How Many Mah Do The Gp32 Consume ?


I think you've misunderstood the concept of MAH...

I think you mean MA (or milliamps). A 2500MAH cell will power something at it's native voltage (1.2V) for 1 hour per 2500milliamps of current required.

So....

1 2500mah battery powering a 500MA device should (in theory) last around 5 Hours if that device uses 1.2v.

The gp32 can obviously survive on 2.4V from 2x 1.2V batteries. If it lasts 7 hours on these to 2500Mah batteries, then it is probably sucking somewhere in the region of 2500 / 7 Ma (or approx 350Milliamps). The GP2x lasts around 3 hours on the same batteries, so this equates to 833Ma of current required.(or thereabouts).

If you up the clockspeed (on either unit) they suck more Ma (but the same voltage), so the same batteries would last less time. For example, if upping the GP2x to max makes it suck 1250Ma, then the 2500Mah batteries would last 2 hours (2500 / 1250).


Any clearer?
 
That was a good explanation but M=Mega ane m=milli.
I really want two of those 2500MegaAmperehours (=2500000000Ah). :p
 
Also, most places don't tell you the usage specification to get the most of the battery. Eg. Some 2500mAh batteries will only allow you to draw there 2500mAh load if you do it at between X and Y mAh. For example, a battery could last 8 hours at 300mA current draw, but only 2 - 3 hours at 500mAh.

The best batteries for high current draw (since the 2x seems to like to use something between 500 and 800mAh) is batteries aimed at digital cameras and the like.
 
Squidge posted on Dec 20 2005 at 12:52 PM said:
ms? Millisecond? You mean mA ?
I think he meant m's as in multiple m's (meaning that he did it more than once).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But what if the gp32 and the gp2x are set to the same clockspeed and ~volume level...

THEN which one is the most energy efficient?
 
cozmic posted on Dec 20 2005 at 03:45 PM said:
But what if the gp32 and the gp2x are set to the same clockspeed and ~volume level...

THEN which one is the most energy efficient?

At a guess, The GP32.

Trooper
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Axeman posted on Dec 20 2005 at 01:48 PM said:
yep - but it wasn't gramatically correct to put an apostrophe in when I was pluralizing something (and its something that bugs me ;) ).
well, you're right, but it makes it difficult to understand so I usually decide to give up gramatical correctness for comprehension ;)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
trooper posted on Dec 20 2005 at 03:01 PM said:
cozmic posted on Dec 20 2005 at 03:45 PM said:
But what if the gp32 and the gp2x are set to the same clockspeed and ~volume level...

THEN which one is the most energy efficient?

At a guess, The GP32.

Trooper


yeah ur right..


the gp2x has an extra processor
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Deleted User posted on Dec 21 2005 at 02:01 AM said:
trooper posted on Dec 20 2005 at 03:01 PM said:
cozmic posted on Dec 20 2005 at 03:45 PM said:
But what if the gp32 and the gp2x are set to the same clockspeed and ~volume level...

THEN which one is the most energy efficient?

At a guess, The GP32.

Trooper


yeah ur right..


the gp2x has an extra processor

Ooowww, Do i win a prize, Or maybe a blue peter badge. :p

Trooper
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I promice you eternal paradise in heaven


Or damnation in hell.

Depends
 
Deleted User posted on Dec 21 2005 at 01:01 AM said:
trooper posted on Dec 20 2005 at 03:01 PM said:
cozmic posted on Dec 20 2005 at 03:45 PM said:
But what if the gp32 and the gp2x are set to the same clockspeed and ~volume level...

THEN which one is the most energy efficient?

At a guess, The GP32.

Trooper


yeah ur right..


the gp2x has an extra processor

No.... The GP2x has more efficient processors... The Gp32 won't run for anywhere near the same time at that speed...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top