EU cripples future graphics cards (by regulating max. energy consumption)

[myrkul]

Everyone is missing the most ridiculous part of the article:  The EU wants to cap MEMORY BANDWIDTH, not just power consumption.

The commission wants to stop dedicated graphics cards of group G7 from going above 320 GB/s - that is in theory a memory bus at 384-bit connected to memory operating at 6667 MHz or 512-bit with 5001 MHz. This is definitely within reach for the next generation graphics cards. Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition currently has a bandwidth of 288 GB/s with a 384-bit memory bus and 6000 MHz memory. For notebooks the limit will be only 225 GB/s.

No, they don't.  In fact they EXEMPT cards with high memory bandwidths from this recommendation if they are in a high end system.  

"1.1.3. Category D desktop computers and integrated desktop
computers meeting all of the following technical parameters are
exempt from the requirements specified in points 1.1.1 and
1.1.2:
(a) a minimum of six physical cores in the central processing
unit (CPU); and
(b) discrete GPU(s) providing total frame buffer bandwidths
above 320 GB/s; and
(c) a minimum 16GB of system memory; and
(d) a PSU with a rated output power of at least 1000 W. "

The whole idea of allowing politicians to determine computer specs is just ridiculous on a monumental level.

[Richy_T]

Everyone is missing the most ridiculous part of the article:  The EU wants to cap MEMORY BANDWIDTH, not just power consumption.

The commission wants to stop dedicated graphics cards of group G7 from going above 320 GB/s - that is in theory a memory bus at 384-bit connected to memory operating at 6667 MHz or 512-bit with 5001 MHz. This is definitely within reach for the next generation graphics cards. Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition currently has a bandwidth of 288 GB/s with a 384-bit memory bus and 6000 MHz memory. For notebooks the limit will be only 225 GB/s.

No, they don't.  In fact they EXEMPT cards with high memory bandwidths from this recommendation if they are in a high end system.  

"1.1.3. Category D desktop computers and integrated desktop
computers meeting all of the following technical parameters are
exempt from the requirements specified in points 1.1.1 and
1.1.2:
(a) a minimum of six physical cores in the central processing
unit (CPU); and
(b) discrete GPU(s) providing total frame buffer bandwidths
above 320 GB/s; and
(c) a minimum 16GB of system memory; and
(d) a PSU with a rated output power of at least 1000 W. "

Curse my decision to go quad core.

Wait, I don't live in the EU. Hopefully we'll dump O-bum-a and be free of such nonsense for another four years at least.


Edit: They do realise that this means that anyone who wants a decent GPU will now go with a power hungry, resource eating monster of a machine, right?

[Littleshop]

Everyone is missing the most ridiculous part of the article:  The EU wants to cap MEMORY BANDWIDTH, not just power consumption.

The commission wants to stop dedicated graphics cards of group G7 from going above 320 GB/s - that is in theory a memory bus at 384-bit connected to memory operating at 6667 MHz or 512-bit with 5001 MHz. This is definitely within reach for the next generation graphics cards. Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition currently has a bandwidth of 288 GB/s with a 384-bit memory bus and 6000 MHz memory. For notebooks the limit will be only 225 GB/s.

No, they don't.  In fact they EXEMPT cards with high memory bandwidths from this recommendation if they are in a high end system.  

"1.1.3. Category D desktop computers and integrated desktop
computers meeting all of the following technical parameters are
exempt from the requirements specified in points 1.1.1 and
1.1.2:
(a) a minimum of six physical cores in the central processing
unit (CPU); and
(b) discrete GPU(s) providing total frame buffer bandwidths
above 320 GB/s; and
(c) a minimum 16GB of system memory; and
(d) a PSU with a rated output power of at least 1000 W. "

The whole idea of allowing politicians to determine computer specs is just ridiculous on a monumental level.

Correct.  Computers change too fast and politicians change too slowly.  Also politicians are not computer experts.  (well actually they are not experts in anything as far as I can tell)

But again, the title of the orginal article is FUD. 

[Gabi]

Everyone is missing the most ridiculous part of the article:  The EU wants to cap MEMORY BANDWIDTH, not just power consumption.

The commission wants to stop dedicated graphics cards of group G7 from going above 320 GB/s - that is in theory a memory bus at 384-bit connected to memory operating at 6667 MHz or 512-bit with 5001 MHz. This is definitely within reach for the next generation graphics cards. Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition currently has a bandwidth of 288 GB/s with a 384-bit memory bus and 6000 MHz memory. For notebooks the limit will be only 225 GB/s.

No, they don't.  In fact they EXEMPT cards with high memory bandwidths from this recommendation if they are in a high end system.  

"1.1.3. Category D desktop computers and integrated desktop
computers meeting all of the following technical parameters are
exempt from the requirements specified in points 1.1.1 and
1.1.2:
(a) a minimum of six physical cores in the central processing
unit (CPU); and
(b) discrete GPU(s) providing total frame buffer bandwidths
above 320 GB/s; and
(c) a minimum 16GB of system memory; and
(d) a PSU with a rated output power of at least 1000 W. "

The whole idea of allowing politicians to determine computer specs is just ridiculous on a monumental level.

/thread

[compro01]

Everyone is missing the most ridiculous part of the article:  The EU wants to cap MEMORY BANDWIDTH, not just power consumption.

The commission wants to stop dedicated graphics cards of group G7 from going above 320 GB/s - that is in theory a memory bus at 384-bit connected to memory operating at 6667 MHz or 512-bit with 5001 MHz. This is definitely within reach for the next generation graphics cards. Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition currently has a bandwidth of 288 GB/s with a 384-bit memory bus and 6000 MHz memory. For notebooks the limit will be only 225 GB/s.

Wrong.

Go read the proposed regulations.  It's about sleep/idle power draw, power supply efficiency and power factor.

It says nothing about how much the system can draw when it's in active use.

[asdf]

Here's what I have been observing also:

1) CFLs are more expensive to manufacture than incandescents

2) CFLs are therefore considerable more expensive to buy than incandescents.

3) There is therefore a strong downward pressure on price for incandescents

4) Chinese knock out cheap, low quality incandescents

5) Cheap, low quality incandescents fail early, meaning that their claimed cost savings are not reached and their energy and resource TCO suck donkey parts compared to incandescents.

6) Statism does the fail thing once more.

7) Statism apologists scramble to make rationalizations. Cue:

This post makes no sense.

perverse incentives created by the state result in sub optimal behavior of the market.

[Richy_T]

perverse incentives created by the state result in sub optimal behavior of the market.

To be fair, I had a brain fart and typed incandescent when I meant CFLs and ended up making my argument about incandescents vs incandescents. 

[Littleshop]

Here's what I have been observing also:

1) CFLs are more expensive to manufacture than incandescents

2) CFLs are therefore considerable more expensive to buy than incandescents.

3) There is therefore a strong downward pressure on price for incandescents

4) Chinese knock out cheap, low quality incandescents

5) Cheap, low quality incandescents fail early, meaning that their claimed cost savings are not reached and their energy and resource TCO suck donkey parts compared to incandescents.

6) Statism does the fail thing once more.

7) Statism apologists scramble to make rationalizations. Cue:

This post makes no sense.

perverse incentives created by the state result in sub optimal behavior of the market.

Actually the reason for the low quality incandescent bulbs is lower demand, less research into them and everyone knowing there is not much future there.  They are a niche market.  There will be junk ones and good high end ones as well. 

So far incandescents have not been taxed and here the POWER COMPANY is subsidizing CFL's so they can avoid building an expensive power plant.  I got 4 CFL's for $1.99 last week.