Can you help settle a disagreement please?

timesrunnigout

Hi there techy people.
A quick question .......we have several computers in our home( one desk top, on touch screen and 3 laptops)
Currently they are all left on at all times (24/7).....they all have a sleep mode which kicks in when they've not been used for 10 minutes)

They are left on like this because i was told some years ago that this was the best way...both in terms of wear on the computers and in electricity/running costs.

Recently a friend visited and said we were completly mad!.....and that on both counts we were wrong ie. not good to leave them on all the time and electricity costs would be definitly alot more by leaving them on...even in sleep mode.

so can anyone clarify these for me.......which is best?
Thanks

Myser

Sleep mode as its name indicates is just that - it is not meant for a long-term solution.

People have a tendency on laptops and computers to just shut the lid or put them in sleep-mode. Periodically doing this without shutting down the computers will cause them to eventually slow down as your session data has to be stored. This affects Windows more than other operating systems.

With older computers, people thought that periodically switching them on and off would damage components. With modern power-supplies, and components on motherboards, this is less the case now.

You will use more electricity when the computers are in sleep-mode as opposed to completely off. Only slightly more though.

Why not buy an energy consumption meter and prove it for yourself:

http://www.maplin.co.uk/plug-in-electricity-cost-and-usage-calculator-223573

It would be interesting to post back the results from what you find.

I would still recommend fully shutting them down for the reasons given above.

ChiefGrasscutter

Here are the figures for my Dell - which I run two screens.
Included in the figures are 15Watts continuous for the UPS and another 5 Watts or so for the router.
All figures approx as the power take varies by the second up/down- measured by a plug in power meter - from maplins I recall.

Fully on and screens lit - 220 watts
Fully on but screens both off 130 watts

Unit on stand by - 45 Watts
Unit off but main supply feed on - 41 Watts
Unit totally off - so just router and UPS - 20 Watts.

So unless I am going to switch the mains to the computer totally off, there is no effective difference between switching the unit to standby and turning it off. So indeed I leave it on standby when I'm not using it most of the time typically overnight for example. Indeed it hardly ever gets switched fully 'Off' - it just gets a re-start every now and then to clear out the memory etc of junk accumulated over the last x days.

There is one valid justifiable reason for not switching it totally off and that is the most likely time for it to fail is when the power is applied as that it when there may be inrush currents and power spikes for the electronics to handle.

robmar0se

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

There is one valid justifiable reason for not switching it totally off and that is the most likely time for it to fail is when the power is applied as that it when there may be inrush currents and power spikes for the electronics to handle.

I can't believe that you don't have a good surge protector if you have UPS? That would protect/insure you from spikes. My general advice is sleep mode during the day, but all off at night or during extensive absences............

Why not set up a poll as it is an interesting debate.

victor2

I have the power switch on mine set so that the computer hibernates and a "Powerdown" adapter controlled by the main computer supply, so that it disconnects the monitor, printer etc. when the computer shuts down and powers them when the computer starts up. Startup from hibernation is faster than a full power up and I do a full shutdown about once a week or a restart as and when something requires it.
It is widely believed that powering on and off the hard drive causes more stress than leaving it running and can lead to an earlier failure than if it's just left running, but so many computers effectively power down the HDD when idle anyway, that it may not be so much of an issue. There's precious little else in the way of mechanical moving parts in a modern computer and it's those that could be more susceptible to wear from power cycling.

Chickabiddybex

If they're all hibernating - leave them on, no big deal.
If they're all sleeping - U MAD! :P

renegade

Chickabiddybex wrote: »

If they're all hibernating - leave them on, no big deal.
If they're all sleeping - U MAD! :P

So, whats the difference between hibernating and sleeping?

Myser

http://windows.microsoft.com/en-GB/windows7/Sleep-and-hibernation-frequently-asked-questions

ChiefGrasscutter

robmar0se wrote: »

I can't believe that you don't have a good surge protector if you have UPS? That would protect/insure you from spikes. My general advice is sleep mode during the day, but all off at night or during extensive absences............

Why not set up a poll as it is an interesting debate.

The UPS will indeed protect against external power/voltage surges & spikes coming down the power line from getting into the PC. (In some rural areas a UPS sometimes can almost be a requirement due to the number of power cuts)

What I was talking about is inrush currents etc applied to the PC's electronics boards generated by/from the power being applied to them and coming from the PC's own internal power supply unit - all of which is after the UPS so the UPS cannot protect the PC from them.
Anedotally I've heard that the most likely time for a PC's power unit to fail is when it's switched on.

As you say 'tis an interesting question - and may also depend on whether you have an old pc or a modern one

GunJack

the "more likely to fail on switch-on" scenario is correct, CG is correct in that it's the transient voltage spikes generated by the internal PSU that are likely to do the damage to the other components, and unless you spend £££££'s on a PSU with super-mega transient protection, that's always going to be the case

robmar0se

GunJack wrote: »

the "more likely to fail on switch-on" scenario is correct, CG is correct in that it's the transient voltage spikes generated by the internal PSU that are likely to do the damage to the other components, and unless you spend £££££'s on a PSU with super-mega transient protection, that's always going to be the case

Yes, I would agree - just like its when one turns on a light that is when it blows! However in terms of Desktop PCs I have found that more often than not it is the PSU that blows first, not always, but generally the case. Quite often manufacturers compromises on the PSU and is of poor quality, and quite often underpowered. I'm not suggesting one needs to go to the extreme as suggested above, but a good quality PSU as manufactured by Corsair and the like is probably sufficent. In terms of laptops which generally have a relatively low DC current supplied, it is nearly always the adapter that goes first. (incidentally, if you keep power attached to a laptop with battery connected, one is more likely to kill the battery more quickly if you leave it attached to power 24/7).

However I do do think there is a middle ground without the need to keep power on 24/7