PS3 contributes to global warming?

by Ed Stasick { Mar 13th 2007 at 10:00PM }

Savvy PR folks know that if they issue a press release filled with all kinds of high-profile buzzwords such as "energy conservation" or "PS3" that they can also get all kinds of free exposure by riding on the coat-tails of popular people, places or things. Such is the case with little known company, sust-it, who has issued a PR on the eve of the PS3's European launch to warn gamers everywhere of the literal and figurative cost of powering your gaming habit.

"Have you pre-ordered your PlayStation 3 yet? If you have sust-it recommends you top-up the pre-payments on your electricity account at the same time. The US version of the PS3 comes with a whopping 380 Watt power supply. That's over twice as much as its main competitor the Xbox 360 with its 165W unit, and over seven times more power hungry than the PlayStation 2. If you were to combine a PS3 with a LG 71" HD Ready Plasma TV to take full advantage of the amazing graphics you could be burning 1.4kWh (kilowatts) of power per hour and if you're a serious gamer that could cost you £1.19 for a five hour session."

What do you think? Is the PS3 too power-hungry? Is your electric bill going though the roof? Do you at least use your console as a space heater to keep warm in the Winter?

Tags: ps3

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

humpty @ Mar 13th 2007 10:23PM

More FUD.. a simple google would have found this:

http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-356-1.htm

During gameplay PS3 is 186 Watts .. about 10 more than 360.. both are much higher than Wii. But, Wii consumes the MOST on standby with Wii Connect turned on..

PS3 uses a higher peak capable power supply.. its only ever uses 50-60% of its max capability, which means the power supply is going to last longer.

Compared to the 360; during gameplay the power supply is operating at 90% or more capacity.. why do you think so many consoles have crapped out or overheated? Its a cheap power supply that wont last.

Jitty @ Mar 13th 2007 10:31PM

What the hell is this 1.4kWh figure? I have a 40 inch 1080p LCD and it's power rating is at 250Watts. If you are so concerned with saving the environment and saving money why the the hell would you buy a 71 inch plasma? A 40 inch 1080p LCD is good enough and depending on how close you sit to your TV, it will also take full advantage of the ps3's graphics... (A more reasonable figure of the ps3's power consumption with your TV would be would be 800W at most)

Plus, now that the xbox360 can do 1080p, I can say the xbox360 will take up ~1.2kWh of juice with that TV!!!? If your going to criticize the ps3's power consumption please only include the ps3's and only the ps3's power consumption.

BTW your standard oven and fridge probably takes more energy than the ps3...

Stef Geiger @ Mar 13th 2007 10:50PM

Jitty, do the math, your 40 inch is about a 1/4 the screen area of a 71 inch TV, which means it takes probably about 4 times as much juice to backlight.

Regardless, this is a damn stupid article. As it's been stated already, the PS3 barely uses any more electricity than the 360, and shouldn't be faulted for having a more robust power supply. MAN, it's as if even when Sony does something no one could really say is a bad thing, someone will spin it the other way.

Dan @ Mar 13th 2007 11:07PM

Umm I mean it's true the PS3 has the biggest power consumption... but I think most people have at least 1-2 computers that they leave on all or most of the day.
If you have a gaming rig, it's sure to be 500-600w peak, so it's not a big deal.

Quik @ Mar 13th 2007 11:20PM

I don't get the point of this article... Anything nowadays uses electricity... As if I tell you: You know that your alarm system uses x kWh and for a year it comes down to y $. I honestly couldn't care less.

PS3fanboy used to have only good stories...

Harold @ Mar 13th 2007 11:27PM

If someone is playing a PS3 on a 71" plasma I don't think they're going to care too much about their power bill!

Jeremy @ Mar 14th 2007 12:08AM

I think the important points have already been covered (actual power usage, 71" plasma!) With that said, the power requirements on the PS3 should be coming down with the shrink to 65um. Has the 360 already been shrunk to 65um?

Joshua Campbell @ Mar 14th 2007 2:15AM

screw global warming... i am into blood diamonds now...

http://www.bornrich.org/entry/ifa-berlin-displays-the-most-expensive-tv-set-with-160-diamonds/

Atelectasis @ Mar 14th 2007 3:32AM

Phhhtt... global warming... we all know that doesn't exist. Pseudoscience proved so!

Laurens Holst @ Mar 14th 2007 7:33AM

Well, be glad then that the 65nm processors are coming soon.

Delive @ Mar 14th 2007 9:11PM

While we are talking about it, My 360 gets a hell of alot hotter than my PS3 any day. And it's alot louder.

Papo @ Mar 14th 2007 8:52AM

If you got the money to get a 71" plasma and a sony ps3 a couple of dollars on your electricity bill don't mean shit.

ps3fanboyassasin @ Mar 14th 2007 9:54AM

All those gamers sitting on their asses NOT driving SUVs is GOOD for the environment....game on biatches.

SuicideNinja @ Mar 14th 2007 11:26AM

"While we are talking about it, My 360 gets a hell of alot hotter than my PS3 any day. And it's alot louder."

Seriously. I'd say it's because the 360 is getting used while the PS3 sits off and dusty. The PS3 is the laughing stock of my entertainment center afterall.

Anyway, just make sure you switch the PS3 off when it's not in use, and everything is fine. I don't know about anyone else, but I never turn it on with the controller anyway.

http://suicideninja.blogspot.com/2007/03/pictures-of-my-new-rig.html

Still waiting for that "full advantage of the amazing graphics" granted by 1080p. Haven't seen it yet. It'd be nice, since I was sure to buy a 1080p TV.

The article is a little silly. If I'm supposed to care about power consumption, I'm not doing a very good job of it. No guilt here.

SamadAgha @ Mar 14th 2007 3:16PM

humpty:

I think you mistyped something there; PS3 only uses 10-15W more than X360. Wii is the one that uses far less energy (1/10th of X360 and PS3).

Back to the article, it is non-sense to use the rated power supply supplied with a system as its continous consumption. It's like having a car that has a 300hp engine. While it can produce up to 300hp, a user may only demand 100hp contiously. According to a real test, PS3 is only a little worse than X360 when it's actually working. So having an a higher-rated supplier only means that the PS (power supply) is not stressed so much and tends to last longer. I'm a little bit on the environment side too but it's complete non-sense to listen to some pot-head and not take any scientific/engineerd data into account.

Not sure why Sony went with a 360W PS on this one (or even sust-it really knows the power-rating), but PS3 only uses about %50 of it.

Ed Stasick, being a blogger doesn't just mean bluntly putting something out! Do some work yourself too!

oki @ Mar 14th 2007 7:03PM

I havent noticed any complaints from the parents about the powerbill. i usually keep my powermac and ps3 on at all times even when im not using it. Keeps my room about 30 degrees warmer than the rest of the house. which is good in my case. rest of my house is frezin