Tuesday, September 13th 2016
New California Energy Commission Regulation Threatens Pre-built Gaming Desktops
California Energy Commission (CEC), the body tasked with keeping the US state of California both energy-rich and energy-efficient, is preparing a new series of regulations aimed at reducing power-draw of computers and the overall consumption of PC monitors. These regulations could have a profound effect on the PC industry at large, as California-based tech companies create industry standards. The regulations could come into force at various stages, between 2017 and 2021.
The CEC is said to have conducted wide-ranging consultations with stakeholders in the industry, to formulate regulations that make certain kinds of computers energy-efficient, while not creating the kind of regulation that prevent certain other kind of computers from being sold altogether (eg: gaming desktops and workstations). For example, it's realistic to sell a desktop PC for Internet and office productivity apps that draws under 100W, but it's not realistic to make one for 4K Ultra HD gaming, or even industrial CAD. These kinds of computers will be governed by a separate set of rules, and as you'll find out, some of these rules are very arbitrary, and not very well thought out.
To begin with, CEC hopes to make computers more energy-efficient by setting idle power consumption targets for manufacturers to design their desktops to meet. The average Joe's office desktop should have no problems meeting those targets, as the technology needed to drive such applications has already approached such level of efficiency. Gaming PCs and workstations, on the other hand, will be given exemptions on the basis of an "expandability score." This is built around the idea that some users need machines that are expandable to meet their growing computational needs (think a video production firm that needs to change components in its workstations as it's moving from 4K to 5K video editing).
This "expandability score" is determined by a number of factors, most importantly, the features of specific hardware components. The higher your product's expandability score, the more "maximum idle power draw" it's allowed to have. Logically, something like this shouldn't affect DIY PC enthusiasts (people who assemble their own gaming PCs or workstations by purchasing components separately), since the resulting build is not technically a product, but an assemblage of products. This should, however, affect pre-built gaming desktop/workstation manufacturers.
One of the interesting specs on the basis of which a gaming desktop will be granted a "high" expandability score is the memory bandwidth of installed graphics cards. The draft regulations prescribe a graphics card with at least 400 GB/s will qualify for high-expandability exemptions in the year 2018. The regulators are aware the technology moves forward, and so does memory bandwidth, and so they set this minimum bandwidth requirement to 600 GB/s by 2020. This, in our opinion, is highly arbitrary. Today's high-end graphics cards such as the GeForce GTX 1080, only feature 320 GB/s, and it's expected that by 2018, mid-range GPUs will have the kind of processing power (and importantly memory bandwidth) of the GTX 1080. So you'll see mid-range GPUs with wastefully expensive memory to meet those bandwidth requirements. High-end GPUs will have moved on to faster memory standards such as GDDR6 and HBM2.
What adds to memory bandwidth being an arbitrary criterion is that both AMD and NVIDIA have innovated lossless memory compression tech that make the most out of low physical bandwidth. This is the same as air-pollution regulators using engine displacement to set regulations for cars, when technologies exist to make the most out of limited displacement (eg: variable valve-timing, turbochargers, etc.)
PSUs are the other key component of the regulations. To get a high-expandability score, the machine should also feature a PSU with a minimum capacity of 600W, workstations should feature PSUs with at least 80 Plus Gold switching efficiency. Lastly, a key target component of the regulations are monitors. On most desktops, monitors are the most power-hungry components. The commission is prescribing new standards for display manufacturers, to use the latest energy-efficient LEDs (for illumination), setting a new default brightness standard (since most consumers never change their monitor brightness); ambient-light sensors that dynamically adjusts brightness to the surroundings; new display signal technology that reduces power-draw by monitor electronics by clock-gating if the input frames are successively repetitive, and switching-efficiency standards for the monitor's internal power-supply.
The jury is out on whether these regulations increase costs for end-users in exchange for more efficient tech, but then that's the classic reaction to regulation meeting any industry.
Source:
DeliddedTech
The CEC is said to have conducted wide-ranging consultations with stakeholders in the industry, to formulate regulations that make certain kinds of computers energy-efficient, while not creating the kind of regulation that prevent certain other kind of computers from being sold altogether (eg: gaming desktops and workstations). For example, it's realistic to sell a desktop PC for Internet and office productivity apps that draws under 100W, but it's not realistic to make one for 4K Ultra HD gaming, or even industrial CAD. These kinds of computers will be governed by a separate set of rules, and as you'll find out, some of these rules are very arbitrary, and not very well thought out.
This "expandability score" is determined by a number of factors, most importantly, the features of specific hardware components. The higher your product's expandability score, the more "maximum idle power draw" it's allowed to have. Logically, something like this shouldn't affect DIY PC enthusiasts (people who assemble their own gaming PCs or workstations by purchasing components separately), since the resulting build is not technically a product, but an assemblage of products. This should, however, affect pre-built gaming desktop/workstation manufacturers.
One of the interesting specs on the basis of which a gaming desktop will be granted a "high" expandability score is the memory bandwidth of installed graphics cards. The draft regulations prescribe a graphics card with at least 400 GB/s will qualify for high-expandability exemptions in the year 2018. The regulators are aware the technology moves forward, and so does memory bandwidth, and so they set this minimum bandwidth requirement to 600 GB/s by 2020. This, in our opinion, is highly arbitrary. Today's high-end graphics cards such as the GeForce GTX 1080, only feature 320 GB/s, and it's expected that by 2018, mid-range GPUs will have the kind of processing power (and importantly memory bandwidth) of the GTX 1080. So you'll see mid-range GPUs with wastefully expensive memory to meet those bandwidth requirements. High-end GPUs will have moved on to faster memory standards such as GDDR6 and HBM2.
What adds to memory bandwidth being an arbitrary criterion is that both AMD and NVIDIA have innovated lossless memory compression tech that make the most out of low physical bandwidth. This is the same as air-pollution regulators using engine displacement to set regulations for cars, when technologies exist to make the most out of limited displacement (eg: variable valve-timing, turbochargers, etc.)
PSUs are the other key component of the regulations. To get a high-expandability score, the machine should also feature a PSU with a minimum capacity of 600W, workstations should feature PSUs with at least 80 Plus Gold switching efficiency. Lastly, a key target component of the regulations are monitors. On most desktops, monitors are the most power-hungry components. The commission is prescribing new standards for display manufacturers, to use the latest energy-efficient LEDs (for illumination), setting a new default brightness standard (since most consumers never change their monitor brightness); ambient-light sensors that dynamically adjusts brightness to the surroundings; new display signal technology that reduces power-draw by monitor electronics by clock-gating if the input frames are successively repetitive, and switching-efficiency standards for the monitor's internal power-supply.
The jury is out on whether these regulations increase costs for end-users in exchange for more efficient tech, but then that's the classic reaction to regulation meeting any industry.
94 Comments on New California Energy Commission Regulation Threatens Pre-built Gaming Desktops
Here's a little hint for you, Ohm's Law takes no prisoners (If you lower the voltage in a closed system, the amperage rises), and your body doesn't really care about 110 or 230, it's all a question of the amperage and how fast the fuses are.
Amateur? I'm paid to do it, so w/e lol.
This isn't dangerous at all. It doesn't even register on the danger meter of the jobs I've done.
If so, you are a disgrace to your profession, spreading ignorance and being proud of it...but w/e it's only lives we are talking about, lol.
/sarcasm off
Good, I'd like to see more intelligent and economical designs. Pic related: I'm only using 3W to make this post from a desktop PC.
EDIT: Actually, what we really need is desktop-oriented higher power AIOs. Instead of "Surface Pros" with batteries and detachable keyboards, have full-powered desktop CPU/monitors with power supplies and wireless keyboard/mice. Simple enough. It's very easy to package typical productivity use within a 100W envelope. The PC I built for my parents caps out ~80W, streams 4k, and can play 1080p games. Add an OS and a few apps (Netflix, YouTube, Hulu, etc) and you have a marketable and affordable product that people actually want. Hell, hire me and I'll build them for you!
I work solo, so bfd. Feel free to whine to every fat ass, smoker, drinker, bad driver, etc, b/c they're the ones in danger and endangering others.
Please leave any voltage above 40v to the professionals, no amount of hipster cynicism will protect you from the laws of physics!
Unless you're on a smartphone/tablet, you've heavily mis-interpreted something.
Just for you I downloaded PCMark Vantage and ran it. Maximum board power while benchmarking was 32W, although I have gotten it higher. Maximum draw by the CPU was 26W. These numbers are retrieved using sensors on the motherboard itself.
Score of 25290 with i3-6320
Try comparing the results with your outdated Sandy Bridge architecture.
I've actually slightly revised this PC, if I were to build it again, mostly because pricing / availability changed but also because I intentionally pushed the envelope the first time. Here's the part list ($700 USD) if you want to build something similar. If 256GB isn't enough storage I recommend an 850 Pro in its place.
secure.newegg.com/WishList/PublicWishDetail.aspx?Source=MSWD&WishListNumber=25048571
still one of the stupid ideas for computers yet came out
When we both entered the store, I went my own way to the back to check out some new laptop models, he went to the right side to check out hard drives. We meet up at the front of the store at the check out line since he was buying some stuff, I was not, I was only looking and providing the transportation. When we both were walking out of the store, we both were stopped by store security, they called the police and took us away to jail.
I was served 3 days in jail and got 3 years probation for theft, only because I came in with the person and left with him, even though I went my own way when we both step inside. I had no idea he was going to steal things, if I knew I would have not gone with him since I was 500 miles from home and didnt want to get into any trouble. After the 1st year the charges will drop to petty theft and after the probation period is over I can have it deleted from my record.
I was only in California on a business trip to the local convention center in Oxnard, CA. I used to go every 4 months to that sales convention. I dont go anymore and I stopped doing any kind of business with California. I run a small ebay business, so when ever someone from California buys something from me and they provide a CA address, I refund their money back. I always put it down on all of my listings but some people dont read.
To me CA can take a dump into the pacific and i would not care, the entire state can burn like the Cajon pass did some weeks ago.
There's a bit of a price premium making high enough quality PSUs to achieve those ratings, but I'm sure that price premium is WAY less than whatever manufacturers will be doing to legally circumnavigate laws like this.I'd expect, in this example, that nVidia's legal team would find a way to shut this down as this would take their flagship card out of the option list for California residents.
Regardless, even if the power supply is only 50% efficient, 3/.5 is only 4.5W.
I don't know why you're being so stubborn. I'm not even using 1% of CPU or memory allocation to browse TPU. The TDP of the CPU is 51W, SSD is ~1.7W, there are two fans that draw less than 1W each, even if I cranked the absolute maximum power draw from all my hardware (which would be dumb at idle) it would be less than 90W.
As you can see above, while benchmarking the board reached a maximum of 32W which simulates typical stress levels, and a maximum potential of 42W if all the components were running at max simultaneously (they don't because different tasks stress different parts of the board).
Note that stress load =/= to max load.
I'm not sure what you don't understand. Out of curiosity how many watts do you think I should be drawing to do simple web browsing?
[INDENT]www.tomshardware.com/reviews/skylake-intel-core-i7-6700k-core-i5-6600k,4252-11.html
I hope this was educational :)
[/INDENT]
I get that you are giving me accurate numbers - but they're nowhere near the wattages of a total system, even if you ignore peripheral devices (monitor, mouse, speakers etc)
As someone who actually does measure the wattages of his systems, trust me when no standard desktop is going to be under 40W - the inefficiencies of the PSU keep even the best desktop systems around 55-75W at idle, before monitor/screen.
(mITX hardware can go as low as 15W, which is also normal for many laptops at idle)
Can't be assed to keep repeating myself.
You're also very wrong.
I'm sure you have tested this as many people have. Take a look here, lots of systems idle at 5W and peak at 30W:
www.anandtech.com/show/10121/intel-nuc6i5syk-skylake-ucff-pc-review/6
Or
www.legitreviews.com/intel-nuc-nuc6i5syk-skylake-mini-pc-review_181093/4(Both measure from the wall)
You're vastly overestimating the power usage of modern hardware if you think <10W at idle is impossible. A 2C Skylake i3 @ 1.8 GHz hardly draws even 2W. M.2 SSDs use less than 2W peak. Fans use ~0.5W. It's not complicated.
Although it is worth noting that even platinum rated PSUs fall way lower in efficiency when you run them dirt low like that.
Because its very clear you're not including 80% of the power draw of your actual system.
You're right that PSUs reach their maximum efficiency at around 50% load and any outlying load beyond that comes with a cost. They're also much less efficient at 20% of their maximum load. Regardless, a platinum PSU like this one will be over 75% efficient even at a 5W load. 5W/0.75 = 7W at the wall.It's very clear I'm not. Perhaps you should research M.2 and the 14nm FinFET process, times have changed.
Hey maybe it will force Nvidia to stop gimping bandwidth ;)
Honestly though, this is just semantics and not worth arguing about. I accept your claim that energy efficiency as a whole, is going up. I just don't agree it should be a legal mandate.
People have argued that regulating emissions is a bad approach as well but what happened? Manufacturers reduced emissions.
The article does mention that Gaming/Workstation PCs will be given leniency based on "expandability score" (whatever that means).