Video games would consume the equivalent of 10 nuclear reactors, according to a report

If, when playing video games, you dream of saving the world, the following is likely to displease you. Although virtual, the exploration of video game worlds involves a very real increase in power consumption, which depends a lot on the hardware used. In a report published in the fall of 2018, several researchers from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory evaluated the carbon footprint of video games according to the platform used (console, stationary computer, laptop… tablets and mobiles excluded from the study). Balance sheet: Globally, this activity would involve approximately 75 terawatt-hours per year. A figure that represents the equivalent of 25 average thermal power plants… or about 10 nuclear reactors !

Consoles greener than computers

The carbon cost is substantial. However, it depends heavily on the place of electricity production : a quick calculation considering electricity production in France (where the carbon intensity of electricity is low, nuclear power being considered as non-carbon emitter) or California (where only 30% of electricity production comes from low-carbon sources) gives as a first approximation… global emissions that can amount from 6 to 2,200 million tons of CO2 per year ! (An estimate calculated from electricityMap data). For their part, the researchers cite a figure of 12 million tons of CO2 per year for the United States, which is the equivalent of 2.3 million individual cars.

GAME CONSOLES. In fact, individual consumptions vary considerably depending on the type of platform used

, the following may displease you. Although virtual, the exploration of video game worlds involves a very real increase in power consumption, which depends a lot on the hardware used. In a report published in the fall of 2018, several researchers from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory evaluated the carbon footprint of video games according to the platform used (console, stationary computer, laptop… tablets and mobiles excluded from the study). Balance sheet: Globally, this activity would involve approximately 75 terawatt-hours per year. A figure that represents the equivalent of 25 average thermal power plants… or about 10 nuclear reactors !

Consoles greener than computers

The carbon cost is substantial. However, it depends heavily on the place of electricity production : a quick calculation considering electricity production in France (where the carbon intensity of electricity is low, nuclear power being considered as non-carbon emitter) or California (where only 30% of electricity production comes from low-carbon sources) gives as a first approximation… global emissions that can amount from 6 to 2,200 million tons of CO2 per year ! (An estimate calculated from electricityMap data). For their part, the researchers cite a figure of 12 million tons of CO2 per year for the United States, which is the equivalent of 2.3 million individual cars.

GAME CONSOLES. In fact, individual consumptions vary considerably depending on the type of platform used, from 5 kWh / year for a casual player using low-energy equipment, to sometimes more than 1,000 kWh/year for a hardworking player with state-of-the-art equipment. A level of consumption that ranges, for American standards, between that of the dryer and that of the electric air conditioning. The use of a console rather than a computer to play remains more widespread : in 2016, the former accounted for 66% of gaming consumption… but their unit power consumption is decreasing faster than that of computers, the report points out. So that contrary to popular belief, the most energy-intensive devices are finally… PCs dedicated to the gamer audience.

Video: Hannibal Watchi

High consumption… but falling thanks to the progress of consoles

However, these high consumptions are declining (at least California-wide), as shown in the graph below from the report.  Several future scenarios emerge, depending on whether players ‘ consumption choices are on PCs, consoles, with virtual reality interfaces or cloud gaming(the fact of playing a video game remotely, a remote data center being used for the calculation of images – a bit like Netflix, but for a video game). The rise of virtual reality, very high fidelity images, or cloud gaming would have very unfavorable consequences on overall consumption.

An energy-intensive problem posed by other technologies, such as the display in 4K (very high definition), which increases consumption on average by 25-64%. According to the report, there is a need to continue to improve the efficiency of the processors (CPUs) and graphics processors (GPUs) used in gaming computers. It also points to the negative consequences of overclocking (the maneuver consisting in adjusting the frequency of the equipment to a higher level in order to gain in performance): according to the tests carried out, the consumption can grow up to a third.

The energy consumption of virtual reality, a special case

Larger size images to calculate, additional accessories (or even wireless) to supply power… virtual reality is expected to be more greedy. But Evan Mills and his colleagues, however, were surprised to see consumption… sometimes weaker in VR ! A situation encountered only for hardware and games that exploit the rendering called “foveal” (after the fovea, central area of the retina where vision is more accurate), where only are calculated in high definition the pixels in the center of the visual field of the player, the rest being calculated only in low definition. The generalization of this practice (far from being acquired today) would be a good way to limit the carbon cost of virtual reality, note the authors.

Still, the choice of the game is not neutral. For the same platform, different games will result in consumptions that can vary by a factor of 3. If we consider a video game available on several platforms at once, consumption can even vary by a factor of 8 to 21 ! The game genre has no particular predictive value on energy consumption, they note. But if we want to play “green”, the best option remains the Nintendo Switch, the least energy-hungry terminal among the 26 supports tested…