Yeah that's not true, at least here in the UK it isn't. My normal build will use 500W when gaming, so every couple hours that's £0.40. Every 10 hours is £4. That's just few days of gaming for me, not including all the other computer use, definitely adds up over a month, especially since my bills used to be £100/month now they are £300 a month.

Using your own numbers, if you're spending 200/month more on gaming then that's 500 hours/month or approximately every waking hour. Are you really gaming that much? And even if you are, that's a lot cheaper than practically any other hobby you could spend that much time on.

I never said I spend £200 on gaming? I just said that my bills have increased from 100 a month to 300, but that's due to rising energy costs in the UK, not my gaming habits . It's more that in addition to my bill literally tripling, costs of gaming aren't insignificant for me. It doesn't matter that it's still cheap for the type of entertainment - it adds up. Ever pound spend this way is not a pound spent on something else.

> It's more that in addition to my bill literally tripling, costs of gaming aren't insignificant for me. It doesn't matter that it's still cheap for the type of entertainment - it adds up. Ever pound spend this way is not a pound spent on something else.

Sounds like a route to being penny-wise and pound-foolish. If you cut cheap entertainment you may well end up spending more (because in practice it's very hard to just sit in a room doing nothing), and if your gaming costs are a lot smaller than your energy bills then the cost should be relatively insignificant, almost by definition.

Well the discussion started with saying "why would enthusiasts care about their energy consumption" - so my point isn't that I'm going to cut out entertainment altogether, but for my next GPU I will definitely look at the energy consumption and there is zero chance I'm buying a 500W monster, even if I can afford the energy for it. It's just stupid and wasteful. I might go with a xx60 series instead, just because the TDP will be more reasonable. Or alternatively I might play the same games on my Xbox Series S which provides me with the same entertainment yet uses 1/6th of the energy of my PC when gaming.

Also, considering that the used power becomes heat, it is not such a waste if you already have inefficient electrical heating.

Conversely, it makes summer much worse.

perhaps.. you can easily equalize indoor temperature to outdoors, so if you're not cooling, it makes no difference.

sucks if you run an AC though :)

I don't use AC I think it's terrible to waste energy like that. I can understandan office or hospital, but home?

I'm from southern italy, it's hot, you sweat, you don't need to burn gas, coal or build infrastructure so people waste it to cool their room, this is so entitled and no wonder we're in full climate crisis.

People can't give up on anything really. It gets worse everyday and people's remedy is to make it even worse,. Nonsense.

So yes, it makes things much worse with a hot pc in the room.

24h x 30 days x .5kW x 0.25 CHF/kWh gives me 90 CHF a month to run my PC, assuming it never sleeps.

Have you run the calculation? It's worthwhile configuring suspend for PCs these days. My 3090 never seems to go below 120W, for one thing.

> 24h x 30 days x .5kW

No modern PC should be pulling 500W all the time.

Idle power can be as low as 20-30W depending on the build.

You should also allow it to sleep, of course.

> My 3090 never seems to go below 120W, for one thing.

Something is wrong. A 3090 should only pull about 20 Watts at idle: https://www.servethehome.com/nvidia-geforce-rtx-3090-review-... . You might have some process forcing it into full-speed 3D mode for some reason.

Windows indexing service.

> 500W

500W is a very high average power consumption. And my electricity is 0.13 USD/kWh, which is about half 0.25 CHF/kWh.

True average power is probably below 100W, for a total cost in the realm of 10 CHF or USD per month.

In the USA, for a significant part of the year, chances are you have to add the electricity costs of running your airconditioning to get rid of that heat.

If you’re living in a colder state, you may have to subtract the costs of having lower heating costs.

Sure, although it's not a ton of heat either way and doesn't make a large impact on the net cost.

The lowest contract you can get in italy is 40 cents.

Also, consuming more energy is bad and this rush to apologize lack of innovation in gpu and cpus weve seen in the last decade is ridiculous.

Where does it end? I'm okay with a 5000cc truck because airplanes and cruise ships are much worse?

the last 2-3 generations of cpus and gpus have seen the most innovation, efficiency, and performance gains in a long time.

If you don't want to drive a 5l truck, don't drive one, but 500W is not an average load, and if you have high electricity costs thats a you problem not an everyone else problem.

The largest parts of my electrical bill are distribution and overhead charges that don't change whether I use power or not. The marginal utility of the power vs the cost is quite reasonable.

This is nonsense. The last 2-3 generations of GPUs have seen nothing of the sort in terms of efficiency, the same is also true of many Intel desktop CPUs. The latest Alder Lake desktop parts from Intel have been universally criticized for power draw too.

Each of the last 4 generations of mid to high-end card from Nvidia has required more electricity than the last. By Nvidia's own admission, their future chips will get larger and hotter to some extent due to slow down in moore's law and future process nodes being harder to reach. The die size of the parts has also grown which does not help.

Its not a small trajectory either; 4 years ago the most power hungry consumer part from Nvidia was a 1080ti which would easily draw 250w under load. today that number is now 500w for the current 3090ti, and rumored to be 800-1000 for the 4xxx parts launching end of this year. A GPU often will sit at peak draw for hours at a time in games as they try to push as many FPS as possible.

A current gaming machine with recent components can easily exceed 500w constant load during gameplay, and this figure will rise again with the 4xxx parts.

The ONLY exception to this really is Apple devices, and even then its not clear we can compare an M1/M2 GPU to the fastest parts Nvidia offer.

You and me are seeing very different news if you dont see midrange gpus consumimg 250w under load and cpus getting over 100.

The performance gains are non existent and largely driven by bigger and bigger chips on smaller nodes.

There is no innovation in gpu and x86 cpus space since a long time, that happens only on arm nowadays.

>5000cc truck because airplanes and cruise ships are much worse

Oh boy, you should visit USA sometime. A 5 liter truck is the small one.

The fuck are those calculations ? Are you trying to mislead people on purpose?

Who is running their computer at 500W 24/7 ?

500W 24/7 consumption? What do you do? Train ML non-stop?

Your example is in now representative of reality.

I use suspend on my PC and I definitely do not run it 24h, or anywhere close to that. Also power is $0.08/kWh where I live.

That's insanely cheap power, use it while you can. I'm paying £0.40/kWh, so about 46 cents per kWh.

Really?

My power is some of the cheapest in the country and we pay ~13 cents/kWh. It's a little misleading though since my bill breaks out generation and distribution costs into separate line items. They are both billed per kWH though and add up to 13 cents.

Yes. We have a fixed basic connection charge of $20. So it's really close to your $0.13/kWh when that is taken into account.

I wasn't trying to be misleading though because the point is the basic charge does not increase with usage. So for each additional kWh we add to that it's only $0.089/kWh.

No, that's fair. I have an additional basic charge too. Congrats on the cheap power.

And double that number if you're in the UK.