GPU 2GB on 240W PSU [HP Dc5800 from small factor]

Swarmachine · Apr 26, 2017

Hello , i have dc5800 based on 240w. PSU ,default with 17 Amps and with in-it 250w cable
-----------------------
Can i Run (it) Nvida GT610 ir Radeon 6450 ?
-----------------------
Already running and upgraded to :
A. 8GB RAM [x4 DDR2] (upgraded from 4gb) *~1.8V. For each one*
B. Procesor intel quad 9400 (upgraded from duo core e6550) *95w*
C. HDD 250GB SEAGATE 7200. *+5V 0.72A AND +12V 0.52A*
D. Radeon Gigabyte HD5450 1024 mb (now stuck with this

) << *TOOL specy showing running on 19w*
E. DVD Drive 5V/12V 1.5a/2.0a

*Psu Power : 100-240 V ~ 5A 50-60Hz*
output 240w (max)
+5.08V +3.33V +12V
17A 15A 7.5A

+12Vcpu -12V +12Vaux
11.5A 0.15A +3A

*Edited from laptop*

InvalidError · Apr 26, 2017

Most of the Radeon 6000 series are rebadged 5000, there is no point in that "upgrade" and I doubt the GT610 would be much better either. Get a GTX750/750Ti/1050/1050Ti - any model that doesn't require a PCIe AUX power cable.

Sagar_20 · Apr 26, 2017

Swarmachine :

The best possible upgrade for your small form factor computer would be definitely the Gt 730 (2gb ddr5 model), Msi or evga. It is the most powerful gpu that you can run on a 240w sff computer.. Hd 6450/ Gt 610 would not really be considered an upgrade to that system. They both are just as bad as the Intel on board graphics. For your information, i've got a Dell Inspiron 620s with a 250w power supply rated 12V, 18A which came pre installed with the Hd 6450 which was just terrible, After upgrading to the Zotac Gt 730, the graphics performance of my computer has greatly improved. Now i can play most of the modern games at 1366*768 resolution without any lag whatsoever. So, i will advise you to go for the Gt 730. It wont be good to run a 65w Gtx 750 Ti on a computer with psu that small... Rest, you think and decide.

King_V · Apr 26, 2017

If the hierarchy chart is correct, the 6450 would be (I was surprised at this) an improvement over the 5450. I don't know if the GT610 would be. I wouldn't necessarily spend money on either of those, though, but, if you have them lying around, trying them couldn't hurt.

Aside from that, I'd agree with Sagar_20 - the GT730 is better. If you can get one, go for the 64-bit version (which has GDDR5), as it actually performs better than the 128-bit version (which has DDR3).

Swarmachine · May 1, 2017

hello , thank you for answer's . . . last decision ....
ill use by suggestion

*EDIT*
"MSI GT730 2 GB Low profile 64 bits ," test results in few days (1-3) then package comes in...

Link 2 Card : https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814137110&cm_re=GT_730-_-14-137-110-_-Product

Also i will check condition inside in Psu.

===================

Also my ram DDR2 it will be good with GDDR5 ? :-/

InvalidError · May 1, 2017

Swarmachine :

GPU memory is completely unrelated to system memory, the GPU could have alien memory and it would make absolutely no difference to the rest of your system.

If you want a reasonably good boost in gaming performance though, you really should be looking at half-height GTX750/1050.

King_V · May 2, 2017

Swarmachine :

I am not sure if that was a typo or not. If it is GDDR5, then I would say go with that one. If it is DDR3 (on the card, whatever is on your motherboard is unrelated to this), then see if you can get a GT 730 specifically with GDDR5, as it will perform better.

King_V · May 2, 2017

InvalidError :

I'd agree with the recommendation on the GTX750. The 1050 might really be pushing it in combination with the fairly power-hungry CPU, given the limited power supply. I'm told some of the newer Dell systems have good quality power supplies, even when they're low wattage, but I can't say I know if the older HP power supplies are as robust when getting close to their limit.

(it's something I might try on a system I personally own if it weren't my primary use PC, but I don't know if I would necessarily be comfortable recommending it for someone else to do).

InvalidError · May 2, 2017

King_V :

The GTX750 uses around 60W while the GTX1050 uses around 65W in their regular desktop implementations, not that much of a difference. Half-height models have smaller heatsinks, which may translate into having more heavily restricted power profiles that will push the 1050 below the 60W mark.

If it can run a 750, it should be able to run a 1050 which uses only 5-10W more.

King_V · May 2, 2017

It's a wider spread - from Nvidia's site, they list the 750 non-TI as 55W, and the 1050 non-TI as 75W.

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/products/10series/geforce-gtx-1050/
http://www.geforce.com/hardware/desktop-gpus/geforce-gtx-750/specifications

That said, even if the spread were closer, it's still taking steps closer and closer to the limit. I agree that the smaller heatsink half height models might have more restricted power profiles, but I'm thinking unlikely unless they very obviously and very explicitly say so.

I am running an R7 250E on a Dell with only a 220W power supply - but in my case, it can provide 216W of that on the 12V rail,

53W - Haswell Pentium G3220
55W - Radeon R7 250E
25W - HDD
25W - Optical Drive
25W - low end motherboard
5W - 1 stick of RAM (plan to add 2nd stick in future, though, so that will bring this up to 10W)
5W - single fan

Total of 193W. That leaves me headroom of 23W before I bump up against my 216W limit on the 12V rail. This assumes that my use of 25W as the low end of the range I've seen for a "standard" motherboard is correct. (I hope so, I wouldn't be happy if it were a higher number!)

Assuming Swarm has 20 more W available on the 12V rail given that the PS is 20 W total more (and this assumption is NOT guaranteed),

55W - GTX 750
95W - quad 9400 (I am assuming a non-S 9450 here)
25W - HDD
25W - Optical Drive
25W - low end motherboard
10W - 2 sticks of RAM
5W - single fan

we're looking at 240W total. He would need 20A on the 12V rail for that, and there is ZERO headroom. Also, assuming my 25W guess for the motherboard isn't understating it's actual power draw.

If there's no optical drive, that gives some headroom for the 750, but the 1050 would again push the system right on the bleeding edge again.

Is it a risk I'd take on a system I had but didn't need? Probably. Is it a risk I'd recommend someone else take? No.

(EDIT: refined listing of data, slightly more elaboration)

InvalidError · May 2, 2017

King_V :

Most components use nowhere near what the manufacturer says they do under normal operating conditions. They list how much power they use under absolute worst-case conditions at stock settings. Absolute worst cases rarely happen in real-life, even less so simultaneously across all components. If you look at Tom's 1050Ti reviews, those without PCIe power connectors use 75W or less. No other site that I know of makes direct GPU power measurements but those that approximate GPU power draw from system power draw put most 1050 non-Tis in the neighborhood of 65W under stress-test (FurMark) conditions.

The HDD may use 25W during spin-up but under normal operation, typical 7200RPM drives only use 6-8W idle and 10-15W seeking. The ODD is rarely active at any one time, the CPU is rarely at 100% load and even when it is, it will be several watts short from the worst-case figure unless you were unlucky enough to end up with the worst possible die that made the power draw cut-off. For what it is worth, pushing a DDR2 DIMM to 5W would be practically impossible without overclocking as you would need to access all 16 chips of a double-sided DIMM to get there but only one rank (DIMM side) per channel can be active on the bus at any one time, so power draw will be closer to 3W.

While the worst-case total may be 240W, the real total will be significantly lower. If OP has an UPS with power monitoring capability, he could measure how much power his PC draws to find out how much power his current components draw. I bet he's under 200W even if we include PSU losses which don't count toward output power ratings, putting his system closer to 160W if we assume 20% PSU losses.

King_V · May 3, 2017

Oh, I'd agree with you on that. I understand the total is max draw, and the likelihood that the CPU, RAM, HDD, CDROM, Video Card, motherboard, fans, etc are all being pushed to their absolute limits SIMULTANEOUSLY is comically low. The optical drive, if he has one, I should probably consider irrelevant, except for that nagging "but what if.." that's constantly going on in my head.

OTOH, if I recall correctly from the video card tests/reviews here, there are brief spikes for some that are well above the official TDP rating, but those are more informational than real-world meaningful due to how incredibly brief they are.

But, if it were a system I couldn't do without, it ratchets up my hyper-caution. If it's a spare system that I'm just playing around with, I'd probably give it a shot.

(side note: Several years back, I got a Sony VAIO system from a friend, Windows XP Media edition, Pentium 4 3.4GHz HT. Apparently the Sony-provided power supply was inadequate. As the system aged, but before he gave it to me, instability was initially solved with RAM replacement. When I got it, the video card, a 256MB Nvidia card that I can't recall specifics of, was dead. The power supply was dead. Yet another RAM stick was dead. The 4-pin connector, both on the MB side, and on the PS side, including a good two inches of the wire, was burned. Thankfully on the MB side, it was only cosmetic, and a new, higher-powered PS solved that problem. Still, I was both alarmed and impressed with the carnage, but also impressed that, once a new PS was in, that it still worked at all!)... ok, that was a major digression, but hopefully a semi-entertaining one.

InvalidError · May 3, 2017

King_V :

Sounds like a bad crimp in the PSU's 4-pin connector caused the connector and wires leading to it to burn out from high contact resistance, not really the PSU's fault electronics-wise. I can imagine an intermittent crimp putting lots of junk on the PSU rails and everything else that depend on it.

As for the momentary peaks, the technical term is transients. Those are the things that capacitors are supposed to smooth out when you have a sufficient number of adequately sized and rated ones. Crappy PSUs tend to have too few capacitors to effectively share ripple current, under-size them and use low-performance/general purpose ones instead of (ultra-)low-ESR types intended for switching PSUs. Under-provisioning capacitors drastically reduces their useful service life and is many manufacturers' favorite type of planned obsolescence due to how predictable electrolytic capacitor failure is most of the time.

Swarmachine · May 4, 2017

Thank you for suggesting to me GT 730 and all other better Nvida GT-X Card's
But i will be honest and go with chi-pest Card with mid performance

There is bad thing that GT 730 Fan is blocking way to input near Intel 1000 internet card so
My pc is now without internet connection , again so now im looking for wifi usb

...Thanks!

Search

GPU 2GB on 240W PSU [HP Dc5800 from small factor]

Swarmachine

Reputable

King_V

InvalidError

Titan

Sagar_20

Distinguished

King_V

Illustrious

Swarmachine

Reputable

InvalidError

Titan

King_V

Illustrious

King_V

Illustrious

InvalidError

Titan

King_V

Illustrious

InvalidError

Titan

King_V

Illustrious

InvalidError

Titan

Swarmachine

Reputable

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page