POPULAR RECENT STORIES

NEWS HEADLINES

Techlogg.com RSS news feed

feed image
feed image

Login for our FREE daily newsletter






Lost Password?
No account yet? Register

Who's Online

Visits today: 154
Visits yesterday: 565
Visits month: 12274
Visits total: 168084
Max.monthly visits: 24649
  occurred: 2008-9
Pages this month: 111135
Pages total: 979542
Data since: 2008-04-09
Blackle energy saving claims still do not add up PDF Print E-mail
Written by Darren Yates   
Thursday, 02 August 2007




Del.icio.us!

StumbleUpon!

New power tests on CRT and LCD monitors finds that power savings are not as high as suggested.

The appearance of our study in the Sydney Morning Herald yesterday resulted in both positive and negative comments with the main complaint that we hadn’t tested enough monitors to have sufficient “cred” in our results.

We’ve now bolstered our testing to include eight monitors – four LCD and four CRT models - based on their default settings.

UPDATE AUGUST 9, 2007 - We've updated our testing again with results from 27 monitors! Read the final story here.  

While you can read the whole story about what Blackle actually claims, we still do not believe that its power saving claims stack up.

LCD monitor results

All of our LCD monitor tests showed that Blackle actually causes a rise in monitor power consumption over the standard white Google search engine page. The results also match what is known about LCD design – that the display has to block the passage of light from the backlight getting through to the front of the screen and in order to do that, more power is required.

On average, our four LCD monitors saw a rise of 0.35W by using Blackle instead of Google.

CRT monitor results

As we stated in the original story, power consumption of CRT monitors is dependent on a number of factors from tube size to refresh rate to manufacturer. And that’s pretty much what we found in our test results.

We picked four different sized monitors from four different manufacturers and only the 22-inch Compaq P1210 showed a power difference that either equaled or exceeded the 15-watt mark being used as the basis of Blackle’s power saving claims.

The 15- and 17-inch models were at 8.5W or less while the 19-inch Acer showed a difference of 11.3W. On average, the four models showed a power consumption drop of 10.825W by using Blackle over Google. However, to get a more accurate figure, you would need to find out the proportion of larger-tubed CRT monitors as it’s unlikely that there would be as many 22-inch CRT monitors as 17-inch monitors being used.

Based on our testing, Blackle’s claims still do not stack up because most monitors do not show a 15W power saving when using Blackle. And as CRT monitors are continually phased out, the power savings will be reduced further.

Bottom line, if you’re running a PC with an LCD monitor, not only are you are not saving the environment by using Blackle, you’re actually using more electricity by using Blackle instead of Google. 

UPDATE AUGUST 9, 2007: We've updated our test results again, this time testing 27 monitors. Read about The Final Tests

MonitorGoogle Power Consumption
Blackle Power consumption
Power difference
LCD models
   
LG L192WS (19in)
24.5W 25.1W-0.6W
LG SW570LE (15in) 26.2W
26.5W
-0.3W
LG L1917S (19in) 33.3W
33.4W
-0.1W
AOC LM721 (17in) 33.1W
33.5W
-0.4W
  Average difference -0.35W
CRT models    
Mitsubishi DV1770 (17in) 72.5W 65.4W 7.1W 
Digital PCXBV-HY (15in) 73.6W 65.1W 8.5W 
Acer AC915 (19in) 75.9W 64.6W 11.3W 
Compaq P1210 (22in) 112.6W 96.2W 16.4W 
  Average difference 10.825W 




Google!Facebook!Slashdot!Netscape!Technorati!Newsvine!Furl!Yahoo!Ma.gnolia!Add this social bookmarking functionality to your website! title=
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 08 August 2007 )
 
< Prev   Next >
© 2008 techlogg.com
Joomla! is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.