Cost to leave PC on 24/7

Page 1 of 2  
I have a PC set up in a cupboard which serves my audio needs via various speakers around the house. At the moment I turn it off at night since I only use it for a few hours each evening. This gets tedious turning it on and off and I`m wondering how much extra its likely to cost me leaving the box on 24/7. We have economy 7 that switches in at 1am, so overnight I would assume it would be a lot cheeper. The box itself has a 250W PSU and is AMD driven with 1 CDRom drive and 2 hard disks, sound card, graphic card. I do have a monitor connected which goes into standby after a few minutes, but I would probably turn this off as it does produce some heat.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John wrote:

You don't say what speed the processor is - this makes a big difference. Total consumpsion of the PC with the monitor off is going to be 100-200W depending on the CPU.
Let's assume 100W. At normal prices a kWhour is ~6p, at Economy7 I think it drops to ~3p. I have no idea how long your Economy7 period lasts - say 6 hours?
So say you run for 18 hours at normal rate, and 6 hours at reduced rate. That's (18x0.1x6) + (6x0.1x3) = 12.6 pence per day. About 4/month, or 45/year, or 450/10 years.
--
Grunff


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Its a 1000Mhz Athlon IIRC

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
John wrote:

Then 100W is near enough, could be +/- 30W, but you have a ballpark figure.
--
Grunff


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
In uk.d-i-y, Grunff wrote:

... minus the amount you save on your central heating bills. :-)
--
Mike Barnes

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Do the HDs stop after a certain amount of inactivity? If not then set it up to do this. With the CRT and HDs off the consumption drops quite a lot.
--
--

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com ).
Version: 6.0.524 / Virus Database: 321 - Release Date: 06/10/2003
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
IMM wrote:

Might be an idea to also run "Rain" or similar which will lower the cpu consumption when idle. Consider suspend to ram or hibernate as options as well, if you don't mind the delay and have a suitable method to bring the machine of of standby/hibernate. Not so much for the power consumption, but the heat/noise of leaving the thing on 24/7, though I suppose the cupboard will muffle most of the noise anyway...
Lee
--
Never summon Anything you can't banish.
-
To reply use lee.blaver and ntlworld com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
..

If you fit something like Vantec Stealth fans, there is not that much noise to worry about, particularly if you have themostatic fan control too. My machine has five case fans, two PSU fans and four fans on various chips, but is hardly noticable at half a metre.
Colin Bignell
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I have one in the psu and one on the 2 gig processor - which does the job. If the processor begins to get too hot, it should shut down
do you have a fan fetish or what ?
--
geoff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
...

The CPU, the chipset, the on-board secondary power supply and the video card all have their own heatsinks, with attached fans. There is one in the case side, directly over the CPU. Then two in the PSU, two in the front of the case blowing air in (over the hard drives) and two in the back taking air out.

I don't particularly want it to shut down and a 3.2 GHz P4 runs rather hotter. A couple of the fans are redundant, but I want reliability and fans are cheap enough that it is silly to risk a failure if one goes down.
Colin Bignell
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

--
geoff

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
That varlet IMM did proclaim to all assembled:

Not always a good idea to have the HDD spinning up and down. It will damage the bearing and could cause one of the heads to clash with the disk surface, ruining large parts (if not all) of the drive.
My own experience was a total loss on a drive after 18 months with it set up as you say, but an identical disk bought and set up at the same time, is still running strong after 5 yrs in an always on mode.
Acquaintances of mine have had total failure after 18 months to 3 yrs, spinning up and down. These have each occurred with different makes, btw.
Not an argument, just something to consider. ;-)
--
FJ
96 Tiger 900

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

This can be a false economy. Starting and stopping the drives reduces their lives quite a bit........

.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andy Hall wrote:

Unless they are IBM Death^H^H^Hskstar drives.
IBM actually advise against leaving them running permanently. They claim they are designed for home/small office use, and to be powered down when not in use.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I physically disconnected the PSU fan when I ran my machine like this. It was a 33MHz 486, which was easily enough for the task. It was running Linux, with the hard disks set to shutdown after 10 minutes and logging disabled, so it wouldn't need to write out the files. It ran like this for a couple of years without any problems whatsoever.
A modern machine might have more difficulty without the PSU fan. I used the old 33MHz motherboard (even though I had a 300MHz AMD available) because the 33MHz processor required no CPU fan. When you aren't running graphical applications, modern processors are simply not needed.
Christian.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I don't think a 33M processor would be much use for audio.
--
*Gun Control: Use both hands.

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

It would be fine for playing back CDs. And, erm, .wav files. Probably going to struggle with MP3s, mind.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Don't most CD roms ignore the processor and simply add the audio to the computer sound buss?

The 586 card on my RPC doesn't see it that way. ;-)

Yup.
--
*If you don't like the news, go out and make some.

Dave Plowman snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk London SW 12
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Replying to the wrong bit of this thread, but anyway. Just out of curiosity I googled for "DOS MP3 player" and came up with this
http://www.damp-mp3.co.uk /
I reckon you should just install DOS (okay, maybe Windows 98 booting straight into a DOS prompt so you've got some chance of being able to see your HDs properly) and stick the whole thing on a timeswitch. DOS doesn't care if you just turn the power off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 01:28:37 +0100, Dave Plowman

If it's a straight audio track as you would have on an audio CD, then the audio comes through the small 4 way connector as analogue audio and is mixed into the analogue path of the sound card - hence the small coax cable. Some CDROM drives also have digital fibre optic outputs for audio.
If the audio is by way of a data file (e.g. mp3, Real, Microsoft, wav,... ) then it is handled via a codec which is generally implemented in software and hence requiring CPU cycles. Some sound cards have digital signal processing which may help with this, although generally the DSP facilities are for synthesis - e.g. with MIDI files etc.
Generally, audio codecs, especially on decompression for playing are not that CPU onerous. Video is a different game, however, especially for compression, and hardware assist or a lot of CPU power is generally needed for good results.
.andy
To email, substitute .nospam with .gl
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.