I would say no. Many people don't turn on or willingly turn the power saving options off to increase performance. I know a lot of people who go so far as adjusting settings so that their usb wireless adapters aren't powered down. I have yet to hear of the average consumer actually discussing a computer purchase based on how "green" it is. People want their devices to perform and the biggest complaint is a slow PC, not an energy hog. I would also argue that the majority of PC's crunching are ones that will be left on 24/7 and don't have the newest of energy saving features built into them. Let's wait and see how far the energy savings in PC's get to in the next 5 to 10 years and then see if there is a reasonable change. If there is, then I would agree. Right now, I don't believe we are anywhere near the hype on power savings.

Edit: I think the biggest argument is whether the extra power consumption from GPU folding is "green" or not. CPU's are already running regardless. GPU's put out significant increases of production, but consume a lot more power. (I'm not arguing that the power consumption ratios between the two.) The GPU requires the CPU to be powered in order to run the GPU, and therefore eats up a lot. The computers in offices left running are the ones utilizing the lost cycles. The GPU's are typically on high end gaming systems or dedicated crunchers. Both of which usually can afford the power bill and not overly concerned about efficiency as much as the points they earn.

I live in a 3rd world country, and when I switch on the PC, I want it to fully use it's computation, to save lives, and willing to pay the electricity cost, because for me, it's a wasted computation.

Electricity is cheap, for me, for now.

?

Please hit Help button right top, then enter the word "electricity" and then know what WCG has to say on power consumption, in snip:

"If it is sitting completely idle, then it uses relatively little power (usually about 50% of the maximum value).".

which means that crunching takes 2x as much electricity. (not debating that the latest generation computers do better than that)

In addition, WCG has a Power Saving preset device profile that allows a computer to use it's green energy functions (ACPI or whatever) and go to sleep 20 minutes after a user stops doing input as the design IS to use wasted CPU cycles while the computer needs to be on.

If there are different messages, then please provide links, for conflicting ones are the last WCG wants to transmit and surely would than like to adjust, as really nothing comes for free, but the sun.

--//--

Let's use an automotive analogy:

If you buy a car, and park it for 5 days a week while you take the bus to work you are being green in that you are using public transportation and helping the community be more efficient. The only problem is, you've got a car that is underutilized, and will probably go to the junkyard with 50k miles on it because you're only using it 2/7'ths of its life.

Then, at your local volunteer society meeting one Saturday, a friend you trust says they are delivering meals on wheels to shut-ins, but using his bike he can only do 1/5 what needs to be done to help the shut-ins he knows of.

So now you have a choice, do you let your car die of old age in the driveway to save gas, or do you lend it to your friend to save / improve lives. They can't afford to reimburse you for the gas, but you both know they could make a big difference in a lot of lives... it's their passion.

If you say yes, you take risks:
1) The car could be damaged or smell like food (i.e. a virus somehow gets your computer because it's online more)
2) Your car may wear out sooner, and need more maintenance and now it's going to the junk yard at 150k miles. (Computers wear out too, mostly fans and hard drives)
3) Your costs will go up, with more gas, tires etc. (electricity for computers and some of the new cars!)
4) You may need your car during the week sometimes and feel bad bumping your friend off the shut-in route. (Do you run the boinc client at max performance even when you're surfing?)

It's not a perfect analogy, but at the end of the day some people will try to conserve their assets and the energy they use to make the world a better place by *minimizing* their impact on global resources as individuals.

Some groups or communities will try to maximize the utility and utilization of their collective assets and see that as the greatest good. Maximum utilization/efficiency, even if it costs them more and uses more resources, means the net benefit *may* outweigh the net costs and be more efficient.

I, for one, lend the friend my car and cover the extra costs, risks, and occasional inconvenience **with glee**. It's a car, not an heirloom, and I'm lucky enough that I can afford to assist in that way. Hopefully, when I need help medically or otherwise, enough tadpoles will feel the same way and I'll get the best help possible.

There is the option of waiting. Computer performance is growing much faster than the efficiency of any car, so I wouldn't buy/build anything solely for the purpose of donating it's spare time. Once I pay someone to bring a system (auto or computer) into existence, it is my obligation to see that it does everything it can to make the world a better place, at least in it's spare time.

Additional energy cost is not the issue that makes or breaks this community. The majority participate because they can, and volunteer whatever level of resources they can (their electricity and other expenses) first and foremost to make the world a better place. Badges are a fun way to keep track of how much we have done, but the efficiency in terms of points/results per hour (and implied per watt) is the true measure of efficiency. It will get better over time for all of us as we upgrade, but that doesn't mean what we are crunching today wasn't absolutely helpful to the world community. If they manage to do this with net zero increase in their electricity costs so much the better, probably means they can affort their next upgrade sooner.

In this analogy can't wait for the 100MPG cars to hit our driveways before we lend the car to our helpful, inspired, volunteering friends. I believe the same is true for our cycles regardless of the marginal power costs.

So the answer to the thread is a definite yes! The wasted resources go far beyond the electricity though.
Cheers!
MrKermit