Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General DISH™ Discussion' started by AppliedAggression, Feb 11, 2009.
Here in Ca. they're talking about limiting wattage for TVs. Won't apply to larger than 58" though.
Amen Stewart - Amen...
This last month, my TED5000 said I used 1100-1200 KWh from 29 Sep - 25 Oct - And that is with almost no Heat Pump use for either heat or cooling. A typical summer month and I'm easily hitting 1500 - 2000 KWh. Part of my issue is that my house was built as all electric in 1983 - and most of my heat makers still are (oven, washer / dryer, water heater). I also have swimming pool (about 3 KWh / hour) for the pump that needs to be run some amount of time on the summer while the pool is open. Our power company offers some options on lowering your electric rates - I switched on Sept 24, see if it helps.
And if you guys are really serious about checking out your energy use - www.theenergydetective.com
I'm at about 1100 this past cycle, and was around 1700 the previous cycle. Only difference is mostly no air/heat.
Traditionally I have a couple of cheap months around March/April and then a couple more November/December.
My lowest usage in the last year was last November's cycle which was about 600 kWh.
This year I bought a new computer... but switched out a lot of light bulbs to LED bulbs.. so I think that has been about a wash.
My big summer/winter months for cool/heat can top 1800 kWh... so the different between cool/heat every day vs no cool/heat seems to be around 1200 kWh if I subtract my peak month from my low month.
Since that leaves aroung 600 kWh average per month for everything else (multiple computers, multiple Dish receivers, refrigerator, water heater, washer/dryer, oven, and all the lights)... I can't complain too much about my Dish receiver power consumption.
The dish receiver uses about 43 kWh a month. I just don't understand why the receiver uses the same amount of power when processing 2 HD signals as it does when it's idle or off.
There is no true "off." Turning a Dish Network or DirecTV DVR "off" disables video output, but everything else continues to run just the same.
Unlike modern PC CPUs, current DVR CPUs currently lack power management; they have no means to manage or reduce power consumption when idle. Broadcom announced several new DVR SoCs with power management, but none are shipping yet. You'll see those CPUs in DVRs next year. That should cut consumption by 10-20w when idle.
Constantly spinning up and down the hard drive reduces the lifespan of the DVR, so that's not something manufacturers want to do with great regularity.
Energy efficiency is not a high priority for cable/satellite providers, but if it were to become a priority at some point, both satellite providers they could probably design their software to spin-down the the hard drive and cut power to the LNBs during certain parts of the day when no recordings are scheduled (ex: once per day from midnight to noon).
Where are the hard-drives located in the Uverse DVRs? I know they have whole-home access... so are they in the "DVR" or are they in your internet gateway?? My sister ahs it, and while I didn't look into it too much, that gateway is HUGE
Exactly, where is the incentive to the Cable/Satellite companies?? You reduce the life of the hardware... to save money for someone else... and in doing so drive up your own support costs?? I wouldn't do it if I were them.
They could switch to SSD's instead of Magnetic hard drives.... but that significantly ups their costs, and customers used to getting everything for free would not likely be willing to pay the difference.
Spinning a hard drive up and down does not reduce its lifespan.
SSDs are still expensive, but are rapidly falling in price. They wont totally replace regular hard drives for a while. However, I think they are cheap enough now that the DVR makers should offer a SSD 'Upgrade' for people who want a quiet DVR for a bedroom and such. They could charge a premium price for this, and get some additional marketing bullet points.
There are as many adherents to the notion that this action does reduce device lifespan as there are detractors.
Your position is clear.
So you've gone and priced them lately ?
Here's one sample -
only 250 GB, and $700 dollars - not exactly a "replacement" yet for use in a DVR.
This discussion shouldn't really be about hard drives since they don't consume much power, but while we're talking about SSDs they're unlikely suitable for a DVR because they have limited/write cycles and with the constant buffering that would "fill" it faster than we'd like.
I guess they could put the buffer in ram but then we're talking about at least 2GB of ram.
This has always been a concern of mine too. I have 3 HD DVr's running. For roughly $10 a month in my electric bill. yes i can afford the $10 but if given a choice I would prefer not to spend it on electricity. I think it would be great if future DVR's could od what my replay did 10 years ago and shut itself down the 16+ hours a day I'm not watching it. I would gladly sacrifice the ability to back up and watch what is currently in the buffers for $10 a moth in savings.
The only reason they use so much power is because no one has tried to make them use less.
And neither side has been able to prove their point with anything more than anecdotal evidence. Either way, its not a big power draw.
If you are interested in a nerd fight, lemme know and I'll take a harsher stance.
With regard to powering down the LNBs..............
That would require all the satellite boxes to communicate with each other so that whatever unit is powering the LNBs would know not to power down when a box was on or turned on and to power up the LNBs for timers on any of the units.
The easiest way would be to build one unit that took a input and a output for every TV set in the house. So if you were subbing for 2 TVs the box would have 4 tuners and two outputs. Want to upgrade to a 3rd or 4th TV set? Plug in a module for them, run the wires and done.Then you could probably implement power saving easily.
SSDs are not suitable for DVRs... They have a limited amount of write cycles for each byte of memory. They have to use special firmware to move anything that is constantly accessed around on the drive for wear leveling.
I have a pretty consistent (though seemingly inconsistent) position.
I agree they could probably improve power-consumption a bit if they truly wanted... but at the same time, we can also choose receivers with less features if the power-consumption is more important to us.
When I buy a car, I can buy one with better gas mileage or one that I like to drive, which may or may not have better mileage... What I can't do is buy a sportscar that looks cool and then complain it doesn't get as good mileage as the economy car.
That 256 GB SSD is larger than the hard drive in my 522.
What did a 256GB SSD cost last year? By this time next year, it will be affordable. Not as cheap per GB as a normal HD, but cheap enough.
Besides, a DVR doesn't need the high speeds of the today's top of the line, expensive drives. A ssd with a low end controller and slower flash chips would be sufficient.
The wear leveling and improved chips of today are enough to make the write limit a non issue.
I think there is enough of a market for a 'Silent DVR' out there that it would be worthwhile. Thats my opinion, anyway.
Not at all the case. Video, especially HD video requires high speed ram.
My HD camcorder uses special high speed SD ram to record 1080i. If I use standard SD ram I am limited to 480p recording. Solid state drives are much too slow for use in the reading/writing multiple streams such as todays 722 and 722k would require, the potential to read and write 6 HD streams simultaneously.
I'm not sure any of them available today are any better.
Or just use a powered multiswitch?
A SD card is not the same as a SSD. SSDs outperform traditional hard drives in every category except price and capacity.