"Aren't screen savers meant to save power?" It's a widespread but outdated belief. To untangle it, we need to go back to why screen savers existed in the first place.
They Were Built to Prevent Burn-In, Not to Save Power
In the CRT era, displaying the same image for a long time could cause irreversible burn-in — a ghost of the image etched into the phosphor. Screen savers were born to keep the picture moving so a static image wouldn't scorch the same spot. The name says it all: "saver," as in protect, not "power saver."
The Truth Today: A Screen Saver Itself Uses Power
With LCDs, burn-in is far less of a problem. And in terms of energy, running an animated screen saver actually uses more power than simply turning the display off — the backlight is still fully on and the GPU is still drawing frames. If saving power is the only goal, "turn off the display" always beats "show a screen saver."
OLED is a different story: with no backlight and self-lit pixels, prolonged static images can still cause mild burn-in, so "keep it moving" remains meaningful on OLED.
So Are Screen Savers Still Worth It?
Absolutely — just for different reasons. Today we use them mostly for beauty: turning an idle screen from a black void into a quiet piece of kinetic art, while also hiding whatever was on screen for a bit of privacy. Leave the power saving to your system's sleep settings.
Tips to Keep a Screen Saver Light
- Set a sensible sleep timer: have the display sleep after the screen saver has run for a while, balancing looks and power.
- Choose an energy-optimized screen saver: a good implementation barely redraws when the image is still and reduces its frame rate under heat or Low Power Mode. Ours do exactly that — a still minute uses almost no GPU.
- Mind the battery on laptops: high-frame-rate, full-screen particle savers drain faster; more static styles are gentler.
For how we approach energy use, see the "will it drain my battery" entry in our FAQ.