So are modern PC processors, they have MASSIVE fan cooled heatsinks.

Freeview HD chipsets are greatly more complicated than SD ones, run at much higher clock rates, and thus run much hotter and use more power.

They don't stick heatsinks on the chips for nothing (in fact they often don't sick heatsinks on when they really should - such as Panassonic Sky boxes).

Well yes, modern pc processors do have massive heatsinks...which do not fit in slim hdtv's by any measure.

Even pc processors that use below 50 watts use a heatsink. To get to a passive level you need very very low power, but in any case its not comparable to some purpose built chip for something as simple as freeview. As I said, even a chip that only uses a few watts is going to get a heatspreader when it is confined in such a harsh environment as a tv.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Samsung-LE19.../ref=de_a_smtd
Entire set has a max consumption of 35watts. So just how many are those watts the freeview chipset? Sorry but you see how the numbers simply can't add up to anything worth a hill of beans.

But doesn't have Freeview HD in it, so why mention it?

Are you perhaps missing the point here?, Freeview HD chips take considerably more power than the SD only versions.

If you stuck an extra 5W on a 35W TV, that certainly wouldn't be a negligible increase. Not that (as far as I know) the chips take 5W, but they take a lot more than the SD ones, so many have heatsinks fitted where as SD ones don't.

Do you have any more recent data, afaik those figures are still fairly representative of their respective technologies today.

Seeing as hauppauge do a USB powered freeview HD that would mean that it can't consume more then 500mw (1/2 watt) if it falls within USB specification.

And that 35W quote was for a 19" set. For a 32" set that goes up to 80W (Samsung D5000 32" Full HD LED).

So that means as most 0.6% of total consumption would be the tuner and that percentage goes down the larger the screen.

As far as I'm aware consumption figures have plummeted since the far off days of most of those sets. It's difficult as it's American, but looking more closely at it it seems to have a range of sets over a good few years - for example the Sony KDL46EX700 if presumably last year or so, and gives a figure of only 87.22W - and the KDL46W4100 gives 274W (and is probably 3-4 years old?).

So that's a reduction down to 1/3 of the power for the same size set.

You don't think all the work is done inside the PC?.

And USB isn't limited to 0.5W anyway.

Ah you spotted the deliberate mistake, 500mA * 5v = 2.5W power draw. And I believe most of the work is done inside the USB tuner as the system requirements are not that high.

Two different questions here.

Will a SD only TV of a similar size use less power than a HD capable one to show SD content - perhaps.

Will a HD TV use less power to show SD content than HD - doubtfull Sony's own figures for two similar TV's show this with the HD tuner TV actually claiming to use less energy than the SD only one. .

Differences between the technology used in different TV's make the question pointless (like Nigels LED/CCFL question).

Only valid comparison is the same TV using a HD source and a SD one using the same settings particulary back lighting levels.

you are comparing LCD vs LED, not exactly a fair comparison ?

afaik, LED screen are about as energy efficient as you can buy at the moment untill larger size OLED become available.

Did you look in the specs.

It says HD tuner built in. 35 watts MAX assuming you max out the brightness to eye burning levels I bet. The fact is the entire thing doesn't have the watts to go around to make your assertion that HD decode takes anything more than a negligible amount of power. I've never seen anyone but you make such a claim in modern times...

Anyways are you really left claiming 5 watts is significant? Lol, its going to be 5 watts regardless of the size of the tv, and its probably not even that.

Like it or not c4rv nailed it on the head, if a usb peripheral exists then the power consumption is by default negligible. You worry about tuning power, but that is proven to be next to nothing, you cannot then point to processing in the pc because all the pc would possibly do is decode the video codec, and dedicated chipsets do that far more efficiently than pc's now(assuming no gpu decode), which is why hand held devices like iphones and ipads can play hd video without melting in your hand. The fact that the ipad can playback video for something like 10 hours is due to the efficiency of dedicated video codec hardware, much the same as with any device playing video these days, such embedded chips have been common for years now, so I don't get why you believe that somehow decoding video is a super big thing anymore. Every manufacturer or the 3rd party suppliers making the dedicated chips have been working on this very problem for over many years now.

Its such a passe concern that they've even managed to create low power video encoding chips for hd for quite some time now, and encoding video is many fold harder a problem to solve, so you seem to be working with an impression of tech that is kind of out of date.

Looking at this 2009 https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...94T4jsiGWTgXRw document on a tv system on a chip shows the entire tv control chip including video decode is less than 7 watts. They've integrated more and more functions onto a single chip which they call tv system on a chip, and it has only gotten more extreme now in 2012...all manufacturers have their own version of this or source it from a 3rd party.

Yes very old, each year plasma and lcd gain efficiency, so such lists don't hold water for long.

5W out of 35W would be EXTREMELY significant, although it's unlikely to be as high as 5.

Its still insignificant as most tv's still use over 100 watts. If a tv used 5 watts and the chipset used 5 you'd have a point, well actually you still wouldn't because its a trivial amount of power regardless..

It boils down to this, whatever the current consumption is for these things is, it is trivial, and thus not a concern.

I see your problem now - you don't think 5% is a significant figure

Perhaps you would care to set up a standing order to send me 5% of your income every month, as you obviously wouldn't miss such an insignificant amount

Curiousity got the better of me.

Digital multimeter Sony KDL32CX523

Tuned to BBC 1 - 0.45A
Tune to BBC1-HD - 0.45A

No measurable difference.

I wouldn't expect any, it uses the same chips in both cases.

That's what I said in post 2. If you have a HD TV it doesn't cost more to watch HD on it than SD

Even Sony's website gives a lower power consumption for a LCD with a HD Tuner than a similar one without.

So where does your hypothetical extra 5W come from ?

The sets with Freeview HD are later generations, so use less power. SD only sets probably won't exist in a few more years.


The 5W figure applies (roughly) to standalone HD boxes, where the added power of HD chips is even more significant.

If was normal on the 'older' Freeview HD chips for them to require heatsinking due to their higher power requirements.

Same range

KDL-40CX520 (No HD Tuner) 120W
KDL-40CX523 (HD Tuner) 120W

Where's the extra 5W for the T2 tuner ?

Dont see why people worry about power consumption.

Year on year they get more efficient, so upgrading from a old CRT or a old plasma\lcd youre going to be better off.

And of course if you are spending something like £500 - £100 or more on the TV then a stand and chances are you are paying loads a month to sky or virgin then broadband ete etc etc why the hell are people worrying\getting anal about the power consumption

Are you both AV installers ? Just curious is all. I think quite a lot of people look to you both and others, for advice on buying AV equipment and it can get confusing when you disagree lol although I admit what your discussing is way over my head. I found the power saving settings on my tv to be annoying as hell. The picture was too dull. I like a bright screen

CRT's use pretty much the same amount of energy as a similar size new CCFL backlit LCD.

There you go then, why suddenly are we worrying about the electric bill the tv will run up, when its using the same amount ish as it always has.
But people are paying extra now than before per month out of there wages, for the likes of sky\virgin
if you can afford that then worrying about the tv electric bill is not a priority!