PS3 uses five times more energy than a fridge
That's just not cool
AUSSIE CONSUMER GROUP Choice, claims that consoles such as Sony's Playstation 3 chew up five times more energy than a fridge.
Apparently a fridge will go through $50 worth of electricity a year while a PS3 will cost $250 a year even if it is not used.
Vole's XBox did not use quite so much juice but came second behind the Sony. The PS3 used ten times more power than the Nintendo Wii.
The report said that the Apple iMac with a built-in display, consumes just two-thirds of the energy consumed by a traditional PC and that LCD monitors were more energy efficient than the CRT versions. µ
L'Inq
Intology
Comments
PS3 = 120W (40GB version)
My PS3 uses 120W so yes it would be stupid to leave it on 24/7 (certainly for folding@home), it is a small powerful PC what did you think?Ok people.
Got to stop folding those proteins with the PS3 or we'll melt the ice caps and lose those polar bears forever.Inconsistent...
They compared a 17" CRT to a 19" LCD... minor nitpick :)The iMac result isn't really surprising. On-board chipsets usually consume less power than dedicated boards.
I'm really disgusted with the idle power states of the consoles. If it's not playing a game, does the console need 90% of the power? I doubt it. What stupid power management.
What Model
Was they testing exactly the current 40GB models have the 65nm CELL and 90nm RSX. The up coming 80GB models are supposedly having the same 65nm CELL but the new 65nm RSX chip.And any new console will have these 2 die sizes from now on that was the plan from Sony. And I read that the RSX and CELL where getting a die shrink Toshiba & IBM stated this for CELL and nVidia said RSX was getting it too. Then later in the year or next there getting both another shrink to 45nm.
65nm CELL Shrink
http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=23092
IBM confirm CELL Shrink
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080207-ibm-shrinks-cell-to-45nm-cheaper-ps3s-will-follow.html
LCD monitors are not alway more efficient
Sure, they are - if you compare like with like size - but not if you compare resolution.However, CRTs top out at 21/22" (20" visible) apart from oddballs like the 16:9 24" Sony GDMW900.
The trend in TFT size is upwards, and at 24" or greater the power consumption is equal or higher to a 22" CRT... Resolution wise, a 24" TFT is required to match a decent 22" CRT
BS.
The current 40GB PS3 consumes far less power than a 360.Here is the original 60GB PS3 (with 90nm Cell), compared to the 360 (90nm too)
http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-356-2.htm
These are actual power consumption readings.
The first link also shows the PS3 consumes 1.9w in standby, and the 360 consumes 2.5w in standby. So it looks
the 40GB PS3 drops the power consumption to 135w
http://www.engadget.com/2007/10/30/40gb-ps3-features-65nm-chips-lower-power-consumption
(360 is still 90nm, so unchanged).
Lastly, "while a PS3 will cost $250 a year even if it is not used." is also clearly untrue.
http://www.choice.com.au/files/f132983.jpg
The chart clearly shows it costs AU$2.33 if you leave it switched on, but in standyby.
Please sort out your totally incorrect article..
Ludicrous
This makes no sense on the intuitive level. It has to be viewed as part of the global warming/do-not-use-energy disinformation campaign.Someone with solid knowledge of power measurements will rip this to pieces.
Some organisations in Australia have gone overboard with global warming. For your amusement, take this quiz on the ABC australian national TV network:
http://www.abc.net.au/science/planetslayer/greenhouse_calc.htm
What next? Logan's Run? Soylent Green?
what?!
Whether you're talking about a mini-fridge or a full-size unit, there's no way a PS3 could draw as much amperage as the compressor, I don't see any hard proof, I only see terrible math.WAIT, I get it, they used a pseudo refrigerator with a thermoelectric chip! *sigh*
The only thing they got right was that it draws 10x as much as the Wii.
Bending the truth
Check out this article for a power consumption fight off between a Wii, PS3, PC and Xbox.http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-356-1.htm
Show me the fridge that consumes less than 2 Watts. Unless they mean the fridge is more efficient than the PS3 if you don't use either.
Turn it off
"Apparently a fridge will go through $50 worth of electricity a year while a PS3 will cost $250 a year even if it is not used."Yes, but it won't use that much power if it is not turned on.
sucky sucky
aussie has a pointmay be, however, i believe a pc gaming rig with any kind of SLi/Crossfire will suck more juice than a ps3.
WHY?
you will not turn on your PS3 24/7, nor using your PS3 on bit torrent for porno when you go to sleep.
obviously we do notice the PS3 uses the same power cable like monitor/psu.
the problem is on the GPU, graphzilla needs to work it out.
Only if you leave it idle..
That table is so incredibly misleading though, seriously.. who leaves their PS3 on doing nothing?, it's either gonna be in standby (or turned off) OR you'll be using it to play games. Same goes for the 360.Showing the "idle" cost of $250 is rubbish.
hmmm
A PS3 is also five times more exciting than a fridge. Except perhaps when you are reaching for another cold beer.Joking aside, that is a lot of electric if it really does use that much even when not used.
We all know that we should switch off at the mains and unplug everything, but surely energy saving should start with the manufacturer!
Holy Crud, Sony!
That's embarrassing for Sony, and the nintendo Wii has gone a long way in a short time. Well done. This shows how Nintendo have been around LONGER and know what makes a game FUN without getting "dirty".You can find lots of fun games that wont charge extra electricity costs at www.orkgames.com - yeh, I found this site and more on the web but this one is new and it looks fun. I've been playing a couple of the newer games and they are totally FUN! (and free.. can't beat that!)
Duh.
"LCD monitors were more energy efficient than the CRT versions."And this just in: scientists believe that water may actually be wet.
But who does that?
Who leaves their Playstation, wii, or anything turned on for a year and unused? Is it a PS3 thang to just turn the system on and not play it?Greenish Yellow Journalism
Was the author a PS3 hater, or just didn't check his facts? Maybe slanted the facts to make a better headline? Sounds like greenie sensationalism to me.From the numbers, it looks like the author compared the newest most efficient refrigerator to the oldest most inefficient PS3. How many of you have a brand new frig?
If you take an average PS3, and an average frig of the same size, the electricity usage is more like 1.5 to 1, SP3 to Frig. If you want some real appliance numbers, check out the US Department of Energy End-Use Summary, and do your own realistic comparisons. Or just break out your Kill-A-Watt again.
Who cares!
Get a life! Who cares how much energy it suck, if you really enjoy PS3, energy bill is not the issue!Except..
A modern PC uses several times the power the PS3 uses so I don't see the issue..PS3 Energy Consumptiom
We measured the PS3 for our energy saving blog, you can see the full results here.http://howtosaveenergy.blogspot.com/2008/11/how-much-energy-does-sony-ps3-use.html