EU cripples future graphics cards
- Thread starter fellix
- Start date
You people are overreacting. Read the document. It isn't half bad.
The main problem IMO is that the limits are too high. The initial limits are higher than any current gen GPUs use and idle power (this doesn't touch maximum or average use power) has been trending down recently. Even the later limits are IMO too high, but maybe this will be seen as a precursor to later tightening, and will still guide the manufacturers to lower idle power.
Also, it only affects computers. If AMD or Nvidia somehow ended up with an SKU that wasn't withing these limits they could still sell it in the retail market, just not to OEMs. And again, limiting whole computer systems means OEMs could probably find an idle-efficient CPU to pair it with.
I agree that a taxing approach might have been more optimal. The problem is that EU has no power to set taxes.
The main problem IMO is that the limits are too high. The initial limits are higher than any current gen GPUs use and idle power (this doesn't touch maximum or average use power) has been trending down recently. Even the later limits are IMO too high, but maybe this will be seen as a precursor to later tightening, and will still guide the manufacturers to lower idle power.
Also, it only affects computers. If AMD or Nvidia somehow ended up with an SKU that wasn't withing these limits they could still sell it in the retail market, just not to OEMs. And again, limiting whole computer systems means OEMs could probably find an idle-efficient CPU to pair it with.
I agree that a taxing approach might have been more optimal. The problem is that EU has no power to set taxes.
Last edited by a moderator:
How is that related? If you want Europe as a market, which I guess is half of the first world countries incl. Norway
, then you have to make compliant hardware as a vendor. Has nothing to do with where the vendor is situated. If global players don't chim in, I'm sure it'd mean the hole is being filled with european players - making less money and giving space for competitors to grow isn't really so great a strategy.Because consumers are not always economically smart ... for something which doesn't really affects their user experience like standby power consumption it doesn't make sense to even involve them, just force manufacturers to make the overall good economic choice (ie. more engineering costs up front to save energy).
And the 4890 is DX10.1 while the 7970 is 11.1 not to mention that the 7970 puts a much higher quality image on the screen due to better filtering
Anyway . Any law that limits idle power consumption is a good thing , but i think its a waste of time since the trend has been lower idle power draw for awhile.
UniversalTruth
Veteran
This sounds intriguing to me.
I know that ATI lower quality beginning with either R600 or RV670 generations, don't know why exactly- probably looked to squeeze every last frame per second.
However, it would be highly appreciated if someone shows in reviews this difference- to test 4890 vs 7970. Is it really possible to see it somewhere?
http://techreport.com/review/14990/amd-radeon-hd-4870-graphics-processor/
http://www.rage3d.com/reviews/video/amd_hd7970_launch_review/index.php?p=6
Look at the colorful checkerboard circles produced by the d3d AF tester.
http://www.rage3d.com/reviews/video/amd_hd7970_launch_review/index.php?p=6
Look at the colorful checkerboard circles produced by the d3d AF tester.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
How is that related? If you want Europe as a market, which I guess is half of the first world countries incl. Norway
That all depends. If manufacturer X makes something for the EU, while manufacturer Y doesn't and manages to make something 50-100% faster because of it. Then you'd basically have manufacturer X owning the EU while manufacturer Y owned the rest of the world. In other words, they'd just split the markets with no competition between them. Although, there's always the possibility that manufacturer Y just sells cut down version in the EU to compete. Which then forces manufacturer X to ditch EU requirements to compete in the rest of the world or risk becoming a minor player.
If that happens the only people that lose out are in the EU, while the rest of the world will have the choice between low power/low perf. or high power/high perf. Of course, then people will end up blaming greedy manufacturers rather than the government just like they currently do with the retail price discrepencies.
Granted that's a rather extreme case, and with the generous idle power numbers used so far certainly not something that will happen anytime soon.
If they do make it too strict, however, there's always a chance of something like that happening...unlikely as it is.
As well, if China continues to develope economically it may eventually end up making up half the revenue for most of the global companies. At which point, potentially restrictive regulations in the EU would just make them a minor player in the global scene.
Regards,
SB
That assumes the cut-down version is still of better quality (pick your unit) than the dedicated european version, which may be possible but I wouldn't think it's going to happen.
The energy-thing they try to achieve there is very contextual, the effect is sought to be a reduction of consumption. The long term effects of that are not in your scenario, what if China's growth creates a worldwide energy-crisis and the europeans are prepared, partly because of a joint effort to lower energy consumption.
There are so much pros and cons and scenarios, it hardly matters how reality turns out. European legislation searches for a specific advantage there, and they have the right to do so. If things change (fusion-energy fe.), legislation changes again, so what.
The energy-thing they try to achieve there is very contextual, the effect is sought to be a reduction of consumption. The long term effects of that are not in your scenario, what if China's growth creates a worldwide energy-crisis and the europeans are prepared, partly because of a joint effort to lower energy consumption.
There are so much pros and cons and scenarios, it hardly matters how reality turns out. European legislation searches for a specific advantage there, and they have the right to do so. If things change (fusion-energy fe.), legislation changes again, so what.
Similar threads
