Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Power The Almighty Buck Games Technology

Digging Into the Electrical Cost of PC Gaming 162

New submitter MBAFK writes "My coworker Geoff and I have been taking power meters home to see what the true cost of PC gaming is. Not just the outlay for hardware and software, but what the day-to-day costs really are. If you assume a 20 hour a week habit, and using $0.11 a KWH, actually playing costs Geoff $30.83 a year. If Geoff turns his PC off when he is not using it, he could save $66 a year."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Digging Into the Electrical Cost of PC Gaming

Comments Filter:
  • Kill-a-watt meter (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stevegee58 ( 1179505 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @10:20AM (#40141965) Journal
    I bought a kill-a-watt meter a while back when I started dabbling in Bitcoin mining and it was a real eye-opener.

    It's a very similar problem to OP's situation since Bitcoin mining and gaming both use high performance video cards.
  • Components (Score:4, Interesting)

    by SJHillman ( 1966756 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @10:22AM (#40141981)

    What about switching out power hungry gaming cards for newer, more efficient cards? This year's mid-end model may have comparable performance to last year's mid-high end model but might draw half the power. Over time, the lower power consumption adds up, not to mention you can get by with a smaller power supply. Likewise, trading in your hard drives for a solid state drive (maybe using a green HDD for extra storage)? And for old timers, switching out CRTs for LCDs? Overall, I think it'd be easier for people to upgrade to more energy efficient components than it would be for them to change their PC usage habits. Lowering the sleep/HDD shutoff/monitor shutoff timers can make a big difference too without having to remember to shut down your PC every day or waiting for it to reboot. Not an option for everyone, but gamers usually aren't on a shoe-string budget or else they wouldn't be able to afford the PC and the games in the first place.

  • Re:Kill-a-watt meter (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @10:41AM (#40142193)

    Back when BTC were above $8, and you were using modern Radeon cards, it was roughly break even. Now if this is in a room that needed to be air conditioned, I would ballpark triple the energy costs. I decided it wasn't worth it unless it was the winter.

  • Re:Lame (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Simon Brooke ( 45012 ) <stillyet@googlemail.com> on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @10:52AM (#40142333) Homepage Journal

    My home has on average 100 watts of power available. I can use more in the short term, but doing so depletes the battery and means I'll have to use much less for some part of the week. The wind turbine which is my sole source of power is rated at 750 watts, but only generates that much in absolutely perfect conditions. So I know quite a bit about how to use power economically. I can light my whole house effectively with just 18 watts of LEDs. They're strategically placed, yes - but you can easily read more or less everywhere.

    In this situation, the graphics card on my computer (Radeon HD 6850 at 127 watts TDP) is actually the biggest power drain I've got. Obviously, my gaming is limited to two or three hours a day... Power is worth thinking about.

  • Re:PC gaming? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MBAFK ( 769131 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @11:01AM (#40142469)

    Sleep on a modern machine is pretty damn good. On my main gaming PC if you turn off the monitor and sleep the system it uses 3.18 watts. If you turn the machine off rather than sleep you use 2.92 watts.

  • Re:PC gaming? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by TheLink ( 130905 ) on Tuesday May 29, 2012 @11:47AM (#40143261) Journal

    Yeah every now and then Slashdot has these silly articles about PC power consumption, "kill a watt" etc.

    The power consumption of modern PCs (post P4) has gone down to a level where most home users would usually be better off looking for savings in other areas. Driving more efficiently, not using as much cooling/heating (and making it more efficient - insulation, sealing etc).

    As for gaming, sure a high powered gaming rig will use a few hundred watts (and usually less if you're not doing SLI). But that's far from the most energy hungry way of having fun. Your hobby could be drag racing, or hiking/rock climbing somewhere that requires a 1 hour drive, or even baking cakes. FWIW even cycling and other sports might be more energy hungry if you replace the calories burnt by eating more of stuff that requires a fair bit of energy to produce ( e.g. US corn fed beef).

    From various sources:
    1 pound of beef = 13-15 pounds of CO2 ( http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/environment/2009-04-21-carbon-diet_N.htm [usatoday.com] )
    1 kWh = 2.3 pounds of CO2 ( http://cdiac.ornl.gov/pns/faq.html [ornl.gov] )
    so 1 pound of beef = 5.6-6.5kWh

    So if all that exercise makes you eat an additional half pound of beef (400kcal), that's about the equivalent of running a 300W gaming rig + monitor for 9 to 10 hours.

    In contrast 1 pound of chicken = 1.1 pounds of CO2.

    I've even seen many people here who say they still prefer to use incandescent lighting. It doesn't take that many bulbs to use as much as a gaming rig, even fewer for a facebook/browsing PC/notebook. A single fluorescent tube lamp uses about 40W already.

Solutions are obvious if one only has the optical power to observe them over the horizon. -- K.A. Arsdall

Working...