• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Best performance to power ratio

tigersty1e

tigersty1e

Golden Member
What cpu and chipset combo gives the best performance to power usage ratio? Ideally I want to use less power, but I need at least the power of an older c2d e6300 @ 1.86 chip.

I already have a HD6450 video card, so integrated graphics is not a necessity.
 
Last edited:
I used to own a g0 stepped q6600 i used to think was amazing.

Now a dual core with ht the i3 2100 flys pass it in most things with less power consumption then a e7600 and pull so little heres a chart of the q6600 vs i3 2100.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/53?vs=289

Worth talking about others might not agree but a little dual core pwning the q6600 my favorite chip of all time it replaces it as top fave.

Can't beat the 1155 series of chips just pick a budget to spend on a cpu and go with it.
 
I need a computer to be running 24/7.

It would run software for 1-2 wireless IP cameras with motion detection and recording. Not much processing power needed. But I would also use the computer for general computing (internet, word processing, etc.)
 
Core i3 2100 or Core i3 2120 will work very well for you.

Add in a cheap H61 chipset, and you are set for very low price.
 
How's that power consumption compare to an E6300 + P35-DS3L?

I have this combo, but considering getting a new setup if I can save power (system running 24/7).
 
tigersty1e said:
How's that power consumption compare to an E6300 + P35-DS3L?

I have this combo, but considering getting a new setup if I can save power (system running 24/7).
Click to expand...


Using anandtech charts i compared a e7600 to a pentium g850...here are the results
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/404?vs=87

No e6300 in the charts but i would think the e7600 would be very comparable if not a bit faster.

The pentium g850 is basically faster then the e6300 by a long mile...

I know some reviews i read showed the i3 2100 pulling much less power then the e7600 if that interests you....why the g850 and the i3 2100 are good options depending on usage.
 
skipsneeky2 said:
Using anandtech charts i compared a e7600 to a pentium g850...here are the results
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/404?vs=87

No e6300 in the charts but i would think the e7600 would be very comparable if not a bit faster.

The pentium g850 is basically faster then the e6300 by a long mile...

I know some reviews i read showed the i3 2100 pulling much less power then the e7600 if that interests you....why the g850 and the i3 2100 are good options depending on usage.
Click to expand...
an E7600 would be around 75% faster than the old 1.86 E6300 so its not even close.
 
Last edited:
toyota said:
an E7600 would be around 75% faster than the old 1.86 E6300 so its not even close.
Click to expand...

So a g850 could possibly be almost 2x as fast as the old e6300 while pulling less energy which is amazing.

I know my i3 2100 impresses me as a prior owner of a g0 stepped q6600 this chip outclasses it while costing me almost a third of what the q6600 did back in 2007 while sipping power.

Amazing how we have moved in the last 2 years alone:biggrin:
 
There's the ULV chips, but not sure any officially exist as desktop parts? I know you can undervolt basically all the current chips just fine at stock speeds a bit.

A lot of power savings can be had by aggressive tuning of your windows installation (IOW, quick to sleep/hibernate, and USB disactivation/etc).
 
Ken g6 said:
So, for minimal power use, a G620T?

That's among current processors. Just wait until the Ivy Bridge chips come out next year!
Click to expand...

E7600 spanks that g620t but still not bad tho for its power consumption.

I do hope perhaps we will get a ivy bridge dual core sorta like the i3 2100 but maybe more cache higher clockspeed and lower power consumption that would be nice but assuming z68 is the official support chipset i doubt we will get many budget processors at launch unless the budget ivys maybe lack pci 3.0 making them compatible with the h series and p67 as well?

Not everyone needs a quad....
 
6Gbit/s SATA and 5 Gbit/s USB 3.0 do increase consumption by a couple of watts, but you can do without them. Sata3 isn't needed if you have to use a HDD (video recording) and if needed USB 3.0 can be upgraded with a controller card. I would definitely consider a Socket 1155, H61 chipset for that or a Llano based system, Llano has even lower idle power draw: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/9

You could also spend those 200 €/$ on a 80 plus platinum PSU now, then wait a year for Ivy Bridge. With a new i3 system, you'll be saving 30-40 bucks/year (20W) at least, while a high efficiency PSU may save you only 10% ~ 10 bucks/year but overall: upgrading less is more ecologically/economically sound.

Devices that measure power definitely help to get a realistic perspective on these things, despite their many inaccuracies.
 
Last edited:
I recall seeing some improvement in idle power consumption going from my E4300 OC'ed@2.4Ghz to Q9300 @ stock. Core ix looks to be better in that regard, since I doubt surveillance software would be taxing the PC in any way unless you were recording in HD. Whether it's worth it you'd have to consult w/ power prices in the area. I haven't done any major updates to my PC since I don't game on it anymore, and power is dirt cheap. Probably not a good thing that it's pulling 160W all the time, but hey, it's winter now...
 
I would suggest an Intel Atom box. It should still do all you want it to do.

I have a few years-old Atom box that only pulls 30W from the wall.

Heck, that's around the range of a higher lumen output florescent light bulb ...

I know it's not a motherboard + CPU solution you're asking for input on, but really, only 30W. I'd consider.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top