• treadful@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I love this kind of shit. Building things for the sake of it is worth it. Not only as just expression, which may be hubris but it’s still expression. Also entertainment, inspiration, pushing the art of engineering, and just giving people something to do, and all the good that comes with that like personal and trade growth.

      A purely utilitarian life is a life only spent on survival. Not a life I want to live.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        A purely utilitarian life is a life only spent on survival. Not a life I want to live.

        Well, that hubris won’t afford you a livable world for much longer.

        We could have respected the planet that birthed us, and taken only what we needed. Instead we extracted every natural resource we could find, and left behind countless shattered ecosystems. Even as the walls close in, we accelerate our pettiness and perform acts of wastefulness that alone do measurable ecological damage, and we celebrate it because it is “cool”.

        • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          If this is something you feel strongly about, then please stop eating factory farmed meat and animal products if you havent already. It is something you personally can actually do. It helps, and it will genuinely make you feel better. You may not have much power, but using the power you do have to help the team you claim to be on instead of the other team is a massive step forward.

          • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            It helps,

            no, it doesnt. despite the existence of vegans, meat production increases every year, year over year.

          • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Look, you’re not really wrong, but you get that this shit is why people get irritated with vegans right? We were talking about being wasteful with energy resources for the sake of capitalism and you came in with a lazy segue to animal rights and nutritional health.

            It’s a conversation that we should be having, but it’s also insufferable to constantly be shoehorning it into every conversation.

            • Teppichbrand@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              I don’t agree. The comment points out the single most easy and effektive move an individal without political nor financial power can make to cut personal co2-emissions with just a change of habit. It’s not about animal rights and not about your health. Us still eating meat even though we know better is an incredibly dumb waste of energy for the sake of pleasure, exactly like this shitty powereating globe.

              • Jrockwar@feddit.uk
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Take a train instead of a flight. Cycle to work or take public transport instead of driving. Install a heat pump or solar in your house. There are a million things people can do to cut down their emissions that can be as effective as becoming herbivores, depending on each one’s personal situation.

                Plus, I don’t have the numbers in my head but I’m pretty sure a locally grown fillet of chicken is more environmentally friendly than an avocado that has travelled across the Atlantic, so “buy local” would be probably better advice.

                • Teppichbrand@feddit.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Yeah, so many things one should do. Yet nothing is as simple as paying for a different product next time you’re shopping your groceries.
                  Avocados are way less harmfull to our planet than local meat. People keep bringing this up so often it’s part of the Vegan Bullshit Bingo.

              • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                Oh, you’re one of those “you can save the planet with your personal habits” people…

                You enjoy your salad. I’m wondering what it takes to firebomb an oil refinery.

                • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  And you are one of those “every problem on the planet is the fault of someone else other than me so I can do whatever I want with no regard for it’s affect on anyone else” people. Stay away from us if you can’t be bothered to carry your own weight, you just drag down people who actually give a shit about something other than their own immediate selfish gratification.

              • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                2 months ago

                The comment points out the single most effektive move an individal without political nor financial power can make to cut personal co2-emissions with just a change of habit.

                eating meat doesn’t emit co2

                • danc4498@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  2 months ago

                  Producing that meat does.

                  Note that the commenter didn’t say to quit all eating meat. They just said to quit eating “factory farmed” meat.

                  It’s not about eating meat, it’s about factory farming the meat and the damage to the environment caused by it.

            • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              I’m not vegan, and I never said anyone should be. Factory farms are the issue, not the consumption of animal products. Get some eggs from a local farmer, no big deal, enjoy, they’re delicious. Just don’t think for an instant that you have no guilt if you are shoveling a huge portion of the cash you earn to billionaires who torture animals and destroy the planet. You are guilty if this is what you do, and no amount of idiotic anger towards vegans who point out the obvious will make you innocent. You have to actually change if you don’t want to be responsible for this. Angrily trying to shut down anyone who points out your disgusting selfish addiction won’t do you. Grow up or shut up.

            • treadful@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              You came in here with your absolutist utilitarian life above all else or we all die post just to respond with this because someone suggested you to stop eating meat. Beautiful.

      • JJROKCZ@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Sure but we’re burning tons of coal to have this thing advertise minion movies, not anything artistic or worthwhile.

        • treadful@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’d prefer if it weren’t. Though that’s not the only use for this thing.

      • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        This isn’t pushing any boundaries, though. This is off the shelf technology. Anybody can do something big by throwing a shit ton of money at it. It would be pushing boundaries of tech or art if it was for instance super power efficient, or mind bending in any way. This is a fucking sphere, it’s the simplest shape and a rip off of the pyramids but less original and not even comparable in terms of durability.

        • dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Could it not be argued that building this thing now gives people a chance at looking at the power draw and attempting to make it super efficient? Like now people have a tool to test things on.

          • danc4498@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            They did mention that they are working on making 70% of this powered by solar panels. Maybe this will push forward solar technology in some way.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          It is absolutely pushing boundaries to be driving this many pixels at a frame rate that doesn’t take minutes to refresh. I build a lot of projects with addressable LEDs and the typical hobbyist stuff chokes out when you start trying to control more than a thousand or so. This thing has 256 million pixels inside and 1.2 million outside.

        • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Probably because they’re not doing much with it. It’s $100/person to see the basic “Planet Earth” showing and almost $200 to see The Grateful Dead show. Previously they showed a Phish show. That’s it for options, and none of it sounds really appealing to me.

        • blakemiller@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          This way some faulty internet lore. The money losses were from a fluke of timing the opening date of operations versus when quarterly finances were reported. Big startup costs meant the first numbers looked silly until they had enough events to get steady profits. They’re doing fine now.

          Internet should’ve known better too. It’s hard to lose in Vegas and the investors obviously knew what they were doing. The power costs are shocking for sure though. Yikes!

    • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Advertising? This thing is essentially a theater. Yeah, it can run advertisement but anything with a screen can do that. It’s like saying a movie theatre is for advertising.

      • zalgotext@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s a 400 foot tall screen that’s constantly on and in view, even at night, which plays ads like 90% of the time. Calling it “essentially a theatre” is a huge understatement.

        • Vash63@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          But the energy usage is quoted as peak for the entire venue - which is literally a theater / concert hall. It opened with a live U2 performance. The energy usage isn’t just for the displays, it includes all the power for the entire building, the concert speakers, heating/cooling, indoor lighting, any kitchen equipment, etc.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The power usage wouldn’t be a problem if the electricity were generated in a green way.

      If only the energy sector had a workforce experienced in building offshore structures that could build offshore wind farms. And maybe a workforce that had experience in drilling that could develop geothermal energy.

      Of course we also need an energy sector that had a lot of financial resources to put into these kinds of investments.

      If only the energy sector had these kinds of resources, a big sphere drawing a lot of electricity wouldn’t be a problem.

  • Zachariah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Add a solar array and battery bank, a you might even have electricity left over. It’s in the desert after all.

  • PunnyName@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Currently, an agreement is under review to ensure that 70% of the Sphere’s power needs will come from solar sources, with the other 30% from non-renewable energy that will be offset by renewable energy credits.

    Ahh yes, energy credits. Aka bullshit.

    • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Hey!

      They’re not always BS. Just most of the time!

      Or are they? Some of the companies who are the best at it and seem to be genuinely trying have been shown not to be able to guarantee one way or the other.

      “Wait, someone cut down that forest we planted?!” (no joke)

      • PunnyName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        At least I understand forests that are replanted over and over to be used for lumber, effectively reducing the use of old lumber for myriad products.

      • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Just to be clear, renewable energy credits are different than carbon offsets, and easier to guarantee because they’re often tied directly to a metered renewable energy source.

        That said, there are still junk RECs on the market, like those tied to energy that was produced up to 2 decades ago that nobody got around to claiming / retiring. Or RECs tied to energy sources that may have happened regardless of the REC sale.

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Ohhh good point! Wanted to edit that into my comment there even, thank you.

          The junk RE credits are really interesting. As is the “ha we were building that solar farm no matter what!” problem - reminds me of when that happens in… tax deductions I think.

    • nikita@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Energy credits — what a bunch of vacuous rhetoric.

      The reality is that it’s energy being taken away from the overall grid, requiring a larger grid and thus prolonging our dependence on non renewable energy while we build up renewable sources.

      If we weren’t so wasteful with our energy we wouldn’t need as much of it and it’d be easier to go fully renewable.

      • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Well this is not good math at all. If you create a project and offset all its power requirements, you haven’t added anything to the grid. The alternative is to not do stuff, which is not going to happen anytime soon*, so it’s a net good thing and needs to be incentivized, not disparaged.

        *Well it will happen after the water wars and plagues wipe us out, and the sphere will stop drawing any energy at that point.

    • CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Consider ”hate credits”… like imagine the KKK can do whatever it wants so long as they claim to offset it with “hate credits”…

  • Sorgan71@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    God you guys cant have any fun. Yeah it uses power but cant we have cool things once and awhile?

    • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Good luck, you are talking to people who think that if the billionaires passed out all their money to everyone, then we would all be able to afford way more stuff. They have no idea that more cash doesn’t mean way more products appear. Supply and demand is such a simple concept, but to them, it might as well be rocket science.

        • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Anti-rich/billionaire/capitalism agenda is quite widely subscribed to by a large amount of Lemmings

        • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          The same people that think energy use is a bad thing are the people that think that if we pass out all the billionaires money, then we can all have way more value. They are teenagers or people who never learned anything beyond what they teach in middle school. They think their gut instinct must be fact, so they spew it over and over. I’m sure you’re not one of them.

      • Contentedness@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Imagine being so naive as to believe massive wealth hording deprived others! What turkeys! Amirite?

        • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Imagine if you will that there are 5 items to be had, everyone wants them. Everyone except for the evil rich man has 10 tokens. The evil rich man has a billion tokens. Right now people are willing to sell an item for 4 tokens. One day the people kill the evil rich man and spread out all his money evenly. There’s still 5 items! They just go up in price! The rich man’s blood doesn’t create more items! It isn’t complicated. It’s very simple.

          • ShittyBeatlesFCPres@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Now you imagine that the rich man undermined democracy and the rule of law, monopolized industries, and charged everyone 5 tokens a year for basic necessities.

            I don’t think it’s everyone else who has a child’s understanding of economics.

            • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              And yet somehow despite all this, nearly everyone is living a much better standard of life than they would have 50 years ago, land we all far excited the kings of 200 years ago. We are rapidly progressing due to our extradoniary ability to work together. Complaining that this beautiful system of cooperation isn’t working as fast as you imagine does nothing.

          • Contentedness@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            Ok but the way I see it there are 100 people and 1000 tokens. Instead of every person getting 10 tokens, one guy has 998 tokens and everyone else argues over the remaining 2. Would killing the one rich guy not free up some tokens for the rest of us?

            • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              Yes, it frees up tokens, but it doesn’t make there be more items. As a result, people pay more for the items that do exist. It is the same as people saying the government should print a bunch of money to end poverty. They have the machines. They just don’t want us to have money, they could just print us all into being billionaires, and we could all live happily ever after!

              • Contentedness@lemmy.nz
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                I see what you’re saying, the tokens represent access to a finite amount of resources and creating more tokens won’t create more resources. I get that.

                But if the problem isn’t with the amount of resources but with their distribution, then redistributing the existing tokens out of the hands of the greedy hoarders must help the rest, mustn’t it?

                Edit: I can’t believe I’m sitting here arguing with someone on the goddamn Internet. Must be out of my damn mind

                • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 month ago

                  Yeah, so if bezos is actually eating 50,000 peoples worth of food every day, then splitting up his money/food would make a whole lot more people be fed. He doesn’t seem very fat to me, though. I do realise that he has a personal jet and uses lots of fuel and energy, much more that the average person. Guess who uses more energy/resources than him, though? The number of people born in a single hour. Those people far exceed his resource usage. So we could kill him and spread out all his money, but if there is really such an extreme shortage of resources, then this would be like throwing out a handful of water instead of plugging massive gushing leaks in the boat.

          • eran_morad@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            2 months ago

            You’ve got to be dumber than dogshit to not realize that unregulated CAPITALISM empowers those with CAPITAL at the expense of those without it. That’s the whole fucking point. Your dumbass example ignores an entire academic discipline’s worth of understanding, backed by empirical observation. JFC.

            • AIhasUse@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              2 months ago

              What system ever worked better? What do you compare how good standard of living should be to? The past? Well guess what, we are all hell of better off than the wealthiest 100 years ago. Do you just imagine a much better world than we have now and decide that you have somehow developed a system to get there and not enough people want it? Wow, you must be a genius to have outsmarted everyone across all cultures!

              I’m gunna guess no. You don’t have an almighty better system, you’ve just fallen for the trap of thinking that nothing is connected. You think you can have all the benefits of systems you don’t like while having none of the connected realities. You are like a child putting whiteout all over their homework to make there be no questions so they always get 100%. Eventually, you will grow, realise people are trying their hardest, we have ways to improve and we are working on them. What doesn’t help is spoiled teenagers complaining that they have to do chores while saying their parents are mean because they won’t always buy them every new video game. Burning everything down that gave you everything you live won’t help. Ever.

  • xthexder@l.sw0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t know what they need so many GPUs for. There’s 16 displays inside, and the sphere itself has fewer pixels than even 1 of the internal displays. You could probably run the sphere off a laptop if you aren’t trying to do anything fancy.

    Maybe they plan on doing crazy live simulations on it or something. I can’t imagine what kind of displayed image would actually use all 150 of them. Nvidia A6000 cards are damn powerful.

      • xthexder@l.sw0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        My job has been to run things on GPUs for almost 10 years now. The only thing anyone practical is doing on that many GPUs is AI training, massive scientific simulations, or crypto mining. 1 or 2 of them is enough to run something like ChatGPT.

        Real-time graphics it turns out don’t scale well across multiple GPUs. There’s a reason SLI has gone away for consumer GPUs. At the current ratio, each of those $3000+ GPUs is only driving 8000 pixels (assuming each led puck is being used as 1 pixel, given their size). It makes no sense other than bragging rights

    • shastaxc@lemm.ee
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I guess the practicality of the decision depends on the finances. Did they actually buy the cards or were they gifted by nvidia for free advertising?

      • xthexder@l.sw0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        It does seem suspiciously like they picked 150 completely arbitrarily to make the project sound impressive, when they could have easily done it with 20. I’m sure a bunch of people in the middle made a bunch of money off that transaction too. Or like you said, maybe this is Nvidia doing some guerrilla marketing

    • Yardy Sardley@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Probably have a few cards running the displays and the rest of them mining some sphere-themed memecoin

  • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Wait, why do they need 150 GPUs for a 1.2 megapixel display?

    That’s less than 1080p!

    Who engineered this monstrosity?

    • yggdar@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      They say there are 16 screens inside, each with a 16k resolution. Such a screen would have 16x as many pixels as a 4k screen. The GPUs power those as well.

      For the number of GPUs it appears to make sense. 150 GPUs for the equivalent of about 256 4k screens means each GPU handles ±2 4k screens. That doesn’t sound like a lot, but it could make sense.

      The power draw of 28 MW still seems ridiculous to me though. They claim about 45 kW for the GPUs, which leaves 27955 kW for everything else. Even if we assume the screens are stupid and use 1 kw per 4k segment, that only accounts for 246 kW, leaving 27709 kW. Where the fuck does all that energy go?! Am I missing something?

      • srecko@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Yeah, 4k phone and 4k plasma tv don’t consume same ammount of energy.

      • Vanix@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        This is a complete shot in the dark but could the huge power draw come from needing some intense industrial cooling/airflow stuff in/on the sphere?

        Edit: forgot a word

        • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          complete shot in the dark

          Man, I wanna delay the stupid edgy joke I’m making but I can’t help myself

        • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          The big power draw is because of the sheer amount of light it dumps out. You try lighting up 54,000 square meters of LED panel to a few hundred nits and see how much power it takes.

        • realharo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          More likely it’s the thing that generates all that heat in the first place.

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Oh Jesus, there are 16 16K screens? I didn’t read that right at all. That’s completely superfluous. The Las Vegas Sphere is an affront to God.

        • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          In the future there will be myths that we once had standards such as html but after we tried to build this sphere, god cursed us to use only incompatible proprietary protocols

      • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Ah, you’re right, that’s 1.2 megapixel for the exterior, and 132 megapixel for the interior.

        That’s a substantial increase, but it’s still the equivalent of about 16 4K screens, which absolutely does not need 150 GPUs!

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          Anything most likely driving factor here?

          Extreme resolution requirements, massive number of LED elements, real-time rendering and synchronization needs, complex content processing, load distribution and redundancy, future-proofing capabilities, fraudulent kickback scheme

  • xthexder@l.sw0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    So how is the total power over 500x that of the GPU power? If it’s all LEDs, that thing must get brighter than the damn sun.

  • dan@upvote.au
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    28,000,000 watts

    That’s usually written as 28MW. I know some Americans don’t like metric much, but one of the points of metric is that you don’t ever need to write that many zeroes - you just need to use the right prefix (kilo, mega, giga, tera, etc) on the unit.

    • rc__buggy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      you just need to use the right prefix (kilo, mega, giga, tera, etc) on the unit.

      Oh, thanks.

      Bruh, it’s PC Gamer.

      quick edit: Hey! Why aren’t you converting it to Joules?

      • Remavas@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Because Joule is the SI unit of energy, meanwhile the Watt is the SI unit of power, equivalent to one Joule per second.

        “Converting” joules to watts would be like converting m/s to US dollars.

        • HerrBeter@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I liked the analogy but I do think it would be clearer to say something like joules = money in bank account and Watt = spending per second

    • ipkpjersi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      True, but 28 million watts really puts things in perspective when your average PSU is less than 1000w.

      • dan@upvote.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        That’s true.

        average PSU is less than 1000w

        Unrelated but I wish it was easier to find lower-wattage PSUs. My local PC store doesn’t have anything under 650W. I know modern GPUs use a lot of power, but not all PCs use a GPU! I have a home server where 400W would be more than enough, yet the smallest I could find was 550W, in stock from just one manufacturer (Be Quiet).

        • tomkatt@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          I mean, it should be fine, just because the PSU can provide more watts doesn’t mean the system is actually using that much power. I have an 800w PSU in my gaming rig, but its average load is only 240 - 320w during gaming (I’ve measured it by powering the system with a portable Ecoflow battery).

            • riodoro1@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Where are you getting this from? Intuition?

              I think the quiescent current and losses are less in a well engineered psu.

              • hedidwot@lemmynsfw.com
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 month ago

                This is verifiable in manufactures data sheets.

                Efficiency at less than 20% and greater than 80% loads isn’t great relative to in between those ends.

                This is compounded by lower wattage PSUs being more limited with regard to features and benefits.

                If you end up with a 650w PSU and your system idles at 80 watts for the bulk of a working day you spend long periods of time in this less efficient window.

                We need to see some quality 300w to 600w designs come back onto the market.

      • magi@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Exactly. This is literally a PC gamer article. Writing it out like that really puts it into perspective for the average reader.

  • AeonFelis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    That article gets stuck so much and makes my (relatively high end) laptop’s fan scream so hard you’d think the website was designed for that kind of hardware.

  • root@precious.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Using the max power use of a video card to math this is ridiculous. It’s not at full TDP pushing this content. They aren’t playing max FPS 3D raytraced gaming, they’re playing videos.

    • ByteJunk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      What.

      The article says that, for the GPUs, they can have a “maximum power draw of 45,000 W at full tilt”.

      The 28 million W comes from the full system, and surely the massive displays, LEDs and eventually sound system makes up the bulk of that, the gfx cards are a rounding error…