Does showing seconds in the system tray actually use more power?

Power impact of showing seconds

• Thread centers on a test finding ~13% less battery life on an idle laptop when taskbar seconds are enabled.
• Many note that desktop OSes heavily optimize idle power; even one extra timer firing per second can keep a CPU core and display pipeline from entering deep sleep, so a tiny periodic task can be visible in idle-only tests.
• Others find the magnitude “insane” for such a trivial feature and suspect either poor implementation or overall Windows bloat as the real culprit.

Implementation and engineering questions

• One view: the cost is fundamentally about frequent wakeups and GUI stack churn, not the tiny amount of “do the math and draw digits” work.
• Another: competent engineering (e.g., caching glyphs, minimal compositing, hardware support like panel self-refresh or hardware cursors/sprites) should make this almost free.
• Some propose OS-level APIs or hardware compositors dedicated to small static overlays (clocks, cursors) so the main GPU/CPU can stay in low-power states.

Test methodology and realism

• The test is idle-desktop-only, with sleep disabled. Several people see this as a deliberate “worst case,” good for isolating the effect but not representative of real use.
• Commenters want additional scenarios: light web browsing, video playback, or direct power-draw measurements over short intervals instead of full battery rundown.
• There’s some confusion over follow‑up tests (same laptops but with video) and how “variance” is being accounted for.

User experience and configurability

• Some actively dislike seconds (and blinking cursors) as constant attention drains and are glad it’s off by default.
• Others rely on seconds for precise timing (e.g., joining calls, casual benchmarking, personal preference) and want it as an easy option, ideally with customizable formats.
• A few suggest adaptive behavior: show seconds only on demand or stop updates after inactivity.

Broader critiques: performance, privacy, and greenwashing

• Many contrast this micro‑optimization with Windows’ heavier wastes: telemetry, “phone home” behavior, web views, ads, AI features, Edge’s cloud spellchecking, and Windows Update overhead.
• Several see Microsoft’s power‑saving nudges and “eco” badges as performative environmentalism that shifts guilt to users while the company runs huge AI/data centers and pushes hardware upgrades (e.g., for Windows 11).
• Similar issues are noted on Linux (e.g., blinking cursor power cost), but some argue alternative desktops now make it easier to avoid such trade‑offs entirely.