4 ms·

Netflix deploys three versions of their caches to IXs and ISPs (their called Open Connect Appliances). The smallest are 1U, up to 112TB of storage, draw 250W a

Netflix deploys three versions of their caches to IXs and ISPs (their called Open Connect Appliances). The smallest are 1U, up to 112TB of storage, draw 250W and can push 10gbps (~1700 simultaneous viewers in HD). The largest are 2U, up to 360TB of storage, draw 500W and can push 200gps (~38000 simultaneous viewers in HD). That's comparable to just a few typical desktop PCs. And perhaps just a single decked out gaming PC. Thinking about this, since most of the power usage is from client devices, I'm now wondering if gaming uses way more power globally than video (especially since bandwidth is not a good indicator of power usage).

jokoon 5y ago
Gaming does use a lot of power because GPU are very power hungry. The Nintendo switch is one of the best gaming platform, peaking at about 50W when gaming PC requires about 500W to 700W PSU. For video, most of the carbon is emitted while building hardware, so the question is mostly about hardware durability, which would be a good question. Another interesting question is the carbon cost of bandwidth: * wireless antennas takes a lot of energy, especially 5G which requires a lot of new hardware. * I'm curious about the energy cost of wired internet, optic fiber installation. Generally, the problem with IT is mostly hardware and quick iteration of software that requires new hardware. It's a very chaotic and vicious cycle. Fixing it might obviously reduce profits of IT companies.
- phillipseamore 5y ago
  A 4/5G base station setup uses from 1 to 3kW. That might be very little pr. user. Fiber is very power efficient since it only needs powered equipment on each end and the fiber itself is passive (over extreme distances, 100km+, repeating might be needed but that's almost exclusively submarine cables). POTS/Copper (xDSL etc) are not very efficient since every active (as in available, not as in being used) line needs to be powered on 48v. In my experience HW is usually either renewed to get energy savings or because it does not meet demand anymore. A network is most often designed for more demand than is expected so it's usually about energy savings. With P2P there would either be the same requirement for networking HW or possibly more. Demand for bandwidth would not decrease with more P2P usage but rather diversify (likely requiring more interconnections = more HW).

jokoon 5y ago

Gaming does use a lot of power because GPU are very power hungry. The Nintendo switch is one of the best gaming platform, peaking at about 50W when gaming PC requires about 500W to 700W PSU. For video, most of the carbon is emitted while building hardware, so the question is mostly about hardware durability, which would be a good question. Another interesting question is the carbon cost of bandwidth: * wireless antennas takes a lot of energy, especially 5G which requires a lot of new hardware. * I'm curious about the energy cost of wired internet, optic fiber installation. Generally, the problem with IT is mostly hardware and quick iteration of software that requires new hardware. It's a very chaotic and vicious cycle. Fixing it might obviously reduce profits of IT companies.

phillipseamore 5y ago
A 4/5G base station setup uses from 1 to 3kW. That might be very little pr. user. Fiber is very power efficient since it only needs powered equipment on each end and the fiber itself is passive (over extreme distances, 100km+, repeating might be needed but that's almost exclusively submarine cables). POTS/Copper (xDSL etc) are not very efficient since every active (as in available, not as in being used) line needs to be powered on 48v. In my experience HW is usually either renewed to get energy savings or because it does not meet demand anymore. A network is most often designed for more demand than is expected so it's usually about energy savings. With P2P there would either be the same requirement for networking HW or possibly more. Demand for bandwidth would not decrease with more P2P usage but rather diversify (likely requiring more interconnections = more HW).