Guide

Energy efficiency test: how did an A++ monitor fare?

Kevin Hofer
4.4.2019
Translation: Patrik Stainbrook

Few people think about how much energy their monitor uses. In essence, energy-efficient devices save energy. The question is, can they save you money as well?

Energy efficiency ratings give us an idea of how much (or little) energy our devices use. It stands to reason that monitors in the A++ category are more efficient than those rated A. However, the label doesn’t give information on specific use. So I decided to do some testing of my own. I grabbed an A++ Philips monitor to see how it fared compared to my HP office monitor, which carries an A label.

The Philips monitor boasts 11 W power consumption compared with 26 W consumption of the HP monitor. On standby, the HP uses 0.5 W, while the Philips eats up a mere 0.3 W. The HP’s screen diagonal comes in at 60.96 cm because of its 16:10 format, making it slightly bigger than the 60.5 cm size of the Philips. As a general rule, the bigger the display, the more energy it uses. But the minor distinction here shouldn’t make much difference.

Taking recordings

So that I know exactly how much energy the monitors eat up, I place an energy meter between them. I set the brightness on both monitors to maximum, but apart from that I leave everything on the default settings.

As far as timescales go, a week in my case means the monitor is on for about eight and a half hours per day for four days each week. I don’t need the monitors for the other three days of the week so I leave them on standby. A week later, the Brennenstuhl energy meter is showing a recording of 0.2 kWh for the Philips monitor. When you translate that into a year’s energy use, you get 10.49 kWh. The HP monitor measures 0.5 kWh, which amounts to 26.07 kWh per year.

Update 6 April 2019: as Anonymous User correctly pointed out, I made a mistake working out the average cost. It should in fact be 0.091 francs per kWh. I’ve altered all the sums and figures accordingly.

This means that in a week, the cost of running the Philips monitor comes to 0.0182 francs. Over the course of a year, that’s 95 centimes. Running the HP monitor, on the other hand, amounts to 2.35 Swiss francs per year. What sounds like a big difference in energy usage doesn’t amount to a vast distinction in cost. But what does it look like on a larger scale, say for all the staff monitors used at the Digitec Galaxus AG head office in Zurich and all the stores?

For the planet, not your purse

Electricity is relatively cheap. And for a company the size of Digitec Galaxus AG that is getting close to the 1 billion Swiss franc turnover mark, it doesn’t make much difference financially whether it opts for more energy-efficient A++ monitors or A ones. 1,794 francs difference is neither here nor there.

And yes, I know this isn’t an exact experiment and of course many other variables come into play. But it’s still impressive and the figures do give you a good idea or at least a place to start. Given that these two monitors are a similar price, it’s all the more important to take energy-efficiency ratings into account when buying a new computer.

34 people like this article


User Avatar
User Avatar

From big data to big brother, Cyborgs to Sci-Fi. All aspects of technology and society fascinate me.


Computing
Follow topics and stay updated on your areas of interest

Guide

Practical solutions for everyday problems with technology, household hacks and much more.

Show all

These articles might also interest you

  • Guide

    Monitors for the home office and open-plan office

    by Zeynep Bekar

  • Guide

    Here's how to overclock your screen

    by Kevin Hofer

  • Guide

    From double plugs to professional measuring devices - electrical equipment for your business

    by Andreas Mielke