[Video] PCs are TOO Powerful… and it’s a problem


Check out Drop + Marvel Custom Keycap Sets at Use code LINUS and get 25% off GlassWire at Who’s afraid …

[Video] PCs are TOO Powerful… and it’s a problem 1
[Video] PCs are TOO Powerful… and it’s a problem 2
[Video] PCs are TOO Powerful… and it’s a problem 3
[Video] PCs are TOO Powerful… and it’s a problem 4

33 Comments on “[Video] PCs are TOO Powerful… and it’s a problem”

  1. 9:12 I just went and read the pdf that this graph comes from (PDF page 31, document page 27, Appendix A). These numbers are so full of holes they'd make swiss cheese blush.
    1. These numbers are generated from the maximum general-purpose performance from all computers on the planet, i.e. "If everyone were to fully load their CPU with matrix multiplications, how much power would it consume". This is entirely unrealistic.
    2. There is no known correlation between performance and bit throughput for special-purpose computing (i.e. GPUs, embedded processors, accelerators etc.), thus they fudge the numbers by simply multiplying the general-purpose bit throughput by two. This is done despite having just shown that an increasing portion of the total compute capacity is based in special-purpose computing.
    3. They then multiply this maximum possible bit throughput by the energy per bit to calculate the joules per year. In effect, this assumes that every CPU on the planet is being fully loaded year-round, twice over (because apparently GPUs require the same amount of power as CPUs on average under load?).
    4. This completely disregards the fact that an increasing portion of the average computer is sitting idle most of the time due to the increase in the quantity of cores available without sufficient increases in application multithreading.
    5. The world's energy production line is flat despite the fact that it will increase in response to demand for more power.

  2. Bottom line is that there are people looking for ways to make money sitting in some office and PRETENDING to be some advocate group.They likely don't even sit in an office but likely sitting at home most of the time.The simple reason for the FAKE entities not really doing much or caring is that they don't want to afford any cost or effort trying to fight some giant manufacturer.Like if they told Nvidia no then Nvidia would take them to court and that costs money of which Nvidia has lots of it.

  3. Desktops are dead. Mobile and laptops have taken over. Its just us gamers and some Youtubers who still use them. I haven't seen a desktop in a house other than mine since 2014. And still they tell us there are so many desktops they will surpass the global power output? Do they think we are idiots? Power requirement will always go up, now that more electric cars are showing up. Punish them, why punish us "incels" who only have our computers to game on and be happy.

  4. So basically it's a repeat of the car efficiency regulations that made everyone buy SUVs. The market will end up buying SUVs which are also more profitable which is worse than that car sale would have been.

  5. Oh, the dropping things has become a joke now. It was find when it was just Linus. Now everyone is dropping things just for the show. Its getting old.

  6. Govt: You are using too much power
    Me: OK, I'll put up solar pannels and a battery bank to offset it at least.
    Govt: No, it's too ugly and you need permission from the power company.
    Me: Power Co, can I grid tie or just drop off and disconnect you?
    Power Co: No, you are paying us our gouging prices and we can't go without your $$

  7. The regulation seems to be made by people who don't know much about computers and I'm not sure they know much about other things. Less efficient PSUs are banned, unless they are rated for high amount of power, in which case they are exempt, because they can waste a whole lot of power instead of just a little; also, with PSU efficiency being the worst at lower utilization levels compared to their rated strength (and supposedly they are really concerned with idle power consumption), the more powerful 80+ Bronze PSU, which is exempt, will waste more power than a lower rated 80+ Bronze one. Also, rating graphics cards by bandwidth in order to determine their power and efficiency score is I guess slightly better than rating them by the amount of VRAM or model number.

    Essentially, people with loads of money buying money no object rigs are fine, guys looking to get a bang for buck build are the ones that are likely to see changes, with components probably being replaced by more costly alternatives. The 3090 is the least power efficient member of the entire 30 series yet it's perfectly fine (maybe 3080 Ti is worse, but that one is exempt too), all they have to do is pair it with a chungus PSU (which they have to anyway) and they're golden, even if the PSU is not; on the other hand, if a company is making a reasonable 3060Ti build, they need to be careful, even though it's a great performer per watt, and even if your PSU is Gold, you still have to be careful not to exceed a power quota. Going for a reasonable motherboard option puts more limitations on you, because "expandability". I kind of get the idea, a more expandable PC is more likely to be expanded, instead of thrown away when it no longer meets the needs, but the reality is… When did you last hear that someone threw away a gaming rig because they wanted more USB ports?! On the other hand, if you need a faster GPU, you don't add more GPUs to your expandable rig, you replace the current one, and if you want a faster CPU, well, you're screwed because Intel probably changed the socket again (unless you went AMD, in which case the chances are a lot better). Meanwhile, that more expensive, more expandable motherboard that had to be chosen in order to increase the power quota will probably, on its own, consume more power than a value one and require more resources to build, while not making your PC run any faster.

    In short, this was made by a committee of bureaucrats and was made in a way which does not guarantee that PCs will become more power efficient, merely that the average, bang for buck consumer will have to buy slightly more expensive stuff, while the actual power guzzling monstrosities are exempt, regardless of how inefficient they are. And all this without even mentioning the commercial miners to whom this does not apply. Yuck!

  8. It's not about regulations. Those are a red herring. It's about the regulation fees. Say fees. That's what the government really wants. Well that and control. Because once they set precedent with the law that encroaches your ability to have the PC that you like – the next law will be one that outlaws crypto mining rigs because they consume "too much" power all the time. You need to know how these bastards think. And then print guns lots of guns. One day the international symbol for peace and liberty – will be a picture of the capital with a mushroom cloud over it.

  9. Hey LTT gang, i have been having lots of problems with my pc as i have been having a BSOD repeatedly (VIDEO TDR FAILURE) and i have tried all of the solutions on the internet and keep on having the same issue. All i rlly want to do is be able to use my (old and slow) pc but unfortunately cant ant suggestions?

  10. Literally the only thing this regulation will do is increase cost of prebuild machines, and making it harder for smaller pc builders as their overhead for compliance will be higher compared to their volume.

    Once again the government is proving to have absolutely no idea what they're doing.

  11. @8:56 Table V-6, If the PC isn't portable and has 32gb or less ram it's maximum sleep mode power is 0watts
    But, if it's portable it only needs to have more than 16gb to have some power allowance.
    What nonsense is this?

Have a comment? Type it below!