By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Wii U consumes more than 63 watts confirmed by DOE(Department of Energy EUA)

theRepublic on 02 December 2013
megafenix said:
theRepublic said:
thewayofthepath said:
First, documented power usage is often 'worst case scenario'. Second, it's basic engineering to use DC power supplies that provide more juice than the application will require. Helps keep voltage steady and current clean. (Not to mention less wear and tear on the power supply.)

Source: My job.

This.

Just because the power supply is rated for 63 watts, does not mean it has to draw 63 watts at all times.  Just that it is capable of doing so.


The power supply is not rated as 63 watts, its rated as 73 watts, the power efficiency determines how much power goes to the machine and how much power goes to waste

 

so if the power supply is 73 watts and efficiency is 87% or higher means that 63 watts or a bit nore goes to the machine and that 10 or less watts are dissipated as heat

 

you shouldnt be that surprised though, i mean, look how much watts gears of war for 360 drained, it consumed 186 watts out of the 203 wattsof the power supply, and thats without using the 3 usb ports 

I know, but that does not mean the Wii U is pulling all of that wattage.  I have a 300W power supply on my computer.  That does not mean it is pulling 300W all the time.

Yes, and the 360 was a terribly designed, inefficient console.



Switch Code: SW-7377-9189-3397 -- Nintendo Network ID: theRepublic -- Steam ID: theRepublic

Now Playing
Switch - Super Mario Maker 2 (2019)
3DS - Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney (Trilogy) (2005/2014)
Mobile - Yugioh Duel Links (2017)
Mobile - Super Mario Run (2017)
PC - Deep Rock Galactic (2020)
PC - Command & Conquer Remastered Collection (1995/1996/2020)

Around the Network
Aielyn on 02 December 2013
megafenix said:
Aielyn said:
The one part you're not quite comprehending, yet, is that they're saying that it's rated to use UP TO 73 Watts (at the wall), with an efficiency of 87%. It is possible that Nintendo decided to play it safe, and left plenty of buffer between the maximum draw of the system and the output capability of the supply.

Power supplies don't provide a constant level of wattage. The wattage is controlled by the thing drawing the power. In this case, the Wii U draws the power, and the power supply is rated, in effect, to be able to supply up to 63 Watts to the Wii U. The Wii U doesn't have to ever draw that much, and if it draws less, then the power supply simply uses less total power at that point in time. The Wii U doesn't have an extra 20-30 watts flowing into it that it doesn't use.

 

That being said, those who argue for this not being an important bit of information because of the above facts are (probably wilfully) ignoring the fact that Nintendo are huge on efficiency of design, and wouldn't provide a power supply that is rated for twice the power draw compared to what the Wii U is capable of drawing. They would undoubtedly leave a small buffer, but there's no way that it's a third to a half of the power supply's capability. If the highest the Wii U went were 40 Watts, they'd only supply a 50-55W power supply, not a more expensive 73W power supply. At the very least, this implies that Nintendo wanted to be able to overclock their system, if necessary - more likely, it's simply capable of more than what we've seen so far.

Curiously, I haven't seen any measurements done for any recent games. It would be interesting to see if 3D World has a higher power consumption rate than the launch titles that all the measurements were done for.


YET nintendo is not one of those that like to trow around wattage for nothing, obviously they want to take profit of every last bit of watt available and already iwata said that games would consume an avergae of 45 watts, and average is like getting an scroe of 6/10 so the maxium for games could be somwhere  between 45 and 50 watts or so and the rest of the 13.5 watts more or less  would go for the usb ports, sdhc port and the disc drive

 

and don forget about geras of war for 360 that consumed 186 watts even without the 3 usb ports and the power suply was 203 watts

Go back and read the rest of my post. You seem to have missed some of it, since you're trying to argue against something I never said, and using an argument that I already put forward, but more neatly and with better understanding.



thewayofthepath on 02 December 2013
Aielyn said:

They would undoubtedly leave a small buffer, but there's no way that it's a third to a half of the power supply's capability. If the highest the Wii U went were 40 Watts, they'd only supply a 50-55W power supply, not a more expensive 73W power supply.

Power supplies are most efficient in a (usually wide) region that is midway of their maximum rated capacity.  The further to the extremes (low and high), the more efficiency drops off.  Nintendo's choise of power supply seems completely reasonable versus the measured wattages people have been recording.



megafenix on 02 December 2013
Aielyn said:
megafenix said:
Aielyn said:
The one part you're not quite comprehending, yet, is that they're saying that it's rated to use UP TO 73 Watts (at the wall), with an efficiency of 87%. It is possible that Nintendo decided to play it safe, and left plenty of buffer between the maximum draw of the system and the output capability of the supply.

Power supplies don't provide a constant level of wattage. The wattage is controlled by the thing drawing the power. In this case, the Wii U draws the power, and the power supply is rated, in effect, to be able to supply up to 63 Watts to the Wii U. The Wii U doesn't have to ever draw that much, and if it draws less, then the power supply simply uses less total power at that point in time. The Wii U doesn't have an extra 20-30 watts flowing into it that it doesn't use.

 

That being said, those who argue for this not being an important bit of information because of the above facts are (probably wilfully) ignoring the fact that Nintendo are huge on efficiency of design, and wouldn't provide a power supply that is rated for twice the power draw compared to what the Wii U is capable of drawing. They would undoubtedly leave a small buffer, but there's no way that it's a third to a half of the power supply's capability. If the highest the Wii U went were 40 Watts, they'd only supply a 50-55W power supply, not a more expensive 73W power supply. At the very least, this implies that Nintendo wanted to be able to overclock their system, if necessary - more likely, it's simply capable of more than what we've seen so far.

Curiously, I haven't seen any measurements done for any recent games. It would be interesting to see if 3D World has a higher power consumption rate than the launch titles that all the measurements were done for.


YET nintendo is not one of those that like to trow around wattage for nothing, obviously they want to take profit of every last bit of watt available and already iwata said that games would consume an avergae of 45 watts, and average is like getting an scroe of 6/10 so the maxium for games could be somwhere  between 45 and 50 watts or so and the rest of the 13.5 watts more or less  would go for the usb ports, sdhc port and the disc drive

 

and don forget about geras of war for 360 that consumed 186 watts even without the 3 usb ports and the power suply was 203 watts

Go back and read the rest of my post. You seem to have missed some of it, since you're trying to argue against something I never said, and using an argument that I already put forward, but more neatly and with better understanding.

sorry, didnt read cpletely and got the wrong idea