R-Pro › Field cases › Air conditioning
Window vs Split AC — Selection for Older Korean Homes
Likely causes
Older home (1980-90s detached/multifamily) constraints
Check: **Window**: ① Small room 1-2py (BTU 5000-8000). ② Temporary (frequent move). ③ Concrete crack concern (no embed). ④ Power ≤1.5kW (hard to add dedicated breaker). **Split**: ① ≥3py living/bedroom. ② Permanent. ③ Concrete ≥50mm (drill OK). ④ Power 2kW+. **Hybrid**: living=split, small=window. Korean 1980-90 detached (rural) = 30% window, new apartments = 100% split.
What to do: **Quote**: window ≈ ₩300-500k all-in, split ≈ ₩600k-1.2M. **Time**: window ≈ 1 hr, split ≈ 3-5 hr. **Noise**: window 50-55 dB, split outdoor 45-50 dB. **Maintenance**: window = single body easier, split = separate units. **Cons**: window = lower efficiency, 1.5x power, view block, noise. Split = higher install cost, hard to disassemble post-embed. **Advice**: User (Gangneung rural) = elderly solo detached → window (simple, low cost). Split = newlyweds/new builds.
**Portable AC trend**: 2022-25 surged among temp/single households. But power 1.5-2x split, louder, exhaust hose loops hot air. Only recommend if permanent split impossible. **Window share**: 50% in 1990s, <5% in 2026 (split dominant). For elderly: must decide clearly between 'expensive but split' or 'cheap but window'.
All 565 cases work offline in R-Pro, with error codes for 62 brands and P-T data for 108 refrigerants.
Open R-Pro →