• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

'£48 a month to run a PS3'

Status
Not open for further replies.

Cedeo

Member
According to research site Sust-it.net , if you spent £400 on a PlayStation 3 this year, you'll find that over an eight-year period you'll spend another £400 just powering the thing. It has a 380w power supply, meaning that if it is maxed out for two hours every day, it will cost you about £48 a month to run - and that's on top of the £40 a game that Sony also charges....


And while many gamers will see this as a worthwhile investment, it's important to point out that running a Nintendo Wii for the same amount of time over the same eight years will cost you £17. Yeah, just seventeen quid.

The Xbox 360 would cost you £165 while the original PlayStation 2 would use up only around £50 over the same eight years.

Figures used are based on numbers provided by Sust-it.net .


£1 = $1.975



http://www.tech.co.uk/home-entertainment/gaming/games-consoles/news/power-consumption-doubles-playstation-3-cost?articleid=1410931336
 
you'll find that over an eight-year period you'll spend another £400 just powering the thing. It has a 380w power supply, meaning that if it is maxed out for two hours every day, it will cost you about £48 a month to run

Does NOT compute. (£48 per year)
 
Relix said:
Confirmed: Playstation 3 the cause of Global Warming

But it could also be a cure for cancer thanks to it using Folding@Home. Suddenly I'm morally confused as to where I should stand with the PS3. O_o
 
This just in: Your mom will cost us $5,000,000 a year in order to research why on gods green earth you would search and dig for this article and post it as if to give us some new found guidance.

This also just in: PC Gaming uses more power. YIKES!?


[/madness]
 
Wario64 said:
Don't forget the monthly payments you have to make just to house the PS3.
Or the television

Hell, how could anyone forget the price of cigarettes needed to appease the system, either?
 
Draft said:
And they say Live is expensive.
[/img]http://modusproductions.com/neogaf/images/avatar/itapoint.gif[/img]

:lol

Some funny math going on in this thread.
 
Gattsu25 said:
Or the television

Hell, how could anyone forget the price of cigarettes needed to appease the system, either?

Someone needs to find the picture of the PS3 air filter that cleans out ciggarette smoke :lol
 
Ranger X said:
Seriously, this thread should be "cat-ified".

4l3yhiq.gif
 
Does the system ever consume that much power for two hours at a time? I play mine for about that much a day, and my electric bill has barely gone up. liars.

6cd17k0.jpg
 
pswii60 said:
you'll find that over an eight-year period you'll spend another £400 just powering the thing. It has a 380w power supply, meaning that if it is maxed out for two hours every day, it will cost you about £48 a month to run
Does NOT compute. (£48 per year)
So not only is the OP horrible at math, but his source as well?
 
1.) You can't do math. (It's 50 a year)
2.) The PS3 doesn't run at its max power 24/7. Most of the time it operates at a lower power consumption.
3.) You can't do math.
4.) The X360's power consumption isn't far below that of the PS3.
 
pswii60 said:
Does NOT compute. (£48 per year)

I calculated £4.17 per month which is about $8. Sounds about right. My power bill went up about $5 after leaving my PS3 on all the time.

It's hard to tell exactly though since electricity usage varies so much month to month for me.
 
bigfatgameguy said:
Does the system ever consume that much power for two hours at a time? I play mine for about that much a day, and my electric bill has barely gone up. liars.



Lots of benchmarks have shown that ingame it usually consumes like 180-190W. Seems like F@H makes it rise to 200W (heavy CPU and GPU intensive) according to Stanford.


For comparison, a normal gaming PC is around 190W, the 360 around 170-180 and a Wii around 20 (!)
 
womfalcs3 said:
1.) You can't do math. (It's 50 a year)
2.) The PS3 doesn't run at its max power 24/7. Most of the time it operates at a lower power consumption.
3.) You can't do math.
4.) The X360's power consumption isn't far below that of the PS3.

I didn't write this bullcrap.
 
Why do people who know nothing about topics create **** like this?

People with kill-a-watts say PS3 is around 200-220 at load. Seriously, if people wanna create an effing article like that, maybe they could spring the 20 bucks for a Kill-a-watt device.

And for the people bringing up PCs, don't. Excluding the shark jumping ATI of recent, Nvidia's 1st really obnoxious card was the 8800. And the G92 looks like it's gonna be significantly more powerful, yet more efficient. So their 8800 line looks like more of a one time event of insanity (and even then, you can do dual core, 8800, 2GB ram, and an 80Plus power supply and probably break under 200 watts at load if you don't overclock like mad.)

So it's really easy to build a gaming PC that loads significantly under 200 watts and idles at a LOT less than either PS3 or 360.
 
it will cost you about £48 a month to run - and that's on top of the £40 a game that Sony also charges....

Damn, Sony charges £40 for a game on top of that? I was expecting Sony to give away the games for free since it cost so much in electric bills :(
yes, i'm kidding.
 
its for the cooling right? better than 3 redringsamirite? /sarcasm

anyways, why does this always get brought up?? I thought this was debunked in several different ways... I remember reading leaving ps3 folding constantly only costs like 25 a month if its 24/7 based on location it can be more or less, but I'm from taxachusetts, so it's quite a bit.
 
Gattsu25 said:
you wrote the “bullcrap” thread title, and you made this “bullcrap” thread solely based on this “bullcrap” source

Yeah, I was quoting what the article inside said, hence the '
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom