Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Pc vs console war - electricity bill killed the pc

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
October 8, 2009 4:51:11 PM

first to state that pc games will never die on console BECAUSE no console can pirate itself, YOU NEED A PC TO PIRATE A CONSOLE GAME and that is for sure!!!!! if only that g*d* pc did not need 1000w like a vacum cleaner to operate, i intend to heat myself at winter near some hi end sli combo and a dozen of cores with plenty of noisy fans, coooooooozy. and my case can keep my coffee and lunch hot all day too, uuuuuuuuu.
October 8, 2009 6:11:27 PM

3 points:
First of all most PC gamers are not running 1000w PSUs. Personally I have three gaming PCs. One running a 450w (8800GTS G92), another with a 500w (4870) and my laptop with a 9800. Once again we have somebody trying to take the extreme of what some high end PCs have - 1000w PSUs in this case - and try and paint that as what is required or even normal.

Second point - Pirating console games via a PC does not require additional power. The cheapest PC on the market today with the smallest power supply can easily be used for pirating console games. Unless you think ALL PCs are going away then there is no reason to think people won't be able to pirate console games using a PC.

Third point - PC power consumption, at least in terms of what's needed for graphics cards, is likely to go down over time as more is integrated into CPUs and other advances. Also the power consumption of a PC + monitor is not going to be much more and possibly even less than a console + TV during actual use. The key is the age old question of whether you leave your PC on at all times or turn off/use power saving features. If you're really concerned about power consumption turn your computer off when not using it the same as you would for a console. It's not rocket science.
Related resources
October 9, 2009 3:04:15 AM

Even if someone has a 1000W PSU, it doesn't mean that they are drawing the full 1000W and actually it is opposite of what you think. A 1000W PSU could be more efficient to run than say maxing out a 500W PSU for example. At 100% load, a PSU efficiency drops quite a bit.
Anonymous
October 9, 2009 10:20:55 AM

you are right we do not need 1000w today as we did not had the need for 600w at 2006 , it is a mater of time though,
October 9, 2009 11:05:26 AM

""" electricity bill killed the pc"""
i dont think so :non:  my bill per month is about $75.00 i dont know how it compares to you yanks but i run my pc 12-16 hours a day and my 42" plasma :D 
October 9, 2009 11:12:47 AM

Firstly - http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-356-2.htm

Secondly - there are more powerful, but less power draw, PC componants these days (look at the new 5770 for example) that would walk all over the console. Easy to make a sub 200w gaming PC that will play any game on the market.
October 9, 2009 1:37:11 PM

The old PS3 uses about ~340Watts so when you think about it my high end gaming PC that the power meter said was only drawing 410Watts when playing Crysis while being 2 or 3 times more powerful than these consoles aint too bad.
October 9, 2009 3:00:23 PM

Quote:
you are right we do not need 1000w today as we did not had the need for 600w at 2006 , it is a mater of time though,


If anything GPU power requirements will go down over time as they become more efficient - similar to what has happened to CPUs. Right now GPUs are where CPUs were 10 years ago where the push for increased performance was outweighing efficiency. Sooner rather than later GPUs are going to hit a wall where they can't just simply get better by shear power. Efficiency will become key like it did for CPUs a few years ago and power requirements will go down. Of course eventually the entire GPU will be integrated into the CPU/Chipset and this will all be irrelevant.
October 9, 2009 5:40:46 PM

purplerat said:
If anything GPU power requirements will go down over time as they become more efficient - similar to what has happened to CPUs. Right now GPUs are where CPUs were 10 years ago where the push for increased performance was outweighing efficiency. Sooner rather than later GPUs are going to hit a wall where they can't just simply get better by shear power. Efficiency will become key like it did for CPUs a few years ago and power requirements will go down. Of course eventually the entire GPU will be integrated into the CPU/Chipset and this will all be irrelevant.



Please tell me where you get your hair brained ideas from ?. Ok we did need to increase PSU power rating - but since then Intel / AMD / Nvidia / ATI have all moved their manufacturing process to smaller more power efficient processes - and along with that comes power savings.

Intel are moving over to 32nm in the near future.... saving more power without reducing any performance....

since i7 came on the scene with the need to use lower powered RAM modules...

again where do you get your ideas ?
October 9, 2009 5:48:28 PM

ulysses35 said:
Please tell me where you get your hair brained ideas from ?. Ok we did need to increase PSU power rating - but since then Intel / AMD / Nvidia / ATI have all moved their manufacturing process to smaller more power efficient processes - and along with that comes power savings.

Intel are moving over to 32nm in the near future.... saving more power without reducing any performance....

since i7 came on the scene with the need to use lower powered RAM modules...

again where do you get your ideas ?

Um, I hope you're not saying my ideas are hair brained, as your quoting seems to imply. I'm pretty sure we're saying the same thing.
October 10, 2009 2:33:30 AM

What does a PS3 + TV draw exactly? Anyone have a kill a watt? We should put some numbers to this. It would be interesting to see what a console and tv draws compared to an average gaming rig.
October 10, 2009 9:44:15 AM

SpinachEater said:
What does a PS3 + TV draw exactly? Anyone have a kill a watt? We should put some numbers to this. It would be interesting to see what a console and tv draws compared to an average gaming rig.


I posted a link above - PS3 is about 200W
October 10, 2009 12:05:29 PM

i have a core 2 duo e7300 @ 3.6ghz with 4gb ram, 500gb hdd and a ati 3850 512mb overclocked. It can always beat console graphics.

My killawatt says under load it uses 130 watts max with furmark and prime 95 running, and in real games its about 110 watts.

And if i upgrade to a 4770 ill get twice the graphical power and power consumption will drop by 20-30 watts.

Also my PC is connected to a 32 inch tv and that consumes 70 watts
October 10, 2009 4:13:56 PM

yeah well at least we aren't forced to use what every cheap components are used in consoles. 512mb of ram.. seriously?
November 17, 2009 2:22:44 AM

sirkillalot said:
""" electricity bill killed the pc"""
i dont think so :non:  my bill per month is about $75.00 i dont know how it compares to you yanks but i run my pc 12-16 hours a day and my 42" plasma :D 


yeah, well my wife's computer runs 24/7 and crunches BOINC after 3minutes of idle on her quadcore i7 920, and my same spec computer runs from when I get home at 5pm till mid-night when I go to bed and 24/7 on the weekend with BOINC kicking in after 1minute of idle. T.V. runs 24/7, I have electric heating, electric stove, electric water heater and my electric bill is $40 during the summer with AC and $50 right now with it being 20-40 degrees. about $0.08/KWH over here.

Nice thing about electric heating is it makes no diff if i run a heater or leave my computer on. Either way I only pay for heat generated.
November 17, 2009 3:46:02 AM

I don't get the hate on consoles. Not everyone has the knowhow or budget for a gaming PC. Don't try to claim you can build a more powerful PC for cheaper, there is no way one could build a complete PC for less than 300, that has a BD drive and built in wireless, unless used, in which case, your budget is now 200, the price of a used non-ps2-bc PS3 in my parts.

All gamers should have access to games. That you can have a PS3 and run games like Uncharted 2, KZZ2 or MGS4, is a truly awesome thing for gamers on a budget, or without the time or knowledge to build their own gaming PC. Get off your elitist soapboxes, geez.
November 17, 2009 12:48:16 PM

JofaMang said:
I don't get the hate on consoles. Not everyone has the knowhow or budget for a gaming PC. Don't try to claim you can build a more powerful PC for cheaper, there is no way one could build a complete PC for less than 300, that has a BD drive and built in wireless, unless used, in which case, your budget is now 200, the price of a used non-ps2-bc PS3 in my parts.

All gamers should have access to games. That you can have a PS3 and run games like Uncharted 2, KZZ2 or MGS4, is a truly awesome thing for gamers on a budget, or without the time or knowledge to build their own gaming PC. Get off your elitist soapboxes, geez.


A lot of the resentment comes from the dumbing down of games to fit consoles and console gamers. You'd have to be blind not to see we PC gamers would be upset over the consolization of gaming. Just look at a title like MW2 which has tons of potential but has been near ruined for PC gamers because the developers dumbed the game down.

Also I need to correct you on your pricing analysis of a gaming PC verse a console. It's a misrepresentation to compare the baseline cost of a PC to a console (i.e. $300 PC vs $300 console). That's because most people are going to own a PC anyways regardless of gaming so the $300 needs only be applied to gaming specific hardware which is very reasonable. By today's standards all but the very cheapest desktops are just a couple of inexpensive upgrades away from playing games reasonably well.
November 17, 2009 12:59:31 PM

You still have to pay for the original desktop. You can't make a comparison between brand new hardware, and free used parts in a comparitive build. You are biasing the arguement to suit your needs. A used desktop will have cost FAR more in original purchase price compared to similar performing new equipment (nature of the evolution of hardware and pricing to suit the market). Either way, it is still a slanted stance to take.

As for games like MW2, blame the developers, not the consoles. If it wasn't for console game sales, the PC game market would not have a lot of money behind it. There are few PC only titles that do well enough to move a company up in the gaming world. There are MANY MANY PC titles to chose from that exist just because they are multi-platform.

If PC gamers were enough of a market force to keep the PC gaming "elite" it would be. But PC gamers do not spend enough on games to allow this. You should be thanking the console gamers for supporting your gaming, not condemning them for "dumbing it down".

PC gaming is in the state it is because of the escalating elitism amongst the power users, that leave average joes with realistic budgets with no choice but to buy a console if they want quality gaming. Your average person does NOT know how to swap out videocards, CPUs, Ram, or PSUs. Not that it is hard, but anything that is an unknown is daunting. So you take that average person's needs, compare to their means, and a simple thing (to you and me) can cost a lot more than just the price of parts, due to the labor they have to pay for on installation, as well as the inflated shop prices they think they have no choice but to pay. Not everyone had a friend or a relative that can make these distinctions for them.

To blame it all on console gamers is shortsighted and ignorant. There has been so much more at play in the past decade than just consoles. I believe it is called Capitalism. A market that can be fiscally capitalized upon, always will be. Money is like water, it flows in the path of least resistance.
November 17, 2009 2:08:44 PM

JofaMang said:
You still have to pay for the original desktop. You can't make a comparison between brand new hardware, and free used parts in a comparitive build.


The cost of the original desktop is negligible because it was money spent regardless of gaming needs. The same can be said for the TV used for a console. If you add in the total cost of hardware used in gaming many console users are spending a lot more money because they are playing on TVs which cost thousands of dollars. But to be fair I wouldn't factor that into price analysis because people are going to own the TV they own anyways regardless of gaming. The same goes for the base components of a PC (CPU, RAM, HDD, etc).

Quote:
You are biasing the arguement to suit your needs. A used desktop will have cost FAR more in original purchase price compared to similar performing new equipment (nature of the evolution of hardware and pricing to suit the market). Either way, it is still a slanted stance to take.


Uh, who is biasing the argument to suit their needs? You are comparing 2009 console prices with the hardware cost of a used PC bought several years ago yet you seem to glaze right over the cost of a console a couple of years ago. I was sticking to current prices ($300 console vs $300 PC gaming hardware). But if you want to jump back to what things cost a couple of years ago then we are talking $400-$600 in the comparison range. When the PS3 (the console you chose to use in the comparison) came out you could have bought a ready built gaming desktop for the same total cost. Remember that for a lot of people playing these consoles they didn't buy them at the 2009 discounted price.


As for the rest of your post I don't blame console gamers for the dumbing down of games and I'm glad there are more people playing games and gaming is more accessible. If preferring a higher quality of games makes me an elitist then so be it. What I don't like is people furthering the myths that such higher quality is only achievable through higher costs and extensive user knowledge. It's a cop out for gaming companies to get away with not having to put out stronger products because "it will cost you too much" or "you aren't smart enough to be able to understand it". The fact that consumers actually go along with that and start threads like "electricity bill killed the pc" does get under my skin.
November 17, 2009 2:26:27 PM

Ok, upgrade a 5 year old desktop with 200 dollars, and surpass the performance of a used PS3 for the same price (though I am cutting you a break, since they can be had for as low as 150). It is still not going to happen. I might have agreed with you at launch, that you MAY be able to surpass the performance for the same price, hell, if you want to set up the perfect scenario, give yourself $1000 dollars, since that is how much many of them went for at launch over Ebay. TBH I am not interested in polar arguements constructed in a vaccuum.

You are ignoring REALISTIC variables: The tech knowledge, budget, time and preference of the consumer. The consoles have exclusives, they are dead simple to get running, and require absolutely no tech knowledge to enjoy. This is the REAL consumer. The average gamer does not come to sites like this. You are building an arguement for a tiny demographic of people, to suit your own bias. At least I am recognizing that I am not the centre of the universe, and accounting for these variables. You are not being anything resemebling fair.

I am done with this discussion. You can breed your own resentment with some other schmoe stupid enough to take the bait.
November 17, 2009 2:47:02 PM

JofaMang said:
Ok, upgrade a 5 year old desktop with 200 dollars, and surpass the performance of a used PS3 for the same price (though I am cutting you a break, since they can be had for as low as 150). It is still not going to happen. I might have agreed with you at launch, that you MAY be able to surpass the performance for the same price, hell, if you want to set up the perfect scenario, give yourself $1000 dollars, since that is how much many of them went for at launch over Ebay. TBH I am not interested in polar arguements constructed in a vaccuum.

You are ignoring REALISTIC variables: The tech knowledge, budget, time and preference of the consumer. The consoles have exclusives, they are dead simple to get running, and require absolutely no tech knowledge to enjoy. This is the REAL consumer. The average gamer does not come to sites like this. You are building an arguement for a tiny demographic of people, to suit your own bias. At least I am recognizing that I am not the centre of the universe, and accounting for these variables. You are not being anything resemebling fair.

I am done with this discussion. You can breed your own resentment with some other schmoe stupid enough to take the bait.


Way to lay out an obvious lie and then bow out of the conversation. Why would I compare upgrading a 5 year old desktop to a PS3 which came out 3 years ago? What a great example of the lies and myths people spread about PC gaming. A 3 year old PC - which is the same date for a PS3 - could easily be upgraded for less than $200 to be gaming capable but you chose to push the date back two years. Obviously you're only intent is to lie and deceive and how convenient that you are now not going to respond when called on your obvious BS.

I'm not trying to convince any body who doesn't play games on a PC to do so. But when people simply lie and spread untruths about PC gaming I'm going to call them out on it. The only bias of my argument is towards what's true. Just look at the ridiculous topic of this thread. This is the type of crap that gets me going and yes I'm going to call people out on it because there are people out there who are interested in PC gaming and are looking for info. I'd hate to think somebody new to or considering PC gaming would give up on it because they think their electricity bill is going to go up.
November 17, 2009 2:56:10 PM

I done with this converstation, because you are ignoring reality in favour of supporting your own arrogance. I am a gamer through and through, and would never claim that a console gives a better graphical experience than a well built PC. I am not the one idiotically blaming console gamers for the problems capitalism has brought (and ALWAYS brings when the market discovers an untapped fiscal resource).

On top of that, you change the conditions to suit your arguement. First you said any old PC lying around, and when I suggested you have to include the original purchase price of the PC being upgraded, you refused. A 5 year old PC NOW (or two years old when the PS3 launched) is a much easier cost comparison, than a brand new build when the PS3 launched. I am the one recognising realistic variables, you are the one dodging them. I even dropped the insistance of a BD drive and WiFi, both features included in the price of the PS3, I shouldn't be so nice to someone so obtuse.

I insist that comparisons between consoles and PCs must be fair, on equal footing, not slanted to prop up your elitism. You do not. Therefore, there is no reason for me to be continue feeding your delusions. It is productive for neither of us.
November 17, 2009 3:09:34 PM

JofaMang said:
I done with this converstation, because you are ignoring reality in favour of supporting your own arrogance. I am a gamer through and through, and would never claim that a console gives a better graphical experience than a well built PC. I am not the one idiotically blaming console gamers for the problems capitalism has brought (and ALWAYS brings when the market discovers an untapped fiscal resource).

On top of that, you change the conditions to suit your arguement. First you said any old PC lying around, and when I suggested you have to include the original purchase price of the PC being upgraded, you refused. A 5 year old PC NOW (or two years old when the PS3 launched) is a much easier cost comparison, than a brand new build when the PS3 launched. I am the one recognising realistic variables, you are the one dodging them.

I insist that comparisons between consoles and PCs must be fair, on equal footing, not slanted to prop up your elitism. You do not. Therefore, there is no reason for me to be continue feeding your delusions. It is productive for neither of us.


I never said "any old PC lying around". But keep on lying and making things up if that's what works for you. Also please go on contradicting your self by saying I'm "propping up my elitism" when my whole argument is that PC gaming is not more costly.

I'm not sure why you ever even entered this thread other than to stir *** up. If you actually read the post leading up to yours you would see it had nothing to due with PC elitism, anti-consoles or even the cost of PC hardware vs console hardware. It was a thread about a stupid comment some troll made regarding power consumption. There was no "console hate" as you put it. You're the one who derailed a thread to stir *** up and now want to just "leave it"; I think they have word for that - tr___ - is it?
November 17, 2009 3:21:04 PM

JofaMang said:
I even dropped the insistance of a BD drive and WiFi, both features included in the price of the PS3, I shouldn't be so nice to someone so obtuse.

Just as an FYI to anybody considering these "great values" in a PS3. The total cost of BD and WiFi for a PC is less than $70 - $60 for BD and $10 for WiFi.
November 17, 2009 6:26:43 PM

Power consumption might be the most retarded argument yet in the PC vs Console war.

Personally I thinks consoles will win because it can double as a book end and my PC is to large for that job.
November 17, 2009 6:37:49 PM

There's never going to be any such thing as a "winner" in PC vs Console. It's a stupid premise in the first place. PCs aren't going anywhere because we use them for so many other things and consoles are too lucrative to go anywhere anytime soon. Eventually the two are going to meld into one in one way or another.

But I agree that power consumption is about as retarded as it gets in trying to create some false argument against PC gaming (or even console gaming if one went that way).
November 17, 2009 6:40:05 PM

purplerat said:
There's never going to be any such thing as a "winner" in PC vs Console. It's a stupid premise in the first place. PCs aren't going anywhere because we use them for so many other things and consoles are too lucrative to go anywhere anytime soon. Eventually the two are going to meld into one in one way or another.

But I agree that power consumption is about as retarded as it gets in trying to create some false argument against PC gaming (or even console gaming if one went that way).


That I can get on board with :D 
!