Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Maingear Touts New Rig As "Planet's Greenest Gaming PC"

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the bold-claims dept.

Maingear has just unveiled what they are calling the "planet's greenest gaming PC." Built using a small form factor and coming with Intel's new Ion graphics as the default option, this little powerhouse is built with a definite eye toward energy consumption. "Said configuration is available with Intel Core 2 Duo CPUs and an 80+ certified 300-watt power supply; those who care more about frame rates than Ma Earth can opt for a GeForce 9800 GT ECO, which — despite being a discrete, power-hungry GPU — still swallows some 40 percent less power than a standard 9800 GT. You'll also find WiFi support, room for an optional Blu-ray drive and TV tuner, upwards of 8GB of RAM and room for a single 2.5-inch HDD or SSD. The whole box checks in at just 7.6- x 8.3- x 11.4-inches, and it's available for order right now starting at $799."

16 of 136 comments (clear)

  1. Ummm... by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think this really qualifies as either a real gaming PC or a green PC. Sure, it will play games, but I wouldn't call it a gaming PC. Same thing with green, it uses a bit too much power to be considered really all that green. Sure, its a good compromise but I don't think its really that green or really that much of a gaming PC.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:Ummm... by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Having read TFA I see no mention of 8 gigs of RAM. The Core 2 Duo isn't exactly blazing fast, though it could play some games reasonably well. The small case also hurts it because most gaming PCs are designed for expandability, which is also quite "green" because it saves you from buying a new computer. Also, most gaming PCs are overclock-able, and have large enough PSU to upgrade decently.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:Ummm... by Kamokazi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you use enough paint it becomes green.

      9800 is quite decent for gaming though. I don't know why they mentioned "Intel's Ion Graphics". For starters, Ion is made by nVidia, and it's primarily a chipset with an integrated 9400 which is pretty much garbage for gaming, AND it's for the Atom CPU, which is weak.

      --
      As our way of thanking you for your positive contributions to Slashdot, you are eligible to disable Slashdot 2.0.
    3. Re:Ummm... by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Core 2 Duo isn't exactly blazing fast...

      No game I've played has even been constrained by my Core 2 Duo (E6600). Heck, I keep it downclocked to 1.6 GHz (vs. 2.4 GHz standard) most of the time and often forget to reset the clock to normal before launching a game. I rarely notice the difference. Of course, it follows that at this point, overclocking the CPU is a pointless exercise. The GPU matters, but on smaller monitors (read: 1680x1050 or less), most games can't even max out the capabilities of a high end two year old graphics card.

      Also, a gaming PC is a gaming PC based on performance, not expandability. Yes, I built my home desktop on a huge chassis to allow expandability, but from age 5-24 I used pre-built gaming PCs that rarely had an upgrade more extreme than an extra stick of memory.

      The lack of expandability is an arguable knock against its greenness though, for exactly the reason you gave.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
  2. Slashvertising... by the+phantom · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Mmm... Slashvertising. How tasty!

    --
    Rhapsody in Numbers
  3. I'm conflicted... by BobMcD · · Score: 5, Insightful

    On the one hand, this seems like a good alternative. On the other, the notion is basically incompatible. After all, wouldn't the greenest thing of all be to simply unplug and go till your garden?

    I fear that 'green' is becoming more about fashion than it is about the Earth, and the notion of a green way to do a very non-green thing seems to support that. Sort of like a hybrid SUV, an eco-friendly landfill, or a more merciful way to kill whales.

    Some things just aren't green...

    Why do I feel the need to go buy carbon credits just for posting this?

    1. Re:I'm conflicted... by Uniquitous · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I came here to say that. "Green" is just a trendy buzzword now. The current crop of airheads trying to out-do each other at who can be the greenest... have any of them read or even heard of the Mother Earth News, tried building a solar heat catcher to lower their heating bills, hell, done anything beside throw their plastic in the bin at Whole Foods and patted themselves on the back?

    2. Re:I'm conflicted... by SilverEyes · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly - a single-use plastic bottle of "spring water" - while driving themselves there and back in their hybrid Yukon/Escalade, and returning to a massive home.

      --
      Interesting.
    3. Re:I'm conflicted... by Talderas · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I fear that 'green' is becoming more about fashion than it is about the Earth

      Wait, it hasn't always been about fashion?

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    4. Re:I'm conflicted... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Some things just aren't green...

      There might be some people who like to play games but still want to keep their power consumption down a bit. Of all the gizmos in a person's house, the computer is not really the most power hungry, nor does it waste the most power.

      Just because some things are not generally associated with conservation does not mean an effort should not be made to make their power consumption more efficient. Driving cross country isn't generally considered "green" but I'd still rather do it in a Prius than a Hummer.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    5. Re:I'm conflicted... by darthflo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      First of all, as Penguinoflight already said, a power supply's efficiency per power drawn would look somewhat like a (ideally very wide, steep-sided and flat-topped) bell curve. Drawing 400 W from a 700 W PSU might draw 450-500 W (80-90% efficiency) from the grid; a 400 or 450 W unit near it's peak would probably drop in efficiency, drawing more like 550 W or so.

      Moving on, the more high-performance hardware in a PC, the wider it's power draw will vary. If you've got one (standard) CPU, one (standard) GPU, one hard drive and an optical drive (plus the obvious rest), you may get an idle power draw around 150 W or so. Having the *PUs peak and both drives spin up at the same time might increase the power draw to 200, 250 W tops.

      In a more high-end gaming rig you may find two quad-core CPUs, two GPUs, one or two optical drives plus a few (one to three) system drives (SSD, 10k RPM hds) plus several (two to many) storage drives (5.4-7.2k RPM hds). Idling along, this may draw some 250 W or so. Peak draw is more tricky here, though. Most of the hardware will put itself into low power modes when unused (drives spin down; CPUs and GPUs move to a lower clock/voltage state). As soon as there's some processing load, it'll all start sucking power like a black hole would suck footballs through a gardening hose. Full load power draw can easily be triple that of the box sitting idle.

      The key is as much of the components spending as much time as possible in the deepest sleep (and power saving) states whenever possible. A quad-core 3 GHz proc and max draw of 100 W may be more efficient than a low-power single-core 1.5 GHz with 20 W max draw; assuming deep sleep at 1 W: The latter may spend, for example, 8 seconds out of 10 processing a given task and spend only 2 s in sleep (8 s * 20 W = 160 Ws + 2 s * 1 W = 162 Ws) while the former would finish in a second, then sleep (1 s * 100 W = 100 Ws + 9 s * 1 W = 109 Ws).

  4. That's kind of a stretch. by FireballX301 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Those parts are outdated for anyone who cares to be on the 'bleeding edge' in gaming, and anyone who doesn't can build their own version of that rig at about half the price (ignoring the form factor).

    Given the probable lifetime energy savings of that $800 box over the $400 DIY job, plus the base environmental costs of building all those parts, you're essentially spending money to have someone else make you feel better.

    1. Re:That's kind of a stretch. by CRiMSON · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But isn't that what 90% of the "Green/eco friendly" shit is.

      You pay more money to feel better and solve nothing?

      It's like the grocery stores around here charging .20 a bag.. to help you protect the enviroment by not using Plastic...

      Fact is, now instead of having grocery bags I can use to pick up dogshit/put in the kitchen waste basket, I'm not having to buy plastic bags to do said jobs.

      So what exactly have they protect? Oh right, there bottom lines by charging .20 a bag lol.

      --
      oogly boogly!
  5. Greenest Gaming PC by Daimanta · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Is like the most fuel-efficient Hummer. Who cares about it?

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    1. Re:Greenest Gaming PC by flaming+error · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps the US Army?

  6. Re:I hate the word "rig" by HikingStick · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Hmmm...I've been kicking up dust on this planet for a good long while now, and have used "rig" regularly any time I'm referring to something that is a complete configuration or package:
    • fishing (rod, reel, tackle)
    • specific fishing tackle conifigurations
      • Lindy rig
      • Texax rig
      • Carolina rig
    • a bike (rims, wheels, fenders, rack, paniers, lights)
    • an outdoor dumbwaiter for a treehouse (box, pulleys, rope)
    • sailing (masts, lines, sails, winches)

    The word isn't as narrow as I think you'd like it to be.

    --
    I use irony whenever I can, but my shirts are still wrinkled...