Groups

    Is it better to leave the tv/computer on standby if returning to it within a few hours?

    Please help end my in house debate.

    I say its better to leave on standby if you're going to return to it pretty soon, where as the girlfriend says its best to turn off completely, then back on.

    I understood it that by turning something off completely and back on uses more energy than just switching off and back on via standby, hence if you're going to return to it soon then stand by is the better option?

    Cheers all,

    Steveo.

    54 Comments

    Depends what u mean by better?

    if u mean energy saving, imo your gf is correct

    Banned

    Not sure on power but it's better for the PC to not keep turning off and on.

    Original Poster

    jayjayuk1234

    Depends what u mean by better? if u mean energy saving, imo your gf is … Depends what u mean by better? if u mean energy saving, imo your gf is correct



    Yeah I mean energy saving. 1 up to her, damn.

    Original Poster

    master_chief

    Not sure on power but it's better for the PC to not keep turning off and … Not sure on power but it's better for the PC to not keep turning off and on.



    Okay, thanks. Why is that?

    Original Poster

    electriclinux

    http://www.5starsupport.com/tutorial/on-off.htmTurn off the monitor … http://www.5starsupport.com/tutorial/on-off.htmTurn off the monitor though.



    cool, thank you!

    Banned

    dcx_badass

    Source? I have 7 Desktops and 3 Laptops, some of the desktops go as far … Source? I have 7 Desktops and 3 Laptops, some of the desktops go as far back as 10+ years old, all are always turned on and off and not a single problem.



    Even if you're away from your desk for a few minutes?

    That's great for your few PCs, now when you've been responsible for hundreds to thousands of PCs then come back and chat.

    You switch your pc off off for a couple of hours?

    Banned

    dcx_badass

    Obviously not for a few minutes but I'm nipping out to the shops for an … Obviously not for a few minutes but I'm nipping out to the shops for an hour or two I will, any less and I just put it to sleep.At work we had 400 PC's and they auto shutdown each day at 6pm and then were turned on the next day as and when they were needed.



    OP isn't talking about overnight, stick to topic please.

    The subject has two sides. My advice would be turn off your computer if you are leaving it for an extended time and select computer features to turn off the screen and turn off non essential components if you are leaving for a short time.

    I would personally leave it on standby if returning within 3 hours or so

    turning it off is best power-wise [rather obviously?]. if your pc supports it you could always use hibernate (restores your previous session as if it was in standby but consumer no power)
    Edited by: "dt_matthews" 22nd Jan 2011

    Very hard to give a categorical answer as this depends so much on both the equipment and the length of time you are talking about. Where PC's are concerned, its probably fair to assume it typically takes roughly 2 minutes to shut down - reboot for most installs\setups; so the efficiency depends on how much less power it consumes in sleep mode to this active use (and also how much you factor in the cost of your time. If you consider your time to be worth £20 a hour, thats 33p thats effectively wasted waiting for Windows to load)....

    Original Poster

    Joey Bloggsy

    I would personally leave it on standby if returning within 3 hours or so



    you talking about the tv?

    Happysteveo

    you talking about the tv?



    both steve, reason is wear and taer on buttons and heating and cooling of circuit boards , just my 2 cents

    ps That should confuse the other half in the debate Ha

    Original Poster

    Joey Bloggsy

    both steve, reason is wear and taer on buttons and heating and cooling of … both steve, reason is wear and taer on buttons and heating and cooling of circuit boards , just my 2 centsps That should confuse the other half in the debate Ha



    haha. cool thanks for that!

    But then the heating-cooling cycle issue is further confused by modern high-efficiency standby units which consume a fraction of a watt... (These don't really keep the residual heat that could be argued to prolong life of a circuit, but then they also substantially negate the argument that significant power can be saved by switching off completely).

    Also - more re computers - there are a lot of other potential 'costs' to regularly switching off and restarting. Wear and tear on drives and other components could be an issue, bandwidth consumption may also be (if you have a small cap on your internet download yet each time you reboot are downloading virus definitions, irrelevant software updates etc, these costs should be factored in).

    In short - I don't think there is a correct answer as both have pro's and con's, so I don't think you'll be able to end the debate one way or another!

    Edited by: "jah128" 22nd Jan 2011

    master_chief

    OP isn't talking about overnight, stick to topic please.



    OP said it was related to energy saving and not wear and tear, stick to topic please

    There is no way on this earth keeping the pc on is more energy efficient.

    /thread

    jayjayuk1234

    There is no way on this earth keeping the pc on is more energy … There is no way on this earth keeping the pc on is more energy efficient./thread



    Thats quite simply not true. If it uses 100W for 3 minutes in a boot/restart cycle, yet 10W on sleep, its going to be more energy efficient to keep it on sleep for half an hour than restart\reboot. As said, its down to time, equipment and other factors - your blunt assumptions simply don't work.

    as has been said above,
    i used to religiously shut my pc down every chance i got
    but, booting it up and down, and probs that came with that have persuaded me its easier to let it hibernate. few years back, tried to research energy difference of it and couldnt find a difinitive answer, so i guess they are more energy efficient these days and plus wear and tear of booting up and down, i would go with setting a hibernate time
    just tell your gf you the man and you know about stuff

    Original Poster

    willesden1

    as has been said above,i used to religiously shut my pc down every chance … as has been said above,i used to religiously shut my pc down every chance i gotbut, booting it up and down, and probs that came with that have persuaded me its easier to let it hibernate. few years back, tried to research energy difference of it and couldnt find a difinitive answer, so i guess they are more energy efficient these days and plus wear and tear of booting up and down, i would go with setting a hibernate timejust tell your gf you the man and you know about stuff



    cheers, it seems a bit more clear cut about the computer than the tv!


    Ask google.

    Always turned mine on and off.. never had a problem..
    but my PC's get replaced because of lack of spec long before they wear out...

    dcx_badass

    If you're computer has problems being turned on and off I think you look … If you're computer has problems being turned on and off I think you look deeper into it and stop buying **** components.


    Also look at you software and a possible virus if booting takes a while (unless the computer has to connect to a server (such as uni)

    willesden1

    as has been said above,i used to religiously shut my pc down every … as has been said above,i used to religiously shut my pc down every chance i gotbut, booting it up and down, and probs that came with that have persuaded me its easier to let it hibernate. few years back, tried to research energy difference of it and couldnt find a difinitive answer, so i guess they are more energy efficient these days and plus wear and tear of booting up and down, i would go with setting a hibernate timejust tell your gf you the man and you know about stuff

    dcx_badass

    If you're computer has problems been turned on and off I think you look … If you're computer has problems been turned on and off I think you look deeper into it and stop buying **** components.



    yeah true, i aint worked my tv out yet but a lot of new tv's dont even have a turn off switch (apart from the socket)




    i dont buy components. just used to have more problems booting up and down and then syncing and connecting with wireless occasionally etc than just letting it hibernate.
    eco or not, im not sure

    jah128

    Thats quite simply not true. If it uses 100W for 3 minutes in a … Thats quite simply not true. If it uses 100W for 3 minutes in a boot/restart cycle, yet 10W on sleep, its going to be more energy efficient to keep it on sleep for half an hour than restart\reboot. As said, its down to time, equipment and other factors - your blunt assumptions simply don't work.




    If op is leaving the pc running for more than 30 minutes then he is better off turning it off then by your math. Therefore my statement was not untrue, there was just a condition.

    It appears it is both of us with blunt assumptions, since the op did not state a time period, however my comments were based on more than a mere 30 minutes, yet you assumed they weren't.

    So, i will reiterate for the pedantic members of HUKD,

    If leaving the pc for more than 30 minutes, it is more energy efficient to turn off your pc.

    /thread





    Edited by: "jayjayuk1234" 22nd Jan 2011

    jayjayuk1234

    I am not assuming anything,If op is leaving the pc running for more than … I am not assuming anything,If op is leaving the pc running for more than 30 minutes then he is better off turning it off then by your math.It appears it is both of us with blunt assumptions, since the op did not state a time period, however my comments were based on more than a mere 30 minutes.



    You are assuming things, not least that its more than a 'mere' 30 minutes. The point is you said "no way on earth" which simply isn't true - it entirely depends on how long, what the consumption is in standby, what the boot\restart times are. I'm not in any way saying it is more efficient to leave on, just pointing out you are wrong to say it definitely isn't.

    i cant turn my tv off,it only has standby lol.
    but then again on standby it uses0.001w so who gives a crap

    jah128

    You are assuming things, not least that its more than a 'mere' 30 … You are assuming things, not least that its more than a 'mere' 30 minutes. The point is you said "no way on earth" which simply isn't true - it entirely depends on how long, what the consumption is in standby, what the boot\restart times are. I'm not in any way saying it is more efficient to leave on, just pointing out you are wrong to say it definitely isn't.



    No time frames were mentioned either way, so you are also assuming things.

    Now lets cease with this pedantic nonsense as you are boring the hell out of me, ok? cool


    Edited by: "jayjayuk1234" 22nd Jan 2011

    What have I assumed? I've said throughout there is no clear way of knowing without a lot of extra info. You've said 'there is no way on earth it will be more energy efficient'. Sometimes its better to admit you are wrong than do a childish 'i'm bored now' cop-out...
    Edited by: "jah128" 22nd Jan 2011

    leave on standby for no sex. Switch off for fun.

    jah128

    What have I assumed? I've said throughout there is no clear way of … What have I assumed? I've said throughout there is no clear way of knowing without a lot of extra info. You've said 'there is no way on earth it will be more energy efficient'. Sometimes its better to admit you are wrong than do a childish 'i'm bored now' cop-out...



    Wow, you are irritating.

    You assumed that i meant less than 30 mins, no time frames were ever mentioned.
    you know full well that on average, the pc will be left for longer than 30 mins, unless the op has no life and never goes out or goes to work.

    You are just being pedantic.

    Fact remains, longer than 30 mins ( on average, based on your math ) and its more energy efficient to switch it off.



    Edited by: "jayjayuk1234" 22nd Jan 2011

    Thought you were bored and finished. The 30 minutes is irrelevant - if it uses 1W on standby and 200W at load you would 10 hours before switching off made more sense. As I've said lots of times, its impossible to know which is more efficient without knowing a lot more. You may be irritated, I guess thats a consequence of realising you are wrong...

    dcx_badass

    Source? I have 7 Desktops and 3 Laptops, some of the desktops go as far … Source? I have 7 Desktops and 3 Laptops, some of the desktops go as far back as 10+ years old, all are always turned on and off and not a single problem.



    You own, and use, computers over a decade old?

    jah128

    Thought you were bored and finished. The 30 minutes is irrelevant - if … Thought you were bored and finished. The 30 minutes is irrelevant - if it uses 1W on standby and 200W at load you would 10 hours before switching off made more sense. As I've said lots of times, its impossible to know which is more efficient without knowing a lot more. You may be irritated, I guess thats a consequence of realising you are wrong...



    Just measured 3 of my pcs. varied specs.

    All went around 110w on bootup for approx 2 minutes.
    Standby average of 30w

    They were all pretty much the same, so unless the op has some nonstandard pc, then my theory is correct.

    Now, i;m definately done with this thread, and you can argue the toss all night with yourself.
    Edited by: "jayjayuk1234" 22nd Jan 2011

    jayjayuk1234

    Just measured 3 of my pcs. varied specs.All went around 110w on bootup … Just measured 3 of my pcs. varied specs.All went around 110w on bootup for approx 2 minutes.Standby average of 30wThey were all pretty much the same, so unless the op has some nonstandard pc, then my theory is correct.Now, i;m definately done with this thread, and you can argue the toss all night with yourself.



    Standby average of 30W? Pretty dated hardware then. Leaps and bounds have been made in terms of efficiency in recent times, particularly regards standby power. What about, say, an Atom-based net-top connected to a Plasma? (Actually a very common arrangement for HTPC users).

    if ur girlfriend have a switch,then turn that off.it is much better to produce less carbon dioxide then wasting electricity....

    addjon

    if ur girlfriend have a switch,then turn that off.it is much better to … if ur girlfriend have a switch,then turn that off.it is much better to produce less carbon dioxide then wasting electricity....



    That's what the discussion is........do you use more electricity turning a pc off, compared to leaving it on standby? Key factors:

    Power used by turning pc on
    Power used in standby
    Length of time in standby

    I heard (years ago) that it was more efficient never to turn a pc off, which (guessing at components at the time) is simply not true.

    damit now a days ppl care more abt electricity then humans.

    According to the gadget show it costs less per yr to keep everything on standby than to completely turn off and on each time. Just thought I'd add my two penneth!!
    Post a comment
    Avatar
    @
      Text
      Top Discussions
      1. Back to school: what's your views on your kids uniform and piercing rules e…23
      2. Surprise! The HUKD Summer Flamedeer Hunt 2017 **OFFICIAL THREAD** (trading …3321182
      3. New Nintendo 3DS XL – SNES Edition available in UK from October1326
      4. If you had £50,000 to start a business what would it be ?1525

      See more discussions