With efficient lights, you only need 30-40watts per sq ft... or about 320 - 430 for a m^2. ... so 460-620W or so for 1.44m^2, if you are using a light with a ~2.7umol/J efficacy. Otherwise, you may need more. (If you add CO2, you can go higher.)
Efficacy is the key when looking at watts... don't want a heater, right?
umol/s - rate of photons produced by light
1 watt/s = 1 joule/s.
2.7umol / 1 joule or... 2.7 light : 1 heat produced per 1 watt of electricity used. If they do not list this umol/J specification, assume it is so embarassing they won't publish it.
So, proportionately speaking, you can adjust my suggested wattages above to any spec you find with a little algebra. Lower efficacy wil need that much higher wattage to make up for it.
The L90 or L70 rating is imporant too. Some diodes are great for 1,000 or 10,000 hours, but trash soon after. This is the point at which it is 90% or 70% as bright as the first day. If L90 is <50,000 hours, it is trash.
Even if lights with the correct spec are more expensive, you will likely save the cost-difference within 1-2 years. AFter that, it costs les than those cheap trash lights.
if you upgrade, save up for something with the Samsung LM301 diodes -- doesn't matter if it is lm301b or lm301h, it comes off the EXACT same factory line with the exact same specification sheets (if you do a little math, since one is marketed toward hotriculture and lists some different specficications.) Also, you 'll want them to mix in some red diodes, but efficacy should remain above 2.5umol/J for a quality light, preferably closer to 2.7.
if you are made of money, run those diodes at .7A and push 3.0+ umol/J efficacy. Just need 2x as many and it'll be 2x the cost... the break-even analysis of the electric cost may take 2-4 years before cost difference is ameliorated... so, this is not the most cost-effective path in some contexts, but your electric bill will be that much smaller.