Efficient TV List

Daox · 03-17-10, 02:12 PM

Well, I didn't get a ton of feedback in my other thread. So, I took matters into my own hands!

I went to the energy star website and downloaded their excel spreadsheet of TVs. I then sorted them by size and secondarily by efficiency (annual estimated usage). Then, I went on google's product search and got prices on all of them. The result is a list of energy efficient TVs for each size that met my criteria. The criteria being no more than 180 kWh yearly estimated energy consumption (150 for the 32" TVs). I also didn't go smaller than 32" since I wasn't looking for anything smaller than that.

Anyway, here is the breakdown. They are first broken into different sizes, then they are ranked by price. As you can see, generally speaking, the more you pay the more efficient the TV is.

32" TVs
I lowered the requirement of 180 kWh per year usage to 150 kWh for this category. There were just too many TVs that met the 180 kWh requirement.

40" TVs

42" TVs

46" TVs

47" TVs

52" TVs
Yup, there is even some pretty darn efficient 52" TVs out there! I was amazed. If I wanted to spend that much, I could go up to a 52" TV from a 27" CRT and have roughly the same power usage. I threw the Sharp in the list because it was close and the price is very competitive.

Daox · 03-17-10, 02:37 PM

I almost forgot, I have the excel file here too for anyone interested.

Efficient TV List

NiHaoMike · 03-23-10, 10:51 AM

My new 55" LED Samsung (UN55B7000) only uses 68W when on.

msirach · 03-23-10, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NiHaoMike

My new 55" LED Samsung (UN55B7000) only uses 68W when on.

My mom and sd just moved to Florida and that is the same one they got. Great picture and uber efficient to boot.

mouse · 04-06-10, 10:42 PM

maybe you could do a calculation to see which is the most efficient for the money. Like price per inch / energy use

NeilBlanchard · 04-08-10, 08:31 AM

Thanks for this list! It has helped my narrow my search: I'd like full 1080P I really want 120Hz or 240Hz refresh rates (the 60Hz models blur motion), and I really like the contrast ratio to be 2,000,000:1 -- this makes darker blacks and a greater range of grays. Believe it or not, black is the hardest thing to do on a color TV.

I think the only 32" that meets these is the Sharp? The 40" models have more choice: the Samsung UN40C5000 is very tempting...it uses a smidge less power than the 32" Sharp! (But of course, it costs a lot more...)

msirach · 04-08-10, 09:31 AM

I always go to Best Buy or similar to compare the pics. Samsung really seems to be getting it together with brightness and clarity. Their line of LED's is growing. I'm interested to see what 3D will bring.

Daox · 04-08-10, 05:03 PM

Neil, keep an eye on the power consumption if you go to the 240hz models. For some reason, I was looking at one and the 240hz had twice the power consumption of the 120. I don't remember what TV it was, but it seems they may use more power.

NeilBlanchard · 04-12-10, 11:05 PM

That's a great reason to stick with 120Hz, then! I got a brief look at the 40" Samsung today, and I gotta' say wow! Sweet HD with plenty of detail and vivid color, but no sense of over doing anything.

strider3700 · 10-03-10, 02:25 AM

I have an insignia 32" LED/LCD I bought a month ago. I get my signal over the air not via cable. When testing power usage I noticed that I was running at about 53-55 watts on the digital channels but the analog channels all drove the power up to 68-71 watts. I'm assuming it's the back light needing to come on brighter to help with the crappy picture or maybe it's just the different tuner used. Either way I though it was interesting.

I'm not sure how many people out there get their signal OTA these days. In case you're wondering the digital high def quality depends on the channel but all of the majors come in at 1080i (1080p on CBC during the world cup) and are beautiful. It's just the really small stations that aren't high def yet. KVOS is 480 but digital so it still looks like when I had an old tv and cable.

03-17-10, 02:12 PM	#1
Daox Administrator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Germantown, WI Posts: 5,525 Thanks: 1,162 Thanked 374 Times in 305 Posts	Efficient TV List Well, I didn't get a ton of feedback in my other thread. So, I took matters into my own hands! I went to the energy star website and downloaded their excel spreadsheet of TVs. I then sorted them by size and secondarily by efficiency (annual estimated usage). Then, I went on google's product search and got prices on all of them. The result is a list of energy efficient TVs for each size that met my criteria. The criteria being no more than 180 kWh yearly estimated energy consumption (150 for the 32" TVs). I also didn't go smaller than 32" since I wasn't looking for anything smaller than that. Anyway, here is the breakdown. They are first broken into different sizes, then they are ranked by price. As you can see, generally speaking, the more you pay the more efficient the TV is. 32" TVs I lowered the requirement of 180 kWh per year usage to 150 kWh for this category. There were just too many TVs that met the 180 kWh requirement. 40" TVs 42" TVs 46" TVs 47" TVs 52" TVs Yup, there is even some pretty darn efficient 52" TVs out there! I was amazed. If I wanted to spend that much, I could go up to a 52" TV from a 27" CRT and have roughly the same power usage. I threw the Sharp in the list because it was close and the price is very competitive. __________________ Current project - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. & To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

03-17-10, 02:37 PM	#2
Daox Administrator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Germantown, WI Posts: 5,525 Thanks: 1,162 Thanked 374 Times in 305 Posts	I almost forgot, I have the excel file here too for anyone interested. Efficient TV List __________________ Current project - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. & To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

03-23-10, 10:51 AM	#3
NiHaoMike Supreme EcoRenovator Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 1,154 Thanks: 14 Thanked 257 Times in 241 Posts	My new 55" LED Samsung (UN55B7000) only uses 68W when on. __________________ To my surprise, shortly after Naomi Wu gave me a bit of fame for making good use of solar power, Allie Moore got really jealous of her...

04-08-10, 08:31 AM	#6
NeilBlanchard Journeyman EcoRenovator Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth Posts: 383 Thanks: 78 Thanked 39 Times in 32 Posts	Thanks for this list! It has helped my narrow my search: I'd like full 1080P I really want 120Hz or 240Hz refresh rates (the 60Hz models blur motion), and I really like the contrast ratio to be 2,000,000:1 -- this makes darker blacks and a greater range of grays. Believe it or not, black is the hardest thing to do on a color TV. I think the only 32" that meets these is the Sharp? The 40" models have more choice: the Samsung UN40C5000 is very tempting...it uses a smidge less power than the 32" Sharp! (But of course, it costs a lot more...) Last edited by NeilBlanchard; 04-08-10 at 08:34 AM..

04-08-10, 05:03 PM	#8
Daox Administrator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Germantown, WI Posts: 5,525 Thanks: 1,162 Thanked 374 Times in 305 Posts	Neil, keep an eye on the power consumption if you go to the 240hz models. For some reason, I was looking at one and the 240hz had twice the power consumption of the 120. I don't remember what TV it was, but it seems they may use more power. __________________ Current project - To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. & To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

04-06-10, 10:42 PM	#5
mouse Lurking Renovator Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 4 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	maybe you could do a calculation to see which is the most efficient for the money. Like price per inch / energy use

04-08-10, 09:31 AM	#7
msirach Lurking Renovator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Southern Illinois Posts: 17 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	I always go to Best Buy or similar to compare the pics. Samsung really seems to be getting it together with brightness and clarity. Their line of LED's is growing. I'm interested to see what 3D will bring.

04-12-10, 11:05 PM	#9
NeilBlanchard Journeyman EcoRenovator Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Maynard, MA Eaarth Posts: 383 Thanks: 78 Thanked 39 Times in 32 Posts	That's a great reason to stick with 120Hz, then! I got a brief look at the 40" Samsung today, and I gotta' say wow! Sweet HD with plenty of detail and vivid color, but no sense of over doing anything.

10-03-10, 02:25 AM	#10
strider3700 Master EcoRenovator Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Vancouver Island BC Posts: 745 Thanks: 23 Thanked 37 Times in 30 Posts	I have an insignia 32" LED/LCD I bought a month ago. I get my signal over the air not via cable. When testing power usage I noticed that I was running at about 53-55 watts on the digital channels but the analog channels all drove the power up to 68-71 watts. I'm assuming it's the back light needing to come on brighter to help with the crappy picture or maybe it's just the different tuner used. Either way I though it was interesting. I'm not sure how many people out there get their signal OTA these days. In case you're wondering the digital high def quality depends on the channel but all of the majors come in at 1080i (1080p on CBC during the world cup) and are beautiful. It's just the really small stations that aren't high def yet. KVOS is 480 but digital so it still looks like when I had an old tv and cable.