin PCIe power connector. That will get you pretty close to your 8800 GT in performance. I haven't seen any that were passive, but I'm sure the cheap Accelero S2 can take care of that problem.

 

[tvih]

Yeah, I actually just switched my "shopping cart" to include a Gigabyte G31M-ES2L motherboard instead of the ASRock one, as not only does it have a couple of extra features, but it's also RoHS compliant.

The NSK3480 is actually one of the first microATX cases I looked at. But the included power source is a bit of a dilemma - no matter what, it will noticeably lose to the Fortron in power efficiency. But the problem with Fortron is the same as with most PSUs - I don't think it's going to be very silent. To date, I haven't encountered a truly silent desktop PSU (barring mini-ITX ones). Of course, the NSK3480 with the PSU included is only about 10 euros more expensive than the Fortron is alone. But gotta think long-term.

The 9800 Green Edition is something I had seen mentioned in passing earlier, but hadn't really looked into it. Now that I tried to find more info, it seems I can't come across any idle power consumption figures. Those are quite important, given that most of my computer use is still non-gaming. The performance/price ratio seems similar to the HD 4670 (except for the need to buy the separate passive cooler).

 

[tvih]

I also took a look at Antec's NSK2480 case. It seems to have decent airflow capabilities too, and the form factor might enable me to place it "out of the way" rather than on the floor. Also, compared to the NSK3480, it would seem to have more space for the optical and hard drives. Problem is I don't think the Scythe Ninja II will fit inside. There's the Ninja Mini available as well, but it adds to the price a bit (as does the case itself, being slightly more expensive than the 3480)... hmm. This case + PSU thing is definitely the trickiest part of all

 

[yh125d]

I'd look at this review (http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...n-hd4770_5.html#sect0) for the power consumption, its showing the GPU using only 49w peak

 

[tvih]

Yes, I know the peak use of the 4770 is low, but the problem is the idle consumption - which is twice that of the 4670. Given I'm more likely to spend more time at idle loads than running full-blown 3D graphics, it's not an insignificant difference. That is not to say that I'd have completely ruled out the 4770 however, it still is a very good contender (in fact, the only true contender probably). I just wish they'd done the idle underclocking the same way as in 4770. I simply don't see why they didn't.

Another issue that's annoying me at the moment is the blu-ray drive. It should be one that can also burn DVDs when needed, so as not to need two separate optical drives (which would of course be very bad for overall power consumption, as optical drives are power hogs). However, the price for such a 5.25" drive is 130 euros. Which in itself isn't the main issue - what is is that a slim version is the same price! Now, of course a slim drive will use less power. But it can't be properly mounted into a standard 5.25" slot, and I can't seem to find a case that would have a slim bay slot while also having the configuration to support a decent CPU cooler and a discrete graphics card.

Aside from power consumption, the secondary reason for wanting a slim drive (given there's no price difference) is for the future if I ever at some point decide to get an additional dedicated HTPC system that takes up very little space (at which point I wouldn't need a BD drive on the desktop computer). The only solution I found so far was a was panel from Scythe (http://www.scythe-eu.com/en/pr...ory/kama-panel-2.html) to mount it in, but it would only really serve to increase both cost and power consumption, and the extra inputs/outputs would be pretty much useless for me with the exception of the card reader.

 

[M0RPH]

Just thought I'd mention the HP Firebird, which was really the ultimate design for a low-power, quiet and compact gaming PC. They even had a version with blue-ray drive... but I think they've stopped selling the Firebirds altogether, and of course the pricing was quite high.

 

[tvih]

Yeah, I've seen it mentioned once or twice during my research. The problems with the Firebird are that in the end it still focused a lot on performance, which meant a somewhat high power consumption despite using largely laptop parts. Which, in turn, leads to the high price. I could almost get the laptop I mentioned for the price. Not that I ever saw Firebirds sold anywhere in Finland. If it was sold, I suppose it still might enter the consideration.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: tvih
The NSK3480 is actually one of the first microATX cases I looked at. But the included power source is a bit of a dilemma - no matter what, it will noticeably lose to the Fortron in power efficiency.

I think you're worrying excessively over power efficiencies. Both Fortron and Antec units are 80% efficient from 20% output. This means the Fortron is 80% efficient starting at 44W while the Antec starts at 76W. This does not automatically mean the Antec's efficiency plummets at 75W. It may drop below 80% at 75W, or it may be at 65W, or at some other wattage. I don't know this number and I don't believe I've ever seen it published.

However, it doesn't matter.

Once you add in a graphics card (even idling) I think your total system power draw will likely be enough to push the Antec into 80% efficiency range.

The EarthWatts is reasonably quiet, plus the NSK3480 keeps the PSU in a separate compartment so that it doesn't heat up as much (thus also helping it keep quiet and efficient).

Oh yeah, the other thing is that in review after review Fortron doesn't seem too interested in the quality of the output. For instance while voltages and efficiency are okay, things like ripple are not that great.

 

[tvih]

Idle power of the system should be very low, considering that the 4670 idles at just 9W, and the E5200 at well under 10W as well. Overall idle power draw shouldn't exceed 50W with the whole setup, unless I decide to go with the 4770 instead which would add another 9W. Considering the EarthWatts 430 actually failed to reach 80% efficiency at 20% load if I recall correctly, I don't think the 380 will do all that much better in that regard.

It's just that I'd rather not do this in a half-assed manner. It's one of the downsides of being an obsessive personality!

 

[tvih]

Hmm... I ran into the SilverStone Sugo SST-SG06B case. Mini-ITX but with a slot to add a discrete graphics card - which means a perfect match for the Zotac GeForce 9300-ITX WiFi motherboard. Not to mention the Sugo also has the slim optical drive bay I've been craving, and complete with a 300W 80+ PSU.

The annoying thing with the Zotac motherboard itself is that it supports Hybrid SLI - but not HybridPower. HybridPower can completely shut off the discrete graphics card when it is not needed! It would have meant no more fretting about idle power consumption of the discrete card.

And in turn, all the motherboards that support HybridPower seem to be AMD ones (funny, given it's an Nvidia feature) - and also microATX instead of mini-ITX. Which would rule out the Sugo case... sigh.

Granted, it would still of course be possible to simply use a HD4670/4770 with the Zotac and Sugo, but the Zotac board / 9300 chipset aren't that low-power compared to a G31 board. And the Zotac costs 90 euros more than the G31 board, even if it does have some extra features.

It's starting to feel like all the manufacturers are doing all they can to rain on my parade

EDIT: According to a review @ Tom's Hardware, a Zotac 9300-based system with an E5200 had about 55W power consumption at idle without a discrete graphics card. Factor in a 4670/4770 and the figure would be roughly 64/73W respectively. That's already half of what my current rig uses up idle. At load the figures would be 80W without a graphics card, and I suppose around 130W with. Of course it's better than my current setup, and in a smaller form factor, but still much more than I was hoping (which is maybe 50W max idle, and around 100W load). Compared to a G45 motherboard that's 10W more, not sure how much the G31 uses by comparison exactly. On the upside, the PSU that comes with the Sugo seems decent, it's a Fortron FSP300, and provides 81.2% efficiency at 60W load.

 

[tvih]

Well, I guess further pondering and planning is pointless, and is only gonna end up with more disappointments and a headache. As such, I placed an order for the following:

- Intel E5200 CPU
- Zotac Geforce 9300-ITX WiFi motherboard
- 4GB DDR2 800MHz
- Samsung SpinPoint M7 Series HM500JI 500GB 5400RPM 2.5" SATA hard drive
- Silverstone TOB02 Slim Blu-ray reader & DVD/CD burner combo
- SilverStone Sugo SST-SG06B Mini-ITX case

I'll also be ordering the HD 4770 at some point, but right now it simply can't be found in stock anywhere, so the IGP will have to do until then. Similarly I haven't settled on a CPU cooler yet, as it seems the Thermaltake MeOrb I was planning on has fitting issues with the Zotac board, many other coolers have the same issue with either the board or the case. Might just end up sticking with the stock cooler if it doesn't end up being too loud.

Overall once the system is assembled, I should have reached the following changes compared to my current system:
- Roughly halved power consumption (I'll have to try measuring it with a meter when the time comes)
- Roughly halved CPU power (but slightly improved graphics performance)
- Case reduced to one quarter size
- Blu-ray playback capability
- X-Fi Platinum replaced with the not-so-stellar ALC668 integrated chip
- addition of built-in WiFi and eSATA

Given the resale price of my current system, this system "upgrade" will cost me roughly 100 euros (or nothing, if I also sell the X-Fi).

So overall I suppose it's a decent step towards my initial goals, even if not all I hoped for. I'll indeed have to run some power consumption tests and benchmarks once the system is up and running. I might even report them here in case anyone is interested in my little project's results.

 

[Sprucket]

I would love to hear your testing results, Im looking to build a similar system aswell based on your research. I am wondering if the system could possibly be powered by a 120 watt picopsu.

Hope to hera from you tvih.

Regards

 

[tvih]

I'd love to get the results myself, but it seems the store and also the importer are totally out of stock with the SST-SG06B case, and I'd rather not get the silver one since all my accessories are black as well. Then again the optical drive hasn't arrived yet either (dunno what gives, importer has it in stock a-plenty), nor the display that I was planning on getting later on, but had to expedite as my current one bit the dust for no apparent reason. Still, going to 23" 16:9 full-HD from 19" 4:3 1280x1024 while actually gaining 6W in power savings is not bad in that area. The HD 4770 is also still going to be out of stock everywhere for the foreseeable future. It might be that I'll just wait for the newer generation of ATI cards, there might be a "power saver" card available in those as well.

Based on my earlier calculations and predictions the system should peak at about 130W. As such the picoPSU might not be able to handle the system at full load. It might be able to run a less power-hungry chipset though, and changing to a E3200 CPU would save you 10W in peak consumption, with some decrease in gaming performance mostly. So basically something like a G31 board with E3200 and HD 4670 or 4770 might barely be doable with a picoPSU, but it'd still be pushing it to the extreme I'm afraid.

 

[Sprucket]

Oki guess your right. However I just learned that there is a 150 watt picopsu out now, the problem will most likely be findeing a suitalbe powerbrick to utilize the full potential of this PSU. Anyway I would still love to hear from you when you get the parts together.

 

[tvih]

Right, just got most of the system components, except for the case, CPU cooler and optical drive (got a HD 4670 for the graphics card after all, at least for now). Using a Q6600 stock cooler on the E5200 in the meanwhile, and a crappy ATX case. 600W OCZ StealthXStream PSU. Preliminary idle wattage in Windows with SpeedStep active appears to be around 57W.

But this reading has two problems. First, the 600W PSU is way overkill for this, and obviously has BAD efficiency at a mere 10% of its rated capacity. According to a review I read, I estimate around 65% efficiency at this wattage. Once I get the case with the 300W PSU that still has roughly 80% efficiency at around 50W, I'm estimating a ~7W drop in power consumption. Second, my meter isn't all that accurate. I can't be certain if it gives too much or too little consumption. But given I used the same meter to establish an idle wattage of 120W for my previous system, this should give a comparable reading, even if not an exactly correct value. So, halved idle power consumption, it would seem. Goal accomplished in that regard.

While running 3DMark Vantage and Prime95 simultaneously, the max peak wattage my meter reported was 127W, with 105-115W being the most common. This should be rather accurate, since these wattages are already in the 80+% efficiency range of the PSU. This is also equal to more than halving power consumption compared to my previous system. But of course it is worth bearing in mind that CPU power is down 50% and GPU power by 40% or so compared to my previous system. Therefore performance per watt isn't all that different in the current configuration, but most of the time my previous system was way overkill anyway. A change to a HD 4770 would result in basically identical load wattage, but around 9 watts of added idle consumption.

More tests are results to possibly follow later (if nothing else, then new power readings once I get the appropriate case).

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: tvih
Second, my meter isn't all that accurate. I can't be certain if it gives too much or too little consumption.

I think most of the cheap meters will underreport power draw if they're inaccurate. There were some threads about this at HardOCP and jonnyGURU.

 

[tvih]

That's what I recall reading too. But I'm uncertain of the amount of error in this case (shouldn't be more than 10% though). For example, Sony lists the maximum power consumption of my TV as 170W, and that's pretty much what the meter reported when running the TV at full brightness (if I recall correctly, anyway) - something that I never normally do.

 

[piasabird]

So how many watts does your monitor use?

I think one major factor in gaming is the cache size of the processor. If you went with a Intel E7400 that would still give you a 3 Meg Cache. Another idea is to limit the size of the video Screen. I have a Dell 18.5 inch widescreen 740p screen. It is not very large but it is large enough to play games on or watch movies for just one person. If you limit the resolution to about half of full HD like that the games should run better because of the lower resolution. One drawback of my particular monitor was it was VGA D-Sub and may not work in all video cards. Even a slight reduction in screen size/resolution can save lots of energy.

I also woud test the heat produced. How hot is the monitor/computer. It takes money to cool down a house.

 

[tvih]

My previous 19" 1280x1024 LCD monitor used 33W. I still have it, but it broke and is waiting for repair. I did order a new 23" 1920x1080 resolution monitor which should only use 23,5W. So, gain screen estate while saving power. Nice. Based on price, features and power consumption, it doesn't seem to make much sense to go for a smaller size, as most of the smaller screens I found still use as much or more energy than the energy efficient 23" one. ETA on the monitor is unknown, which is a bit of a bummer since right now all I have to use as a monitor is the 40" TV... which uses about 58W with full power saving options and minimum brightness (thankfully my room is never bright).

CPU cache does indeed affect performance especially for gaming, but the E7X00 CPUs are so much more expensive than the E5200 with not all that much performance difference that I opted for the E5200. Even the E3300 would probably have been sufficient, but alas it isn't avalailable just yet. Chances are if I find myself needing a bit of extra juice I'll just upgrade to an E3900 when it is released.

Heat isn't too much of an issue. While I did indeed wish for a computer that produces less heat (my apartment can get quite hot), it's not so bad in the sense that during winters it doesn't all go to waste. And "cooling down" the apartment is done merely by opening the windows. No fancy AC here.

On a slightly related note, I tested the power consumption of my audio systems as I of course regularly use them with my computer. An old 5.1 HIFI surround amplifier I had loaned temporarily from my brother (and used to own it, sold it to him years ago) used up a whopping 50W while idle or playing music at a normal volume. My HIFI stereo amp used 15W instead. Finally, my new Logitech Z-4 2.1 PC speaker system used up only 5-6W. Of course, the power used by my headphones is negligible Power consumption of all sorts of things related to your computer is something to keep in mind if you indeed want to save energy with the whole "package" instead of just inside your case (which would make no sense). So overall at idle for my system considering all accessories (monitor, pc speaker) the power consumption should be roughly 80W or so once I get the proper case and the new monitor. Around double that at maximum load. Not quite laptop-level, but decent.

Oh, and speaking of the case, the store I ordered from finally got it and the optical drive in stock, so with some luck I should get them tomorrow, or at the latest on Friday.

 

[0roo0roo]

well a borderline low powered pc will be obsolete rather fast..requiring upgrades in the near future=not green

 

[tvih]

Being green isn't the only reason for doing this (heat, and especially loudness and size being other major factors), but it's indeed a big one. And it's true, hardware upgrades are bad for being green given the big environmental costs of manufacturing the parts. Luckily I have a big family where there's usually someone needing an upgrade, so I can pass along my old stuff to continue to be used by someone else who has even older stuff in use - there's still a XP1700+ being used by one family member, and if this computer turns out to not be powerful enough, I can give him this one (he's a very casual user so it would be plenty enough for him, given he is indeed now still using XP1700+ and a Raden 9550) and get a better one myself. That way it's not as bad as it would be otherwise, even if not optimal either.

However, I don't see myself needing a "full-power" rig any time soon. Even though the title for this thread says "gaming computer", it's not the main use. This computer can handle all my non-gaming needs for the foreseeable future - heck, aside from Photoshop and high-resolution video, my netbook can handle most of it. Gaming I only do casually anymore these days, with a long, long backlog of older titles to plow through, and this one can even play games such as Crysis. So I imagine this should last me a good year or two even in gaming use - and with only upgrading CPU (given there will be used more powerful quads like Q8400S etc available for a low price in the a year or two) and GPU (HD 5XX0 series or similar), much longer than that. Even if I do end up upgrading to a completely new more powerful system with no one else to continue using this one, it could continue to serve as a decent HTPC even though having many separate computers is kinda bad.

Overall it would be optimal to have a very low idle consumption computer with the power to scale up to high performance demand, but currently that's hard to get. An Intel Quad S variant would be the closest thing CPU-wise, with 4770 in CrossFire probably giving the most GPU power for the wattage (if only it had same idle consumption as a 4670 per card...). But I'm still quite new to this focus on computing, so "getting it right" might take more than one try. Only time will tell.