Question about power consumption in different builds (AMD, Ivy, Haswell)

kuujo

Distinguished
May 19, 2013
13
0
18,510
I have three options, when it comes to power consumtion in my new build. Either go for AMD, Intel Ivy or Intel Haswell.

Looking at prices in my country:
AMD FX-8120 is the cheapest option,
picking Intel 3350p Ivy will require around $50 more,
going for Haswell i5 4570 will take $90 more than AMD build.

I don't really care about the difference in performance. I heard that AMD is more power consuming than Intel, and that Haswell's have some super low power consumption when idle.

I know it is hard to tell, because it depends on where you live, but hypotetically, if you bought Ivy how long would it take to get back the additional $50 you paid by energy saving in your country. Same goes for Ivy vs Haswell option. I just wonder if it is worth it, because if the difference in power consumption is minimal, and for example it will take year or more to start benefiting, then I would just go with cheaper option, since I plan on changing PC in 2-3 years anyway.

I leave my PC running over night most of the time, that is why I got interested in Haswell, but I might be understanding the whole power consumption thing wrong.

Sorry, if the question is stupid.

Thanks!
 

excaliburr

Honorable
Oct 22, 2013
36
0
10,540
AMD cpus do use quite a bit more power on paper, but in practice it's actually not that much more. tek syndicate actually measured the power consumption between an almost identical intel build and amd build. I cant remember the exact specs but for gaming at least 3 hours every single day, AMD will only cost about $10-$15 more per year than the intel, but is offset by the fact that AMD cpus are $30-$50 cheaper than a comparable intel cpu. Even a consistent gamer doesn't game for hours every single day so the difference is probably even less than $10

If you turned off your computer when not in use, and used it for a few hours every day, it would probably take 3-5 years before your intel build actually saves you money in power costs.
 

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator
FX 8320 is a better choice. If you leave your system on 24/7, doing something like Folding @ Home, you you could see some differences on your electric bill. For the average user, the power consumption difference would have a minimal impact. I had an X3210 Kentsfield @ 3.6ghz, I swapped it for a much cooler running E8190 Wolfdale. I saw 0 benefit on my power bill for normal usage.
 

logainofhades

Titan
Moderator


i7's use more power generally than an i5 due to hyperthreading.
 

Gaidax

Distinguished


Probably yes, but not by much if you go study review.

Here is a link with AMD power consumption numbers

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/6

So yeah, it is undeniable that Intel is much more efficient with power, but it's a bit hard to transfer it into dollars, I mean it may look like a hefty difference, but if it ends being like 10$ a year, then that's peanuts anyway, especially since you initially save $$ with AMD purchase.