Savings in time, our most valuable commodity, but certainly not in
electricity. Lets say the newish (<2 yrs old) computer is 60% more
efficient. Unlikely, but I'm giving you the benefit.
Rough calculations show me saving $212/yr if I just don't use a computer
and kill my Blade in a grand funeral on Oracle beach (lets negate the
CO2, toxins released, and the cost on future generations, though BC
would import less coal produced USA electricity to supplement our hydro
production).
At 60% more efficient, the electrical savings would be $127.00/yr. I
priced a new Dell mid-range workstation @ $1300 + taxes & shipping =>
~$1,500. So it would take me over 12 yrs to pay it off from
electrically savings, maybe 9 yrs if you include price increases.
Hardly the numbers the marketing types want everyone to ponder as they
rush out to be "green?".
Right now my time is very important to me, so I'm getting an amd
workstation to replace the Blade. But electrical savings don't make the
deal. Also if you look at all the pollution incured to produce each
computer, perhaps we should try and use them a bit longer.
Peter
On 11-09-16 07:20 AM, Olivier Cherrier wrote:
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:20:35PM +0200, matthieu.he...@laas.fr wrote:
Honestly if you need graphics performance, give up on sparc64 and get
a cheap x86 based machine (even a 7-8 years old one with a supported
card will outperform any other architecture under X on OpenBSD, and
not only because it's the only architecture that gets attention from
X.Org developpers).
You can even buy a recent desktop machine... it will be relatively
shortly refunded by the economies you will do while switching off
your sb1000! ;-)
