The Next Efficancy Debacle - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Sionyn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2015, 06:22:46 pm
content: The European Commission sis follow up on 'evidence' that Samsung and another manufacture use software that alters their screens' power use during tests.but isnt this just optimization for different lighting conditions ?a "Home" mode for optimum energy savings and other modes that optimized viewing experience at the expense of power use by the backlight.How is that cheating ?http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-34412501

author: German_EE
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2015, 08:04:09 pm
content: I just tried an experiment with our Samsung TV:Playing a movie scene with a dark background (Alien) the current drawn was 45W at 230VPlaying a movie scene with a bright background (Lawrence of Arabia) the current drawn was 60W at 230VMaybe this is what they are talking about and, if so, it appears to be a standard feature.Edit: Got the figures the wrong way around, sorry, brain fade.

author: Tomorokoshi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2015, 08:13:43 pm
content: Without trying to figure out exactly how the test was done:1. Does the algorithm operate differently depending on the source input? The lab test might be digital while the "real world" test might use analog inputs, for instance.2. Does it adjust based on ambient lighting? What are the conditions in the lab? Were they measured or specified?3. "the South Korean firm's LCD TVs dropped from 70 watts to about 39 watts within a minute of the test video starting." So what is in the video at the 1 minute mark?4. 31 Watts? They're complaining about 31 Watts?

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2015, 08:17:35 pm
content: Most LED backlit LCD TVs dim the backlight when the screen is dark - this means they can claim ridiculous contrast ratios of 10,000:1 or more (when in reality the contrast ratio is rarely above 1,000:1) But this makes the picture look awfully bad, when you have a varying white and black level. In the case of one Samsung LED TV I repaired, this feature could not be turned off. Ridiculous.It wouldn't surprise me if the smarter sets can detect these patterns and optimise for them. The motion lighting feature would only explain the issue if the patterns started fast then ran slowly.Perhaps the test should be 24 hours of typical TV programming - perhaps one of ten prerecorded films ...These energy ratings killed plasma TVs. Panasonic had B class energy ratings on their 42" and 50" 1080p panels, but they still pulled 150W, so maybe they did this too.

author: Augustus
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: October 02, 2015, 10:02:54 pm
content: Quote from: German_EE on October 02, 2015, 08:04:09 pmOur Panasonic Viera 42" LED LCD does the same. They call it "Adaptive Backlight" and it's enabled by default. Sometimes annoying as hell because in certain situations the backlight level seems to be "pumping" back and forth and that's just ugly. After turning it off the power draw remains pretty constant, regardless of the displayed content.@OP: Proper forum etiquette would require to start a new "Samsung firmware engineers morally bankrupt??" thread...

author: AF6LJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 02, 2015, 11:24:45 pm
content: It seems to me that dimming back lights during a program to save energy is counterproductive to the experience.The vast majority of energy saving features in appliances and computers are great, but ones like this I have to question...Maybe what we need is a thread titled "Are overreaching energy saving regulations morally bankrupt?".

author: Len
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2015, 03:43:21 am
content: Quote from: Sionyn on October 02, 2015, 06:22:46 pmNo, it's detecting the specific test video in order to cheat the test. At least that's what is claimed in the article you linked.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 03, 2015, 03:54:45 am
content: Who cares? For the most part it's a bloody annoying feature anyway that detracts from the viewing. Besides, it's unlike Volkswagen where the user can't choose to have the feature on or off.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 03, 2015, 11:07:57 am
content: Let me guess, if you want to use your TV to listen to the radio the screen stays on. Industry standard tests will never get around human stupidity. The problem with regulations is that they don't get people to buy into the idea of saving power.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 03, 2015, 11:58:48 pm
content: Given how bad the majority of modern TVs are audio wise, who would actually want to use one as an audio player? A cheap set of computer speakers is superior.EDIT: Maybe smart TVs would often be used as such.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 04:14:47 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on October 03, 2015, 11:58:48 pmAny decent smart TV these days will turn off the LCD back light if it's receiving audio data only. I have a Phillips LCD which does just that if you listen to the music channels. Alternatively I think there are options for pretty screen savers as well?Then again, who listens to radio via TV broadcasts? Slightly off-topic but the next logical move will be to integrate DAB+ tuners into TVs and ditch the audio-only channels from the TV broadcast space altogether.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 08:15:30 am
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 04, 2015, 04:14:47 amPeople do. Last weekend i was away and we rented a flat. My friend wanted to play a CD, no CD player in the flat. So the TV was used, all glorious 32" of screen running just to play a fricking CD in the bedroom. Thank god the 50" TV in the main room could not take a CD!!!

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 11:10:01 am
content: Quote from: Simon on October 04, 2015, 08:15:30 amSounds like a good weekend away with the lads ;-)

author: AF6LJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 12:21:13 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on October 03, 2015, 11:07:57 amMany people listen to satellite broadcasts that are audio only, and it shouldn't be a major problem to look for video and when none is present shut off the backlights, and maybe even shut down the T-con and row and column decoders.The problem with such regulations is they come into being for political reasons and never consider the practicality of implementation, or their usefulness to begin with.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 03:59:56 pm
content: which is why I say that regulations cause a problem and that you need PEOPLE to buy into the moral and the ethics and design thing INTELLIGENTLY...... in an ideal world we don't need regulations, we need common sense.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 04:02:35 pm
content: Quote from: Halcyon on October 04, 2015, 11:10:01 amif only: Green Party conference....... But being a nice big flat we made best use of it when we made friends with a person who then decided to stay on another day and needed a place to stay. Housing crisis are they saying ? the whole block of 3 double bedroom flats was empty, we were the only ones there. They were probably all being let out on a sproadic basis.

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 04:26:20 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on October 04, 2015, 03:59:56 pmCommon sense is useless when it comes to the very large or small scale, and not always right on the scale of the every day human experience either. It's at best a rough guestimate on the situations we evolved to deal with. We need more scepticism and willingness to follow the evidence to conclusions instead of ignoring it because it's inconvenient for our lifestyles, religion, and/or political and philosophical leanings.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 04:30:07 pm
content: why is common sense useless ? maybe we should call it "real engineering attitude" or "commitment to make best use of resources"..... call it what you may. fact is we live in a society where the only thing we care about is our pay check, that is why rules have to be made.It makes sense that if I am designing a TV that can play radio stations and CD or even a memory stick with MP3 if it is used for this purpose it should be programmed to turn the screen off after 60 seconds of no buttins being pressed. It's simple and it makes sence. Why don't they ? becuase they have nothing to gain or loose personally. So you would have to make a silly blancket rule...... and then we all moan.Rules are to keep idiot and assholes in order. Reals engineers that care should not need rules......

author: Mechanical Menace
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 05:48:59 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on October 04, 2015, 04:30:07 pmI didn't say it's totally useless, it's just useless when it comes to things outside of the scale of the everyday human experience. Common sense tells you not to jump out of a six storey window, avoid fights, not to eat rotten food, how to deal with friends, family, and your immediate community but it also tells you heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones, that light travels instantaneously, that strangers are more likely to abuse children than their parents, and on, and on. Common sense is starting with a conclusion you think must be right so doesn't need to be tested. Mathematics, logic, science, and engineering beyond how to make a better pointy stick do much more than what common sense is capable of because they start by throwing it out of the window and asking simple questions common sense would tell you are stupid to even contemplate.QuoteSimple, makes sense, but that's not common sense. Common sense says "Humans are only little we don't need to worry about that, tiny us can't change the much bigger world." This silly little island has 60 around million people on, you can't handle numbers anywhere near that big naturally. Some numbers are just way too big for our brains to deal with so you need abstractions to be able to deal with it. If your brain can't inherently handle the concept common sense can't deal with it. And if common sense can't deal with such a tiny population how can it deal with global matters? Common sense says "It's only 60 watts so doesn't matter" because common sense can only deal with your community being 150ish people and a large faceless group being a couple of thousand*. Uncommon sense asks "It's only 60 watt but how many tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of 60 watt do we have to deal with?"*Which was the size of the groups we evolved to deal with topside before uncommon sense gave us farming, cities, etc, etc...

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 06:06:11 pm
content: Yes I see what you mean. I think a lot of people fall into the "it's only this one product why should i break the trend". I am constantly fighting for change in my work place as constantly look to the past to find a reasuring model to use for the future instead of be prepared to "dare" and rethink something and make it batter. As much I feel that much of what I am asked to do is antiquated.Example, we used to make air conditioning controllers with off the shelf thermostats and for the customers reasurance had a compressor over ride switch to forcibly turn it off no matter what the thermostat said. In this 21st century we started doing our own controls and thermostat and decided that the first 20% of the stats knob is an off position, yet i have just been asked to put a compressor over ride switch in when all you need to do is "turn the darn thing orf". Old models are so comforting. But engineers are supposed to be pushing the envelope. The term engineer and engineering comes from the "application of cleverness" how many engnieers can't be bothered to sovle problems never mind think of potential onesand solve those too.

author: SeanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 06:42:35 pm
content: Off switch is good for when ( not if please note) that cheap Ranco thermostat decides to wear through the sense tube and dump all the gas fill, or the contacts decide to weld together and run all the time. think of why you have a RDC in the breaker box, and why you have breakers. They are not there to be used all the time, but are meant to be used.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 06:44:53 pm
content: Quote from: SeanB on October 04, 2015, 06:42:35 pmNot this is an over ride intended for every day use. The thermostat is all electronic using a thermistor and solid state switch with a dedicated off position on the temperature knob that replaces the manual off. Yet i was asked to put an "off" switch on as well. if the switch was included it would be an input to a uC not a harware cut off.

author: AF6LJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 06:53:01 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on October 04, 2015, 06:06:11 pmI can go along with this to a degree; but no engineering for the sake of engineering. I have seen enough of that in my life and it usually ends in designs that are overly complicated to repair or designs that are unreliable.Howard Hougs had a bright idea and re-engineered the woman's bra, well the first problem with that was the designer never had to wear one, the second problem is from a practical standpoint the woman's bra had already reached its logically complete design.If the state of a design can be re-engineered to the next logical step in a given product's evolution it must actually be a better, or more energy efficient to justify the re-engineering. These are not subjective benchmarks they can be measured and are really the only justifiable reasons to go to all that work.I worked for a company where the VP of Engineering had a rule that all designs had to be unique. That rule made life difficult for some of us who had to reproduce those designs and troubleshoot and repair them, especially since those "unique" designs were used in a number of tightly confuguration controlled products.It did make me a better technician, but at what cost??

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 06:56:52 pm
content: I'm not saying to redesign for the sake of it. But himanity has mostly acceted that we need to use less energy and many energy efficiencies are simple to implment and are things only the engineer will see not the legislator. If things are not good enough the legislators will sit down and make some stupid rules that make life hard for everyone. So just beat the legislators to it and design products that don't need rules imposed to try and make them efficient.

author: AF6LJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 07:03:26 pm
content: I completely agree Simon;besides legislators make laws almost all the time for the wrong reasons.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 07:10:35 pm
content: I think one of the biggest growing inneficiencies is computer processors. Why are we being sold 4-8 core processors when the average user only needs 2 ? (I turned two of my 4 cores off and got better performance). Yea marketing wank. At work they tell me i should not meddle with things and that I "break" things, but I'm the idiot in the office that is running 2 processor cores when evereyone else is running 4 cores split into 2 logicals so that their CAD software gets to use just 12.5% of the processor and possibly RAM bandwidth. I went against the trend and have the same machine performing faster. The only thing needing multiple cores is software specially designed for it. But theose "morally bankrupt" engineers that work for the proccessor makers are forcing us to use products that need more power and can in many cases perform more poorly. Progress is such a wonderful thing. So maybe we need legislation about how many cores you can have in a processor, or perhaps engineering companies can "engineer" true solutions instead of only worrying about the bottom line.

author: AF6LJ
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 04, 2015, 10:07:47 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on October 04, 2015, 07:10:35 pmWell...I am most likely in the minority, that would be a reduction in performance for me.When I am playing my online game.....I am streaming audio from another program, downloading email at regular intervals (MS Outlook is always open), and I may also have a browser running. Now I can do that and not suffer performance degradationSometimes I even have my DTP program open and stuff printing...I like to multitask, after all computers are suppose to improve our productivity, and if I need to take a gaming break to relieve stress or do a brain flush to get the creative juices flowing again...So be it.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2015, 01:04:52 am
content: My Panasonic plasma tries to turn the screen off on the Freeview radio channels. Unfortunately, a software bug (perhaps stupid design choice) leads to a single long horizontal line being drawn at 100% white for the top most row of pixels on the 1080 line screen. Because of this, the panel sustainer stays active and the panel is sustained for 10 subfields at 600Hz - consuming about 75 watts idle.It's a shame really because on pitch black screens the whole TV consumes less than 15 watts by cutting out the sustain and address fields it doesn't need, pretty impressive given the processor and panel priming (dark panel glow) are still active, 215V and 55V SMPS etc.

author: jwm_
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: October 05, 2015, 02:10:43 am
content: Quote from: Simon on October 04, 2015, 07:10:35 pmWait, what? who in the world is forcing you to buy 8 core machines? My desktop has one core and works fantastically.My laptop has more, but it's not because i want more cores or speed, its because modern CPU energy efficiency is obscenely better than it was not too many years ago and a big part of that is due to multi-core dies. My last thinkpad idled at 25 Watts, my current one is several times faster and idles at 9 watts.And the processor makers, or more cores are not making things slower, it's bloated software. Use an operating system written by people that actually care about making each version faster than the last (many distributions of linux for example, because the developers are people like us and we also believe upgrades should come with more speed and efficiency, not less.).But the main reason more cores are becoming more common is that they maxed out the speed of chips a while ago, faster clock speeds require higher voltages and power consumption goes up with the square of voltage, and higher clock speeds on the CPU don't help much when you couldn't actually get data to the CPU to process that fast requiring much more expensive and technologically problematic external busses.Intel got burned on this when it had to scrap its whole Pentium IV and Itanium development lines (which were all about clock speed) when their low cost mobile processor at 1.4Ghz (branched off the old pentium pro architecture) trounced their 2.4GHz server CPUs because thermal considerations were becoming the limiting factor in CPU speed. By designing a low energy chip they "accidentally" created a high performing one. It was about then that Intel stopped putting GHz numbers in their marketing materials. more cores means the processing is more distributed on the die which makes for more processing power per watt. It's no consipracy. It's why your phone has 4 cores, because it makes the battery last much much longer than one core running at 4x the speed. Multiple cores are frightfully more efficient, it's probably one of the biggest recent computing efficiency gains that has been made.

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: October 05, 2015, 06:00:41 am
content: nobody if forcing us to buy multicore processors, but on a 4 core do DO NOT need hyperthreading, that was only any good for their emergency edition in response to the athlon-64 when ram was slow. so hyperthreading just gives each process 1/2 a core for the sake of marketing it as 8 logical cores as most people see the number 8 not the "logical" and don't know wnat it means. I see ebay sellers advertising 4 core 2.5GHz machines as 10GHzI have proved it, I get faster ram bandwidth with 2 cores instead of 4 and my software only uses 1 core and I'm never doing more than one intensive task at once so there is another core for the rest. Like I said disabling hyperthreading on my work machine gave my 3D-CAD software twice the proccessor availability, for all it's sofisticated glory the software only uses 1 core.Unless you are gaming or video encoding over 2 cores is just wasteful. Go on everyone fire up task manager and see how much of that precious processor your actually using..... The AMD design of getting more work done per clock is also more efficient than intels idea of just throwing more uneeded cores at the processor. They outperformed intel years ago on that which is another reson intel dropped their GHz ratings because AMD put them to shame.