I did some conceptual analysis of the video switch that leads me to wondering why the old one consumed 5W. With modern chips a 4-way video switch only needs 30 mW. (There are some suitably fast FETs that take in four inputs, one output, with four control gates.) A low power CPU can handle the logic of pretending to be multiple mice and keyboards, while running the real mouse and keyboard. Similarly it can handle the many control signals that make up the digital portion of the VGA signal. The switch that I just got claims a total consumption of 100mW, and that makes sense to me.
Now, they've gone for integrated cabling. This does good things for predictability, eliminates impedance mismatch, and keeps all the phases consistent. It probably also reduces customer problems. But it should save much power.
So I am left guessing a bit why the old one consumed 5W. I could understand a 10-fold improvement, but not a 50-fold improvement. Nonetheless, I'm happy to eliminate the power drain and power wart. At present power prices, I save 2 pennies/day ($8/yr). It's more than I expected, but will never recover the cost of the new switch. The reason remains supporting the higher frequency that I need for the 1920x1200 display.