View Single Post
chas_m

 
chas_m's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jan 22, 2010
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 17,586
chas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond reputechas_m has a reputation beyond repute
Mac Specs: Mid-2012 MBP (16GB, 1TB HD), BenQ second monitor, iPhone 5s 32GB, iPad Air 2 64GB

chas_m is offline
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newbie2mac View Post
Well, maybe we're "splitting hairs" here?
No, we're not "splitting hairs." You misread.

"Maximum" is a word that actually has a meaning.

Quote:
Isn't that true or am I missing something (which isn't hard to do).
Again, you're missing something. That something is "maximum."

To achieve a use of 241W/hour, you would have to have the monitor on at full brightness, doing something like playing a complex 3D game, running the GPU and CPU at 100% all cores, plus spinning the optical drive, plus typing and mousing continuously, plus having bluetooth and internet active and functioning. For an hour. IOW, you would have to be maxing out every part of the Mac's functionality continuously.

Do you find yourself doing that on a routine basis? No? Then the 241W/hour idea isn't accurate and doesn't apply.

Quote:
If that's the case, wonder what would the "average" usage amount to in wattage per hour?
Apple doesn't supply that information and I wouldn't like to speculate (because it depends on a LOT of factors, starting with screen brightness), but there's a device called a Kill-A-Watt that you can buy and use to measure this.

You still haven't explained a) why this is important and b) why you feel it is high in comparison to any equivalent machine. As previously explained, LED-backlit screens use less power than flourescent-backlit LCDs, which it turn use a lot less power than CRTs. Likewise, chip manufacturers (particularly Intel) have been continuously working on reducing the power draw of their processors even while making them more powerful, meaning a computer from just a few years ago that was less powerful, didn't have all the additional features today's computers have (such as powered ports, Bluetooth and wireless cards by default, fast hard drives, faster optical drives, etc etc) drew a max combined of anywhere from 250-400W/hour.

But the key thing to understand is that when one says "max" that's exactly what one means -- a rarely-achieved state of full exploitation of all power-drawing resources. Even older computers typically draw much less than their max power consumption -- anywhere from around 60W to their upper "max" limitations. If you're word processing on a dim screen, you're using a HECK of a lot less power than if you're playing CRYSIS on a max-brightness screen.

So, in short, the iMac does *not* draw 240W/hour, which is what you claimed, in typical use.

Had you actually read the link I provided, you would have learned that Apple takes LOTS of steps to minimize electrical use when the computer is "idling," which is what it is actually doing most of the time one uses it. This is why Greenpeace and the government have both given the machine high marks.

Quote:
Especially, since the iMac is an all-in-one and not with a separate tower, how often does one turn off the monitor but keep the computer on anyway? Just asking ...
It's called "display sleep" and most of us have it available all the time. Since the bulk of what a computer does is wait for input from the user, one can set the screen to go blank after a certain number of minutes of inactivity. The exact amount can be adjusted (if one is a slow reader for example, one might set it to a longer time). Adjusting the brightness also has a dramatic effect on how much power the screen uses (and again, the screen is the major culprit of energy use). This is precisely why devices that are dependent on battery, such as notebooks and the iPhone (et al) have such quick "dim the screen" and "go to black" timings.
QUOTE Thanks