Mac gaming is the way to go due to energy efficiency

[Colstan]

Gamers use a tiny, tiny percentage of that. Going after gamers for "using too much energy" is like trying to address a tsunami with a bunch of buckets by hand. It's not practical and it's not the kind of solution that would make any real difference in the end.

I wish I had access to the statistics, but an electrician ran the numbers for how much energy the average gaming PC uses. Even with heavy use, it was negligible both for the amount we pay for electricity over a year, as well as on the power grid. Things like air conditioning, central heating, municipal lighting, and industrial uses have a far greater impact on energy consumption.

So, we don't need to fret about how much energy our computers use concerning the electric grid, climate issues, or yearly costs. The biggest impact is from heat output. I just replaced my Mac mini with a Mac Pro, and it heats up my office like a space heater when working hard.

 

[Homy]

That's 817,546 households out of hundreds of millions of households in the US, or less than 1% out of household energy usage alone. And household/consumer usage doesn't even count for the majority of energy consumption to begin with: Industry uses about 70% of the world's energy worldwide.

Gamers use a tiny, tiny percentage of that. Going after gamers for "using too much energy" is like trying to address a tsunami with a bunch of buckets by hand. It's not practical and it's not the kind of solution that would make any real difference in the end.

I wish I had access to the statistics, but an electrician ran the numbers for how much energy the average gaming PC uses. Even with heavy use, it was negligible both for the amount we pay for electricity over a year, as well as on the power grid. Things like air conditioning, central heating, municipal lighting, and industrial uses have a far greater impact on energy consumption.

So, we don't need to fret about how much energy our computers use concerning the electric grid, climate issues, or yearly costs. The biggest impact is from heat output. I just replaced my Mac mini with a Mac Pro, and it heats up my office like a space heater when working hard.

Well, one argument doesn't automatically overrule another. Nobody here is talking about solving the entire energy and climate crisis with only more power efficient gaming rigs so you are missing the point. I just gave you some small examples of economical and energy savings on a larger scale that shouldn't be ignored just because there are larger problems.

Do your arguments mean the computer industry shouldn't move towards power efficiency and the users/gamers should ignore the problem and build monstrous rigs just because it doesn't matter on a personal level? The answer is simply no. That's actually one of the first problems when talking about larger issues in the world. Many think that nothing they do individually will make a difference, whether it's about politics or environmental issues. An ant alone can't do much but an entire colony can take down the toughest enemies. Two wrongs don't make a right.

 

[ArkSingularity]

Well, one argument doesn't automatically overrule another. Nobody here is talking about solving the entire energy and climate crisis with only more power efficient gaming rigs so you are missing the point. I just gave you some small examples of economical and energy savings on a larger scale that shouldn't be ignored just because there are larger problems.

Do your arguments mean the computer industry shouldn't move towards power efficiency and the users/gamers should ignore the problem and build monstrous rigs just because it doesn't matter on a personal level? The answer is simply no. That's actually one of the first problems when talking about larger issues in the world. Many think that nothing they do individually will make a difference, whether it's about politics or environmental issues. An ant alone can't do much but an entire colony can take down the toughest enemies. Two wrongs don't make a right.

You are trying to make gamers sound like they are causing massive harm to the planet, then when the numbers show
that gamers use only a tiny, tiny fraction of worldwide energy (bitcoin has caused substantially more), you are flipping the script and saying "Well, two wrongs don't make a right, gamers still need to use less energy"

Many of those gamers are using older, less efficient GPUs because the GPU market has been in massive turmoil with substantial price inflation. Would you rather people throw out those GPUs and purchase very expensive systems, throwing out those old GPUs in the trash? Does everyone have $2,000 ready to spend in their bank accounts for top-of-the-line ultra efficient hardware? Are you willing to personally lend to a fund that donates to kids, gamers, and hobbyists so that they can get more environmentally efficient GPUs to save the planet?

The industry IS moving towards higher efficiency systems, but those systems are expensive and take time to penetrate the market. People don't just jump up and replace things the moment that something better comes up on the scene, not everyone has the luxury of being able to afford to buy the newest thing every time it comes out.

 

[Homy]

You are trying to make gamers sound like they are causing massive harm to the planet, then when the numbers show
that gamers use only a tiny, tiny fraction of worldwide energy (bitcoin has caused substantially more), you are flipping the script and saying "Well, two wrongs don't make a right, gamers still need to use less energy"

Many of those gamers are using older, less efficient GPUs because the GPU market has been in massive turmoil with substantial price inflation. Would you rather people throw out those GPUs and purchase very expensive systems, throwing out those old GPUs in the trash? Does everyone have $2,000 ready to spend in their bank accounts for top-of-the-line ultra efficient hardware? Are you willing to personally lend to a fund that donates to kids, gamers, and hobbyists so that they can get more environmentally efficient GPUs to save the planet?

The industry IS moving towards higher efficiency systems, but those systems are expensive and take time to penetrate the market. People don't just jump up and replace things the moment that something better comes up on the scene, not everyone has the luxury of being able to afford to buy the newest thing every time it comes out.

I'm just pointing to numbers and facts. The rest is your interpretation. The simple fact is that using less energy is better than more, no matter what, and yes two wrongs still don't make a right, no matter how tiny or big your wrongs are.

Don't know where you got the rest about me suggesting people should throw their stuff in the trash and spend thousands of dollars on new tech. That could actually be more harmful since producing new tech uses lots of resources. People should use their your old stuff as long as they can if it suits their needs and upgrade only when necessary but when buying new think an extra time if they need all that power. I don't know about the industry moving towards more efficient systems. As we've seen with all the new Intel and Nvidia tech they keep cranking up the power usage making those "poor" people upgrading their power supplies, coolings and other components.

 

[Homy]

One positive news is that Google is shutting down Stadia and its gaming servers so now we can worry less about the energy consumption.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I can confidently say that "energy efficiency" has never been on my radar of concerns when thinking about "gaming"

 

[Colstan]

Well, one argument doesn't automatically overrule another. Nobody here is talking about solving the entire energy and climate crisis with only more power efficient gaming rigs so you are missing the point. I just gave you some small examples of economical and energy savings on a larger scale that shouldn't be ignored just because there are larger problems.

I can't speak for others, but I never said that your arguments are invalid. I was just putting forth what I heard from an electrician who ran the numbers, and I don't think gamers should feel guilty about using energy for their entertainment purposes.

Do your arguments mean the computer industry shouldn't move towards power efficiency and the users/gamers should ignore the problem and build monstrous rigs just because it doesn't matter on a personal level?

No, of course not, and I never said so. I want more power efficienct computers for one simple reason: heat generation. I'm sick of running the air conditioner when I've got a personal space heater right next to me. I also hate that my Mac Pro has no less than seven fans inside it. (Four for the case, three for the GPU.) Noise is a bugbear that I'm constantly wrangling with.

I honestly don't care about the other problems, because they aren't an immediate concern in my life. What does matter to me is all the damn heat and noise that modern machines produce. That's why this Mac Pro is probably going to be my last x86 computer, because Apple generally cares about quality of life issues, and Apple Silicon requires less wattage, therefore less heat and noise. That's something tangible that I can easily latch onto, just like anyone else who owns a high-performance computer can attest to, such as gaming PCs.

 

[mi7chy]

One positive news is that Google is shutting down Stadia and its gaming servers so now we can worry less about the energy consumption.

That's a con for Mac only users that rely on Stadia for AAA gaming.

If people care that much about energy saving they can get a Raspberry Pi 400 keyboard PC for $70 that uses like 7W max, has Vulkan support and plays Mac type games.

 

[dimme]

Where I live electricity cost are thought the roof, I'm not a big gamer except for flight simulators, also I have a home lab that I do some tinkering with. I have replaced my large server with raspberry pi's and intel nuc's. I also produce my own power with solar panels (although tied to the grid) Getting rid of the power hungry server made a difference in my home usage.

I think the energy efficiently of Apple silicon is the way forward. Intel and AMD will follow eventually. I think in a few years power hungry gaming rigs with their circus lighting will be a thing of the past, replaced with a smaller more energy efficient design, but also more powerful than todays offerings.

 

[diamond.g]

I think in a few years power hungry gaming rigs with their circus lighting will be a thing of the past, replaced with a smaller more energy efficient design, but also more powerful than todays offerings.

Home consoles fit that usage (sorta) now. For PC's to go the large APU route OEMs will need to be convinced. Otherwise we are going to be stuck with what we have now I guess (at least on the PC side, Apple isn't going to go back).

 

[Zest28]

Using Nvidia and Intel hardware seems like a crime in this moment

Mac's are too expensive and there are hardly any games on the Mac.

Meanwhile, a $499 Xbox Series X is faster than a M1 Max. And the full system consumes 160W - 200W which is not that bad.

 

[ericwn]

Don't worry though, at least there will be fewer chargers that end up in the landfill. Now you just have to buy a separate charger when you buy a phone, and that charger will even come with its own packaging that creates even more waste than before. 😂

In the unlikely event one has only one usb-c based Charger around, but then plenty people would get a multiport charger or reuse their existing ones and be done with the topic. 😂

 

[mi7chy]

Not much available so have been playing retro PC native AS ports like Duke Nukem 3D, Quake maps, etc. on M1 Macbook Air. Frame rate, smoothness and experience aren't as good as $400 windows laptop with older AMD 4650U APU that has similar efficiency.

M1 Macbook Air (Duke Nukem 3D 35.7 fps)

AMD 4650U ~5.5W (Duke Nukem 3D 96.4 fps)

M1 Macbook Air (feels lower than 107 fps)

AMD 4650U (473 fps at ~14W)

 

[Huntn]

Using Nvidia and Intel hardware seems like a crime in this moment

If your number one priority is computer energy efficiency and you don’t mind being straight jacketed with a lack of titles, then I’d agree.

 

[Flint Ironstag]

Discussion is fine and dandy, but all this concern is misplaced. As usual, follow the money to discover why energy is STILL so expensive (should be free!) in "developed" nations. It's beyond disgrace.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

This thread is such bait it's not even funny it's just sad

 

[dimme]

I'm not a big gamer but I do enjoy flight simulators. Running X plane on my M1 Mac I get great performance and the computer just sips electricity. We produce our own vis Solar Panels.

 

[Bento.Box]

Yeah, many people seem to be missing the bigger picture. They only look at their personal usage and say they can afford it, it's worth it or they're not going to use maximum TDP. The CPUs and GPUs still use much more power than Apple Silicon even during normal usage. What happens when hundreds of thousands or millions buy and use these power hungry systems?

Even with half the TDP, 600W, gaming 4 hours a day in a month would consume 72 kWh costing $36 or $438 a year for just CPU/GPU for ONE person. 10 million people would use 8 760 million kWh yearly costing $4 380 million a year.

In the US the average annual electricity consumption is 10 715 kWh. The electricity consumption of the gaming people above would be equivalent to 817 546 households. It takes around 1460 onshore wind turbines to produce the energy, or 3.5 nuclear power plants on average every year. Think big, think different!

That's allright. I don't have a BEV to charge everyday nor have I kids that generate an effton of CO2 down the road.
So I can afford my 2 KW PSU in my desktop .

I'm certainly not sacrificing my quality of life because other people around the globe can't keep it in their pants.