Power usage

[JohnnySL]

hi all.

I was wondering, would it be possible to include the power usage (idle and under load) in the future reviews? I am trying to find good independent figures on power usage of the routers and they are pretty hard to find. Only hardware.info seems to measure them, but it would be nice to see a second site do them as well, so we can double check if those values are correct.

I understand that with the cheap electricity prices in the US this is not really interesting, but in Europe where prices are a lot higher, it is influencing my decision which product to buy.

 

[thiggins]

We measure power for NASes because they use more due to hard drives.

Today's top-end routers typically draw 7-10W, so we don't bother to measure and have no plans to.

 

[JohnnySL]

Well, according to hardware.info e.g. the Asus routers draw roughly double the amount of power than the Netgear versions (e.g. 8W for a r7500, vs 13.3W for an ac-87u). Double the wattage is double the cost. Over a lifespan of 5 years, that is a difference of about $120,- here in Europe.

But from an American perspective i can understand that this is not really interesting.

 

[azazel1024]

Well, according to hardware.info e.g. the Asus routers draw roughly double the amount of power than the Netgear versions (e.g. 8W for a r7500, vs 13.3W for an ac-87u). Double the wattage is double the cost. Over a lifespan of 5 years, that is a difference of about $120,- here in Europe.

But from an American perspective i can understand that this is not really interesting.

Speaking as an American, no it is interesting and important.

I agree, looking at a lot of reviews as well as personal testing, Asus routers, for whatever reason, seem very power hungry compared to almost all competitors.

My costs are roughly 14 cents per kw-hr when all is said and done, or about $1 US per year per watt operating 24/7.

So the difference between a 5w router and a 14w router is $9 a year, or $45 over 5 years. I wouldn't consider that HUGE, but it certainly is a consideration in total cost of ownership of a device.

Does seem like it would be relatively easy to hook a router/AP up and measure power consumption at idle, which is how most routers are going to be used (just idling or with light load, which rarely causes power usage figures to budge much). Just standardize it so its the same with everyone one. Idle, WAN connected and a single LAN connected and measure the figure.

It increases test time...but how much? 2-3 minutes to make sure you have a kill-a-watt between the router's adapter and the wall outlet, including the time to add a sentence or small table showing the figure?

I'd also be curious on the same thing when testing switches and pretty much any other networking equipment.

Most of the stuff is left on 24/7 and power consumption can vary pretty wildly.

My TP-Link WDR3600 with WAN and single LAN active uses 4.2w, my TP-Link 841nd with WAN and LAN active uses 2.6w, my TP-Link Archer C8 uses 7.8w with WAN and LAN active. Some of the Asus routers seem to be using in the 13-16w range. Some of the combined router/cable modems seem to use anywhere from 8w up to around 25w.

 

[thiggins]

Speaking as an American, no it is interesting and important.

So the difference between a 5w router and a 14w router is $9 a year, or $45 over 5 years. I wouldn't consider that HUGE, but it certainly is a consideration in total cost of ownership of a device.

ASUS guys are pretty devoted. I can't see power consumption being a serious consideration.

 

[azazel1024]

You ASUS guys are pretty devoted. I can't see power consumption being a serious consideration.

I actually don't own any of their networking gear (though I have one of their tablets).

It depends on who you ask. I certainly like to find out power consumption figures on all of the gear I get just to see if it SHOULD be a consideration.

If features and performance and reasonably comparable and there is nothing big jumping out at me in terms of differences that matter to me, I am going to look at price and total cost of ownership, which includes power consumption.

I'd certainly rather own a $69 router with similar performance, support, etc. to a $89 router...but if it turns out that the $69 router is likely to pull down $10+ a year in extra electricity, I am going to jump on the more expensive router.

I do the same algebra when figuring out computer equipment that is likely to be on a lot (IE server parts), appliances, etc.

 

[JohnnySL]

thanks for chipping in Azazel. i'm afraid we are the odd one out here

 

[L&LD]

I have to agree that more info is never too much.

Even a quick check of idle power usage with nothing connected, wired or wireless, is worth looking at.

Not so much for us now, but to show the manufacturers that this aspect does get looked at and taken into consideration by the buying public.

With more attention drawn to it, this will be one more point for them to compete on.

 

[sfx2000]

I brought this up a while back in discussion on the updated Wireless Test Regimes...

It's a valid data point - in a comparison between vendor X and vendor Y, if all features are similar, and vendor Y is 25 percent more efficient in power usage, this is a big deal...