Follow

English synopsis: A study by the Fraunhofer institute commissioned by the Federal Environment Agency analysed the CO2 emissions of different internet technologies (actual data, not just estimates). Emissions created by the data centre are smaller than those of the method of transportation. Glass fibre is best, followed by copper cable, 5G, 4G, and 3G. UHD videos shouldn’t be played, as they are 10x larger than HD and offer minimal improvements.

netzpolitik.org/2020/studie-zu

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 0

Actual data: CO2
Data centre - 1.5 g/hour
- 2 g/hour
Copper - 4 g/hour
- 5 g/hour
- 13 g/hour
- 90 g/hour

video - 700 MB
video - 7 GB

Show thread

So, as you can see, the “increased efficiency” of streaming on a Thin Client only concerns the data centre, which is already the most efficient part of the system. The real problem is the energy needed to transport that information across the globe 🌍.

Show thread

One thing I haven’t considered is that game streaming might still be more eco-friendly for the “casual” gamer. If you’re only playing a few hours per week, then buying a gaming PC all for yourself is worse than “borrowing” one from the streaming service.

Show thread

Between and , I would take GeForce Now any day, because the quality is magnitudes better AND I’m not locked into a platform.

Show thread
Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!