![]() |
|
|
#309 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
A modern switching power supply will "approximate" a resistive load, but then I think there's a rule of thumb/fudge factor of 97% or so. I can't remember where I saw or read that, but that's in my brain for some reason. Clamp type ammeters (which is basically what you're using) are generally close enough... it would be weird to be off by 50% though. You might try one of those Kill-A-Watt plugin things. I'm not sure, but I'd guess those are shunt-type measurements of the current, and they do fairly well for high inductive loads like refrigerators/freezers, for example. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#310 | |
|
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!
2·3·1,693 Posts |
Quote:
Power = e*i, voltage times amps. Large installations use various means to correct their overall PF. These can be capacitor banks, or certain kinds of electric motor which can be set up to have a capacitive (current leading voltage) effect |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#311 |
|
Undefined
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair
24×389 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#312 |
|
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!
2×3×1,693 Posts |
Current can lead or lag voltage.
EDIT: But I guess the effect is the same. Out of sync is out of sync. Last fiddled with by kladner on 2015-12-01 at 06:21 |
|
|
|
|
|
#313 |
|
Undefined
"The unspeakable one"
Jun 2006
My evil lair
622410 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#314 |
|
"Kieren"
Jul 2011
In My Own Galaxy!
2×3×1,693 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#315 |
|
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
32·29·37 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#316 |
|
Dec 2014
25510 Posts |
A Kill-A-Watt says 67 Watts with Power Factor (PF) 0.96 .
The machine only has 1 DIMM populated so I am wondering if the CPU is idle waiting for access to memory. I am going to try 2 & 4 DIMM to see what difference they make. If the LL test time improves linearly with the increased power usage, it would be worth it. |
|
|
|
|
|
#317 | |
|
"/X\(‘-‘)/X\"
Jan 2013
55628 Posts |
Quote:
Last fiddled with by Mark Rose on 2015-12-04 at 15:21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#318 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
Optimally you'd want just one module per memory channel. I think it's the same for desktop CPU's as Xeons, where more than one module per channel will (potentially) run them at a slower speed than if you only had 1 DPC (dimm per channel). Certain systems like the newer HP Proliants can handle running 2 or even 3 modules per channel at full speed (as long as you're using "official" HP memory, which they charge a premium price for, of course). I have a few "unfortunate" systems where we've had to upgrade the memory in an inefficient way... they're 3-channel Xeons with support for up to 3 dimms per channel (18 slots on a dual socket board). And we've populated all 18 slots. That knocks the max speed for the DDR3 modules from 1333 MHz to 800 MHz. Well, it works fine for the server's intended purpose, but I'm sure Prime95 runs slower as a result. The systems in question have 144 GB of RAM... 18 x 8GB modules. If we weren't on a budget we'd have simply gone with 12 * 16GB modules for a total of 192 GB and would let it run them at 1333 or 1066 MHz (depending on the type/rank/voltage installed). Ah well, we have to live with budgetary constraints.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#319 | |
|
(loop (#_fork))
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England
3·2,141 Posts |
Quote:
(ah, most people are not running multi-threaded ... that explains the difference in figures) Last fiddled with by fivemack on 2015-12-07 at 10:28 |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Hardware Benchmark Jest Thread for 100M exponents | joblack | Hardware | 284 | 2020-12-29 03:54 |
| Garbage hardware thread | PageFault | Hardware | 21 | 2004-07-31 20:55 |
| Old Hardware Thread | E_tron | Hardware | 0 | 2004-06-18 03:32 |
| Deutscher Thread (german thread) | TauCeti | NFSNET Discussion | 0 | 2003-12-11 22:12 |
| Gratuitous hardware-related banana thread | GP2 | Hardware | 7 | 2003-11-24 06:13 |