MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404129034 · doi:10.24018/compute.2024.4.5.135

A Comparative Study of CPU and GPU Power Consumption while using Open-Source and Proprietary Media Players

2024· article· en· W4404129034 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Afzal, Mohsin Jamil

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Information Technologies and Computer Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Remote Desktop Technologies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower consumptionOpen sourceComputer scienceCPU shieldingConsumption (sociology)Power (physics)Operating systemCentral processing unitParallel computingSoftwareSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a comparative analysis of power consumption between open-source and proprietary media players when playing open-media format videos (.webm). As media consumption grows, energy-efficient software is critical for both environmental sustainability and device performance. Using tools like HWiNFO, key metrics such as GPU and CPU power consumption, memory usage, and efficiency were evaluated for popular open-source (e.g., VLC, Kodi) and proprietary (e.g., GOM Player, KMPlayer) players. The results reveal that open-source players generally consume less GPU power but more CPU resources, while proprietary players balance CPU and GPU usage with higher memory demands. The findings suggest that careful selection of media players can lead to significant energy savings over time, offering insights for developers and users focused on energy-efficient computing.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Information Technologies and Computer ScienceSame topicCloud Computing and Remote Desktop TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207