Interested to know how much less for lower resolutions. I’m not sure I’ve ever cared for high resolutions - and I’d always pick more battery life given the choice.
on my laptop (specs wise - consider steam deck non oled, but worse graphics performance, 1080p screen (IPS)) - 5.3-6 Wh for 2x speed playback. for full hd playback 6-7 Wh. Idle power is much higher though 4.5 Wh, on my old laptop, video power consumption consumed similar power, but idle power was close to 2.5-3 Wh (in terms of specs, it had halve the number of cores, and a tn panel)
That is an interesting take. Can I save a lot of battery by choosing 1080 instead of 2/4k for laptops in general? You don’t really need 2k for prose text or programming anyway.
Edit: no https://superuser.com/questions/974045/does-changing-the-screen-resolution-affect-power-consumption
Can I save a lot of battery by choosing 1080 instead of 2/4k for laptops in general?
Yes. What your link states is that running a 4k monitor at 1080p won’t save you power (it will, but via gpu, not monitor draw).
A 1080p monitor will require substantially less power than a 4k monitor, all other factors held equal.
@cm0002 … and the point is?
That is very low power draw for that activity compared to many devices.
I think Macbooks are about half that.
ARM is more power efficient and so are OLED screens so it wouldn’t shock me if the apple silicon macbooks are significantly lower power draw.
Finding a good 1 to 1 comparison is difficult though so I can’t say for sure.
I wonder how Asahi on Apple Silicon would do. I would think it would be even less
