-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Tesla lowers Model 3 range estimates in Europe due to extra power consumption of AMD Ryzen processor
- Thread starter whiskeylover
- Start date
Did anyone stop to think the system may be operating at max power 24/7?
Some engineer at Tesla is probably using all of our cars to mine crypto without anyone knowing.
Some engineer at Tesla is probably using all of our cars to mine crypto without anyone knowing.
diamond.g
Active Member
In this case the CPU they are using isn't as fancy as the later variants, boost clocks work weirdly on pre Zen 2 (which this is) CPU's.
Assuming all the cars are getting the GPU daughtercard (and not just the S/X).I've pointed it out before, but for a very slow drive cycle that drags in for dozens of hours (the EU cycles might be), while having low average energy demand (like the UDDS cycle), even 45W can add up to a significant amount and result in multiple miles of range difference.
Tesla lowers Model 3 range estimates in Europe due to extra power consumption of AMD Ryzen processor
Although it does seem suspicious that a chip would drain 7 miles worth of energy. But I'm not a car expert. I am in the chip industry, specifically power consumption. Chip power consumption is the number one issue nowadays, since everyone’s chip basically works. Power and performance are huge...teslamotorsclub.com
Everyone here also seems to be forgetting the Navi 23 discrete graphics. That has a TDP of 65-90W depending on model and as far as I can find, the previous Atom infotainment system didn't have an analog to it, so this is completely new power demand. It would be interesting to see what the idle or low demand power draw of the new GPU is.
[Hardware] MCU Performance - Intel Atom vs. AMD Ryzen
This is interesting, well its in German but the folks looking at a nor'easter
may have time to learn it, wish you the best.
Maybe translate page may work.
As we say here after 4 litters of beer it may make sense..
What was I talking about, looks like happy hour.
This is interesting, well its in German but the folks looking at a nor'easter
may have time to learn it, wish you the best.
Maybe translate page may work.
As we say here after 4 litters of beer it may make sense..
What was I talking about, looks like happy hour.
An extra 5 watt power draw would not reduce Model 3 range by 7 miles.
If that were the case better not charge any phones on road trips.
Whoops messed up. Probably more like 50 watts. Keep in mind that’s drawing power constantly. Even at stop lights.An extra 5 watt power draw would not reduce Model 3 range by 7 miles.
If that were the case better not charge any phones on road trips.
As I know, it's false. WLTP range is based on 13-16 kWh average consumption. It means 13000W-16000W average consumption by the car. If you want 3.5% range drop, you need to increase the consumption by at least 455W. It's not just an Atom to Ryzen 15->45W (30W increase), and also not just the extra Navi 23 GPU 0->160W (160W increase) maximal consumption, it is much more.. Something else is happening.. Not just "the Ryzen". For example, the FSD computer is replaced also, or the range drop is only theoretical, like Tesla measures the WLTP / EPA differently from now on.
Is there anyone, who knows the answer?
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Did you mean 13-16 kW? Where did you get those numbers? Do you have a link?As I know, it's false. WLTP range is based on 13-16 kWh average consumption. It means 13000W-16000W average consumption by the car. If you want 3.5% range drop, you need to increase the consumption by at least 455W. It's not just an Atom to Ryzen 15->45W (30W increase), and also not just the extra Navi 23 GPU 0->160W (160W increase) maximal consumption, it is much more.. Something else is happening.. Not just "the Ryzen". For example, the FSD computer is replaced also, or the range drop is only theoretical, like Tesla measures the WLTP / EPA differently from now on.
Is there anyone, who knows the answer?
EPA is much lower:
UDDS ~3200W
Highway ~8400W
FTP ~5300W
There's still other correction factors that changes this, but from the pure test numbers, the cycles don't actually consume that much power on average, so a continuous power draw may be more significant than you may think.
Tesla lowers Model 3 range estimates in Europe due to extra power consumption of AMD Ryzen processor
Just some quick math:
EPA shows max usable is 82kWh for Model 3 LR:
Previous WLTP range was 614 km.
Tesla Model 3 Long Range Dual Motor
WLTP cycle used would be Class 3B (larger vehicles with Vmax greater than 120km/h) and average speed there is 23266m/1800s = 12.93 m/s = 46.55 km/h
Emission Test Cycles: WLTC
That means the test would take 614km/(46.55km/h) = 13.2 hours
82kWh/13.2h = 6.2 kW
That matches the ball park of the consumption on the EPA test, so makes sense.
And to finish the math, 12km (claimed difference)/614km is 2%, 2% of 6.2kW is around 120W. That's more than from the Ryzen APU alone, but if you add in the Navi GPU (assuming it's true it's discrete, which from what I can find there is no analog in the Atom computers) it's not out of the realm of possibility.
Last edited:
MaskedRacerX
Member
Given what I'd assume is additional thermals, and subsequently, extra cooling requirements for the new MCU, I wonder how much that affects total consumption, if at all[?]
I do mean kWh / 100km WLTP consumption, you can average it out.
a.) I've seen many different values, thats why I wrote 13-16.. for example this site shows the same magnitude:
Tesla Model 3 Long Range Dual Motor
All details and specs of the Tesla Model 3 Long Range Dual Motor (2021-2023). Compare price, lease, real-world range and consumption of every electric vehicle.
ev-database.org
WLTP Ratings (TEL)
| Range | 614 km |
| Rated Consumption | 147 Wh/km |
| Vehicle Consumption | 122 Wh/km |
b.) But if you do the math about WLTP range and battery, you get the same scale: 614 km from the 82kWh battery: 13,35 kWh/100km..
c.) If you just think about it: an EV uses 10-35 kWh (35 is for SUV cars going fast) between city usage and motorway speeds / 100 km.
(Anyway, new Model 3 Ryzen owners say the range stays the same, doesn't matter if Atom / Ryzen with the same 60kWh battery.)
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Ok, I see the mistake you are making. You are assuming the car is going on average 100 km/h. That is the only way you can directly use the numbers to get a kW number. Basically you are doing the following math implicitly: 13.35kWh/100km * 100km/h = 13.35 kW.I do mean kWh / 100km WLTP consumption, you can average it out.
a.) I've seen many different values, thats why I wrote 13-16.. for example this site shows the same magnitude:
Tesla Model 3 Long Range Dual Motor
All details and specs of the Tesla Model 3 Long Range Dual Motor (2021-2023). Compare price, lease, real-world range and consumption of every electric vehicle.
WLTP Ratings (TEL)
Range 614 km Rated Consumption 147 Wh/km Vehicle Consumption 122 Wh/km
b.) But if you do the math about WLTP range and battery, you get the same scale: 614 km from the 82kWh battery: 13,35 kWh/100km..
The problem is the average speed of the WLTP cycle is much lower than that! The car is travelling on average 46.55 km/h (keep in mind you must include also the parts of the cycle where the car is stopped or going very slow). The computer is basically a parasitic drain that constantly runs, so the slower the car goes on average, the higher the impact.
But this thread is not discussing the real world impact. I don't think anyone is disputing it's very little if any (even 2% really is nothing vs other real world variables). This is discussing if it is plausible for there to be a 2% impact on the car on a WLTP cycle. Both your numbers and mine show that is plausible, given that only works out to 120W. This is assuming talking about OP with Model 3 LR having 12 km (7 miles) lower range vs 614 km originally.
Similar threads
- Article
