F5F Stay Refreshed Software Operating Systems Compare energy use between MacOS and Windows 10.

Compare energy use between MacOS and Windows 10.

Compare energy use between MacOS and Windows 10.

Pages (2): 1 2 Next
A
Ash4eva_xx
Junior Member
Find
15
02-07-2016, 08:17 PM
#1
I'm a MacOS enthusiast with a Windows PC. I'm curious—does one program perform better in saving energy when animations are active? Has software efficiency improved or declined since the early graphical interfaces? If you have any insights, feel free to share!
Reply
Reply
A
Ash4eva_xx
02-07-2016, 08:17 PM #1

I'm a MacOS enthusiast with a Windows PC. I'm curious—does one program perform better in saving energy when animations are active? Has software efficiency improved or declined since the early graphical interfaces? If you have any insights, feel free to share!

Reply
Reply
D
DragonTTK
Member
Find
52
02-10-2016, 02:04 PM
#2
Probably minimal if any power difference. If I had to guess OSX would be more efficient since I think it tends to have less background usage when doing light tasks, but under full load both will be identical.
Reply
Reply
D
DragonTTK
02-10-2016, 02:04 PM #2

Probably minimal if any power difference. If I had to guess OSX would be more efficient since I think it tends to have less background usage when doing light tasks, but under full load both will be identical.

Reply
Reply
2
2Elite4U
Member
Find
70
02-12-2016, 05:50 AM
#3
huh cule
Reply
Reply
2
2Elite4U
02-12-2016, 05:50 AM #3

huh cule

Reply
Reply
B
Bomma
Junior Member
Find
20
02-13-2016, 07:17 PM
#4
MacOS offers improved energy efficiency.
Reply
Reply
B
Bomma
02-13-2016, 07:17 PM #4

MacOS offers improved energy efficiency.

Reply
Reply
R
redson77
Junior Member
Find
3
02-14-2016, 12:13 AM
#5
It might vary based on how well the driver is made and what background tasks are running. Both options can perform better on MacOS than Windows, particularly on a MacBook, since performance mainly depends on driver quality under heavy use.
Reply
Reply
R
redson77
02-14-2016, 12:13 AM #5

It might vary based on how well the driver is made and what background tasks are running. Both options can perform better on MacOS than Windows, particularly on a MacBook, since performance mainly depends on driver quality under heavy use.

Reply
Reply
S
sjoerdje007
Member
Find
96
02-14-2016, 10:33 AM
#6
Reply
Reply
S
sjoerdje007
02-14-2016, 10:33 AM #6

Reply
Reply
H
HogCrafted
Junior Member
Find
31
02-26-2016, 11:47 AM
#7
I've tried it on my Mac.
Reply
Reply
H
HogCrafted
02-26-2016, 11:47 AM #7

I've tried it on my Mac.

Reply
Reply
B
boke2002
Junior Member
Find
39
02-27-2016, 01:37 PM
#8
Sure, glad you asked. Thanks for your message. Just a quick note—yes, I was teasing about the tricky part being sarcastic on forums.
Reply
Reply
B
boke2002
02-27-2016, 01:37 PM #8

Sure, glad you asked. Thanks for your message. Just a quick note—yes, I was teasing about the tricky part being sarcastic on forums.

Reply
Reply
N
Nixelord03
Member
Find
182
02-27-2016, 02:33 PM
#9
It’s not always about better power handling, but more about reducing unnecessary strain during idle periods. The definition varies—like macOS can turn off features such as Time Machine until you connect the charger. This isn’t about controlling CPU speed, just limiting its workload when battery is low. The main point is understanding what counts as effective power management.
Reply
Reply
N
Nixelord03
02-27-2016, 02:33 PM #9

It’s not always about better power handling, but more about reducing unnecessary strain during idle periods. The definition varies—like macOS can turn off features such as Time Machine until you connect the charger. This isn’t about controlling CPU speed, just limiting its workload when battery is low. The main point is understanding what counts as effective power management.

Reply
Reply
B
BSDtheGreat
Junior Member
Find
47
03-03-2016, 08:55 AM
#10
On my hackintosh linked to a UPS, I can clearly observe the variations in power consumption across Windows, Ubuntu, and macOS. Windows usually consumes a lot of energy, often exceeding 40% of the UPS's capacity, while macOS and Ubuntu tend to use only 10%-30%. *NIX-based systems are clearly better here.*
Reply
Reply
B
BSDtheGreat
03-03-2016, 08:55 AM #10

On my hackintosh linked to a UPS, I can clearly observe the variations in power consumption across Windows, Ubuntu, and macOS. Windows usually consumes a lot of energy, often exceeding 40% of the UPS's capacity, while macOS and Ubuntu tend to use only 10%-30%. *NIX-based systems are clearly better here.*

Reply
Reply
Pages (2): 1 2 Next