3 ms·

Desktop marketing seems to be getting desperate. Few people use the apps they show in the Mac Studio benchmarks. Fewer still care that their chips use less powe

Desktop marketing seems to be getting desperate. Few people use the apps they show in the Mac Studio benchmarks. Fewer still care that their chips use less power... if they did, they would stay on their phones.

Spooky23 5y ago
Large businesses do. I bet in some places you could get grant/loan incentives to replace a PC fleet with these things. Back in the Pentium-4 days, iirc I was able to get almost $250k in grants and $1.5M in subsidized loans to do accelerated refresh of a PC fleet and small datacenter, all through a utility's peak load reduction program.
- contingencies 5y ago
  I don't deny such things happen but it's illogical. If you have 20 people on desktops a small fraction of them will use more energy for microwaving lunch, making coffee or on air conditioning than they will save in aggregate on this nominal reduction in power draw.
  - AdrianB1 5y ago
    Microwaving lunch: 2 minutes at 800W; desktop with monitor: 8 hours at 150W, that is 45 times higher. Similar for coffee, no simple math for AC. If you can reduce 150W to 80W, it is both significant and achievable - this is what my desktop usually draws.
    - contingencies 5y ago
      You forget these things sit ~idle (or at browser load) 99% of the time. The magnitude of difference only expresses at peak consumption. Furthermore, what about the lost time/hassle for changeover plus embodied energy in throwing out the last system? It's insanity.
      - Spooky23 5y ago
        The average corporate PC device gets replaced every 39 months. Acceleration of that cycle with a Mac replacement, which usually has a 50-60 month lifecycle, is a pretty significant savings.
        contingencies 5y ago
        If those are real figures that's a good point :) I think we're well in to pedantry now. Call a somnambulance :)
  - Spooky23 5y ago
    20, yes, it’s a waste of time. At 2000, reducing power consumption by 30%, may yield $100k annually.
  - dddddddan 5y ago
    How is it nominal? The current MacPro (which most of the target market would already be using) has a power supply that is >1kW. It's insane that this this is faster than the existing MacPro with a tiny power draw in comparison.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
etchalon 5y ago
The "few people" who use those apps are the people Apple is selling these systems to.

Spooky23 5y ago

Large businesses do. I bet in some places you could get grant/loan incentives to replace a PC fleet with these things. Back in the Pentium-4 days, iirc I was able to get almost $250k in grants and $1.5M in subsidized loans to do accelerated refresh of a PC fleet and small datacenter, all through a utility's peak load reduction program.

contingencies 5y ago
I don't deny such things happen but it's illogical. If you have 20 people on desktops a small fraction of them will use more energy for microwaving lunch, making coffee or on air conditioning than they will save in aggregate on this nominal reduction in power draw.
- AdrianB1 5y ago
  Microwaving lunch: 2 minutes at 800W; desktop with monitor: 8 hours at 150W, that is 45 times higher. Similar for coffee, no simple math for AC. If you can reduce 150W to 80W, it is both significant and achievable - this is what my desktop usually draws.
  - contingencies 5y ago
    You forget these things sit ~idle (or at browser load) 99% of the time. The magnitude of difference only expresses at peak consumption. Furthermore, what about the lost time/hassle for changeover plus embodied energy in throwing out the last system? It's insanity.
    - Spooky23 5y ago
      The average corporate PC device gets replaced every 39 months. Acceleration of that cycle with a Mac replacement, which usually has a 50-60 month lifecycle, is a pretty significant savings.
      - contingencies 5y ago
        If those are real figures that's a good point :) I think we're well in to pedantry now. Call a somnambulance :)
- Spooky23 5y ago
  20, yes, it’s a waste of time. At 2000, reducing power consumption by 30%, may yield $100k annually.
- dddddddan 5y ago
  How is it nominal? The current MacPro (which most of the target market would already be using) has a power supply that is >1kW. It's insane that this this is faster than the existing MacPro with a tiny power draw in comparison.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

etchalon 5y ago

The "few people" who use those apps are the people Apple is selling these systems to.