Jump to content

MacOS vs Windows 10 Power Consumption

Go to solution Solved by Guest,

MacOS has better power management. 

So I am a MacOS fan-

I have a windows PC

but I have a macbook (macOS mojave)

 

and I was wondering, does one software do better at saving energy (with all the animations on and stuff) also, has the efficiency gotten better or worse since the first GUIs

so if anyone just knows anything interesting about this id luv 2 here it

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

 

Desktop:

Intel Core i7-11700K | Noctua NH-D15S chromax.black | ASUS ROG Strix Z590-E Gaming WiFi  | 32 GB G.SKILL TridentZ 3200 MHz | ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 3080 | 1TB Samsung 980 Pro M.2 PCIe 4.0 SSD | 2TB WD Blue M.2 SATA SSD | Seasonic Focus GX-850 Fractal Design Meshify C Windows 10 Pro

 

Laptop:

HP Omen 15 | AMD Ryzen 7 5800H | 16 GB 3200 MHz | Nvidia RTX 3060 | 1 TB WD Black PCIe 3.0 SSD | 512 GB Micron PCIe 3.0 SSD | Windows 11

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BobVonBob said:

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.

huh cule

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

MacOS has better power management. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

could depend from the driver quality and background activity

both could be better in MacOS than Windows, especially in a Macbook, under full load it's only a mater of driver quality 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2019 at 9:40 PM, RorzNZ said:

MacOS has better power management. 

that answer is too long and complicated  ( ' -- ' ) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, James the Broke Gamer said:

that answer is too long and complicated  ( ' -- ' ) 

I've tested it on my Mac. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

I've tested it on my Mac. 

cool, thx for answering (btw I was joking with the complicated part it is hard to be sarcastic on a forum)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/8/2019 at 8:40 PM, floofer said:

MacOS has better power management. 

not necessarily better power management, but less crap hogging it down at idle.

 

look it all depends what you define as power management.

for example macOS is intelligent enough to disable things like Time Machine until you plug in the charger. that has nothing to do with keeping the CPU clock speed under control, just making the CPU do less work on battery.

 

so the real question is what do you define as power management?

She/Her

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...
On 2/8/2019 at 7:23 PM, James the Broke Gamer said:

So I am a MacOS fan-

I have a windows PC

but I have a macbook (macOS mojave)

 

and I was wondering, does one software do better at saving energy (with all the animations on and stuff) also, has the efficiency gotten better or worse since the first GUIs

so if anyone just knows anything interesting about this id luv 2 here it

 

On my hackintosh, which i have connected to a UPS, i can physically see the differences in power draw when running Windows, Ubuntu and MacOS. Windows tends to guzzle power, using up over 40% capacity of the UPS' load capability, whereas macOS and ubuntu tend to use only 10%-30%. *NIX based OSes definitely win in this department.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Windows is so bloated full of background chaff this isnt even a contest. Advantage Mac. Apple also has the advantage of owning the hardware, so the over all integration is so much better.

 

If you spend the time turning off all the background crap in windows you can narrow the difference, but who has time for that.

 

Also, were talking about desktop Operating systems. A server OS like hyper-v core will likely be far more efficient than Mac OS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/15/2019 at 11:06 AM, Ashley MLP Fangirl said:

not necessarily better power management, but less crap hogging it down at idle.

 

From a developer perspective you can sort of say they have better power management or maybe it is better to day they have done a much better job of getting us devs to adopt the apis they provide.

MS have simlare apis but almost no-one every uses them. on apple platforms when your app runs a task you give it a pirority this is used be the system to scedual to task in the best way to safe power and maximise perfomance.

Eg you might have a task that is related to active user interaction, eg the user is dragging an item into a custom list you have built and you want to move other items out of the way to make space for it, so you take this work as really really high priority. 

Or maybe the user clicks a button and your going to export some data, this is important is is fast but is should not end up slowing down user interactive tasks, so you should label this with `userInitiated` 

 

Another aspect of your app (due to your product manager being a d**k) is collecting way to much personal info and metrics and sending it to your anyalitcs backend (some nasty third party like FB). This really should not get in the way of the user at all and it's even ok if it takes 15 minutes or 1h to do the tiny task you should use `background` pirority. 

(there are a few other levels you can set).

What the OS does with these tags is to configure how it schedules tasks. Eg on intel systems lower priority tasks will be placed on cores that are currently not boosting, it will also group them up so it can put these cores to sleep for a while and then start them up (at a low power level) to run the group of background tasks before putting the core back to sleep. This scheduling of tasks also helps high perf tasks on intel platforms as most intel cpus have a limited time they can sustain a full boost so by keeping as many cores ideal as much as possible when enough high priority tasks fire up the system has cores that have not used thier respective boost.  

While windows does have simlare apis there are a few key limitations, firstly devs do not really use them, secondary since windows is NT based it has very poor support for having LOTs of threads most devs at told on windows to have as many threads as there are cpu cores and implement task priority switching yourselves/with a third party framework within your threads. On macOS (and linux or even basically any other modern os) it is common for applications to have 100s of threads and this is a good thing as it really helps the OS scheduler track and prioritise things properly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...



OSX on mac hardware = by far more effiecent than windows. 
Windows will destory your battery life - why? 

First Safari gives a huge battery boost vs chrome, no safari on windows means chrome = compounded issue with battery life. 
Second, OSX is optimized to not overload the system with background tasks, more so if your device has a GPU then windows is forced to run on the GPU and loses graphics switching. 

Windows is horrible on Apple hardware, OSX 100%. 
There is little you can do to optimized apple hardware on windows, but undervolting the cpu is one option, also undervolting the gpu however its a minor difference. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×