Alienware no longer shipping high end gaming PCs to certain US States, citing new power consumption regulations

[Curufinwe_wins]

14 minutes ago, MageTank said:

snip

It seems that the higher power consumption of AMD's chipset makes this regulation far harder for them to meet than for Intel's 6W chipset standard from the last decade, since normal expandability scores seem to permit roughly 20W on the non-dgpu systems and around 40W idle for d-gpu carrying systems. Though crazy high end stuff like my example on a previous page seems to premit up to around 60W idle.

 

I don't agree though that it fails to make sense that customers can bypass things. A customer could overvolt a lightbulb if they want and get a bit more lighting (sometimes), but the default settings and configuration are still highly important for all those customers that do *not* change the defaults. Thankfully this is NOT the same ECU crap (where instead of just being forced to meet a set standard, you are being forced to meet the set standard in the original mode the car was shipped with).

 

I likewise think it is a good concession (even though I agree the scoring is overly complicated) that if you offer more value to your consumer (by increasing expansion or some other feature) you are allowed to use a bit more power to compensate for that utility.

 

The whole thing of system makers having to either choose to offer more for their consumers or work to increase the efficiency of their stock configurations is IMO exactly what should be the net result of these types of regulations, even if I'm not the biggest fan of how it is implemented.

[Mister Woof]

6 minutes ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

It seems that the higher power consumption of AMD's chipset makes this regulation far harder for them to meet than for Intel's 6W chipset standard from the last decade, since normal expandability scores seem to permit roughly 20W on the non-dgpu systems and around 40W idle for d-gpu carrying systems.

 

I don't agree though that it fails to make sense that customers can bypass things. A customer could overvolt a lightbulb if they want and get a bit more lighting (sometimes), but the default settings and configuration are still highly important for all those customers that do *not* change the defaults. Thankfully this is NOT the same ECU crap (where instead of just being forced to meet a set standard, you are being forced to meet the set standard in the original mode the car was shipped with).

 

I likewise think it is a good concession (even though I agree the scoring is overly complicated) that if you offer more value to your consumer (by increasing expansion or some other feature) you are allowed to use a bit more power to compensate for that utility.

 

The whole thing of system makers having to either choose to offer more for their consumers or work to increase the efficiency of their stock configurations is IMO exactly what should be the net result of these types of regulations, even if I'm not the biggest fan of how it is implemented.

Simple.

 

Just set your BIOS to default, upload your CPUZ validation to www.cal30fps.ca.gov, then once you're done it, just reapply your OC.

 

And even then, flashing a motherboard/GPU is a lot easier than a car. Don't even need a laptop.

[Curufinwe_wins]

Just now, Mister Woof said:

Simple.

 

Just set your BIOS to default, upload your CPUZ validation to www.cal30fps.ca.gov, then once you're done it, just reapply your OC.

 

And even then, flashing a motherboard/GPU is a lot easier than a car. Don't even need a laptop.

Hahaha, well thankfully the current regulations do not require registration or similar, and if they tried to lock down consumer-end modification in the same way I would be extremely upset. This isn't like rolling coal after all.

[MageTank]

1 minute ago, Mister Woof said:

Well that's definitely a different conversation compared to the one I was having about articles and their negative clickbait strategies.

 

Coming from someone who lives in California and has to struggle by hard to understand regulations and codes, I definitely understand. 

 

If I had to guess, it is to do two things:

 

1. Improve OEM systems, which is the largest number of users, on a relatively small individual unit power savings but a large one as a whole.

2. Deter OEMs from even bothering in some market segments (seems to be working on Dell)

 

Ultimately I believe still that gamers, miners, folders, etc., are still miniscule compared to the overall general user.

 

So even if they manage to skate by them with work arounds, your regular folks combined are going to still have a greater net benefit than focusing on those other guys.

 

I am mostly just salty that they have me calculating memory bandwidth on iGPU's and adding up "expandability ports" for some arbitrary score that is never really explained as to how it correlates to power consumption, lol. You mean to tell me if I throw more x16 slots on a board, I am allowed to use more power simply because they exist? Sweet...

 

Do I think this is California overreaching again? Absolutely, but not for the wrong reasons. Something has to be done, I am just not entirely sure this is it, or the right way to do it.

 

Just now, Curufinwe_wins said:

It seems that the higher power consumption of AMD's chipset makes this regulation far harder for them to meet than for Intel's 6W chipset standard from the last decade, since normal expandability scores seem to permit 20W on the non-dgpu systems and around 40W idle for d-gpu carrying systems.

 

I don't agree though that it fails to make sense that customers can bypass things. A customer could overvolt a lightbulb if they want and get a bit more lighting (sometimes), but the default settings and configuration are still highly important for all those customers that do *not* change the defaults.

 

I likewise think it is a good concession (even though I agree the scoring is overly complicated) that if you offer more value to your consumer (by increasing expansion or some other feature) you are allowed to use a bit more power to compensate for that utility.

 

The whole thing of system makers having to either choose to offer more for their consumers or work to increase the efficiency of their stock configurations is IMO exactly what should be the net result of these types of regulations, even if I'm not the biggest fan of how it is implemented.

That might explain it. The models I submitted for independent testing were both AMD X570 boards with 5900X's. We've tried with gold-rated Sirfa units and ChannelWell units but our report has been less than desirable.

 

I'll also concede that I am likely overestimating the number of people that alter their systems beyond stock, mostly because of who I interact with on these forums.

 

I just wish the system itself made more sense. Base it less on the ports themselves physically existing and more on what you are actually using at the time of shipping the system. If we cannot control what a customer is doing with their system after they receive it, why should we be graded on what they can upgrade to because of the port/slot selection?

 

I know people view this as "Companies are being forced to offer more quality components to customers now!" but what it actually means is, the average consumer is going to pay more for a system because the cost in materials went up due to having to buy boards with more X16 slots in them to pass Title 20 instead of being graded based on the efficiency of the individual components we selected.

 

If I choose a motherboard with a solid VRM (little to no leakage), my BIOS is configured to have a decent LLC with adaptive vcore and I am using a highly efficient, high-quality PSU with an OS configured to take advantage of all power saving features, the number of ports on my board shouldn't impact my efficiency scoring if the power consumption of my system isn't changing. 

 

I don't know, I see this as a loss for some customers looking for value deals on gaming systems and don't want features they don't intend to use, and not really a loss or win for customers that don't mind spending extra for quality because that target audience doesn't mind paying a premium anyways.

[Mister Woof]

1 minute ago, MageTank said:

I am mostly just salty that they have me calculating memory bandwidth on iGPU's and adding up "expandability ports" for some arbitrary score that is never really explained as to how it correlates to power consumption, lol. You mean to tell me if I throw more x16 slots on a board, I am allowed to use more power simply because they exist? Sweet...

 

Do I think this is California overreaching again? Absolutely, but not for the wrong reasons. Something has to be done, I am just not entirely sure this is it, or the right way to do it.

 

That might explain it. The models I submitted for independent testing were both AMD X570 boards with 5900X's. We've tried with gold-rated Sirfa units and ChannelWell units but our report has been less than desirable.

 

I'll also concede that I am likely overestimating the number of people that alter their systems beyond stock, mostly because of who I interact with on these forums.

 

I just wish the system itself made more sense. Base it less on the ports themselves physically existing and more on what you are actually using at the time of shipping the system. If we cannot control what a customer is doing with their system after they receive it, why should we be graded on what they can upgrade to because of the port/slot selection?

 

I know people view this as "Companies are being forced to offer more quality components to customers now!" but what it actually means is, the average consumer is going to pay more for a system because the cost in materials went up due to having to buy boards with more X16 slots in them to pass Title 20 instead of being graded based on the efficiency of the individual components we selected.

 

If I choose a motherboard with a solid VRM (little to no leakage), my BIOS is configured to have a decent LLC with adaptive vcore and I am using a highly efficient, high-quality PSU with an OS configured to take advantage of all power saving features, the number of ports on my board shouldn't impact my efficiency scoring if the power consumption of my system isn't changing. 

 

I don't know, I see this as a loss for some customers looking for value deals on gaming systems and don't want features they don't intend to use, and not really a loss or win for customers that don't mind spending extra for quality because that target audience doesn't mind paying a premium anyways.

If you own any type of guns in CA then you know the drill.

 

Nothing new lol.

[Guest]

42 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Sadly it's not always about using a better PSU though. We use gold-rated ChannelWell PSU's in our integration systems but still fail title 20 requirements on some of our models.

WHICH "Gold rated" CWT PSUs?  Does it have the bust mode LLC controller?  (CM6500UNXIS, for example).  You're not going to pass without it.  If it's an off the shelf GPS or GPU platform, it's going to use a standard LLC Resonant controller.

 

But yeah... "high expandability" can most certainly get you out of the weeds.

[poochyena]

1 hour ago, Mister Woof said:

they still aren't blasting Alienware specifically being at fault

Every single article references them, specifically.

 

1 hour ago, Mister Woof said:

Like, you can't read these sentences and believe they are blaming Alienware instead of the states' with a straight face:

but all those examples are doing literally just that. ALIENWARE'S computers are too power hungry, that what they all say. None of them are saying "gaming computers", its ALIENWARE.

[Mister Woof]

2 minutes ago, poochyena said:

Every single article references them, specifically.

 

but all those examples are doing literally just that. ALIENWARE'S computers are too power hungry, that what they all say. None of them are saying "gaming computers", its ALIENWARE.

I disagree with you completely.

 

Alienware is presented as the whipping boy here, and just like ARs and F250 gassers, CA is out to take your high-powered gaming systems. That's the story. That's the click bait.

 

But you do you.

[poochyena]

17 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

I disagree with you completely.

 

Alienware is presented as the whipping boy here, and just like ARs and F250 gassers, CA is out to take your high-powered gaming systems. That's the story. That's the click bait.

 

But you do you.

You are completely ignoring what any of the articles say and inserting your own bias. If you hate CA, you can absolutely twist the words to mean what you want, but if you read it in an unbias way and read what they ACTUALLY say, then it is specifically about alienware struggling to keep up with CA regulations.

[Mister Woof]

10 minutes ago, poochyena said:

You are completely ignoring what any of the articles say and inserting your own bias. If you hate CA, you can absolutely twist the words to mean what you want, but if you read it in an unbias way and read what they ACTUALLY say, then it is specifically about alienware struggling to keep up with CA regulations.

You're defending the clearly state-directed inflammatory journalism and calling it my misunderstanding because you lack the basic ability to infer connotation and language that everyone else who has commented on this thread has identified.

 

At some point you have to ask yourself is it that everyone else is wrong, or is it you?

 

I don't really care if or when you come to this realization, because I'm done discussing it with you.

[Ydfhlx]

2 hours ago, poochyena said:

which no one is doing or proposing

If you can't buy one due to state law.. . It's a ban, or what? I perhaps should have said "banning certain gaming PCs", but I didn't say all as well...

[Blademaster91]

21 minutes ago, poochyena said:

You are completely ignoring what any of the articles say and inserting your own bias. If you hate CA, you can absolutely twist the words to mean what you want, but if you read it in an unbias way and read what they ACTUALLY say, then it is specifically about alienware struggling to keep up with CA regulations.

Well its clickbait and not just about CA, as other states banned the sale of alienware gaming PC's, and dell isn't struggling to follow the regulation, all they would have to do is use a 80 plus gold rated PSU. Although that would require dell to actually spend a few dollars on a decent PSU, seems like they don't want to though and its not surprising considering how crap their gaming PC's are.

[Ydfhlx]

9 hours ago, oali24 said:

This should be applied to the whole US then

So people go to Canada to smuggle them? War on drugs clearly didn't work, war on PCs would? Also Brazil tried to limit import of foreign PCs in the 80s, as a result half of all PCs in Brazil were smuggled...

 

Unless police will go to every home and manually check power consumption of every PC there is literally no way to see if sb has a PC with high power usage. And it would basically mean that people can't do things like 3d modelling, scientific simulations or coding because it needs powerful hardware.

9 hours ago, oali24 said:

they don't sell cars with the same enissions and efficiency of engine and exhaust systems from 20 years ago.

Sure they don't... And see how the price has risen. Another thing is that you can force people to get more efficient cars by putting taxes on fuel. Try doing that with electricity, people who can afford gaming PCs won't really notice while poorest people will suffer despite not really being part of the "problem".

 

The solution is, apart from investing in new power plants, is to approach manufacturers of PC hardware and pay them to make more efficient parts, like Intel is trying to push 12VO standard.

[poochyena]

11 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

basic ability to infer connotation and language

You're bias, and that bias is leading you to infer extra meaning from something that has no extra meaning. Read what is said, don't try to interpret extra meaning out of it.

13 minutes ago, Ydfhlx said:

If you can't buy one due to state law.. . It's a ban, or what?

You can buy gaming PCs in CA.

[Mister Woof]

4 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Well its clickbait and not just about CA, as other states banned the sale of alienware gaming PC's, and dell isn't struggling to follow the regulation, all they would have to do is use a 80 plus gold rated PSU. Although that would require dell to actually spend a few dollars on a decent PSU, seems like they don't want to though and its not surprising considering how crap their gaming PC's are.

The media hype is just FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) that big brother is out to get your gaming PCs or prevent you from owning gaming PCs. 

 

Most of the articles don't even go into detail on why this affected Dell specifically, only that it did. And then without doing so they make the statements I quoted earlier.

 

I got more actual information and data from the forum members here who have reviewed the actual CCRs and by PSU-Jesus himself.

 

 

[Ydfhlx]

3 minutes ago, poochyena said:

You can buy gaming PCs in CA.

You cannot buy certain gaming PCs in CA due to state law. And don't try to "infer extra meaning from something that has no extra meaning".

[poochyena]

25 minutes ago, Ydfhlx said:

You cannot buy certain gaming PCs in CA due to state law.

right, a specific type of gaming PCs, not "gaming PCs" like you said. Might as well have said they are banning electricity.

[Mark Kaine]

3 hours ago, Curufinwe_wins said:

The key is "according to some" and is factually wrong.

well, as i said ten thousands of years is agreed upon by european experts, in europe… 

 

And saying "50 years" is simply disingenuous, misleading and false, the 50 years is simply the time it takes to be half as radioactive and half as deadly, doesnt mean its not still super deadly, like a few days of exposure would surely be enough to kill anyone.

 

Nope, we only have estimates but these need to be contained safely for thousands of years, which is nearly impossible (and a problem, just not for us lol)

 

 

 

 

[Mark Kaine]

4 hours ago, Mister Woof said:

That's what made me really interested in the breeder and thorium salt reactors.

 

It seems they haven't been able to make them viable for large scale use, and they're still considered next gen tech, but it seems promising from my high level laymen view.

This is purely speculation from me, but i think the reason this isnt more widely used is it would go against the already etablished indtustries, which rather keep doing what they're doing.

 

However, I watched this weird dude's video yesterday and he made some compelling arguments that "nuclear fusion" finally… finally… would be close to its *breakthrough*

 

Which was supported by the claim that *this year* would be the year the first, um, reactor, would be able to produce more energy than it uses to be run… which, well, would be the *breakthrough* they need…

 

I dont really know if that happened already, has been delayed, or whatever, but it didnt actually  sound like bs, i mean many european institutes, private companies, etc are actually working on this, and its been very costly, so far (also, china, japan, korea, etc all have their own - reasearch, i guess, facilities)

 

 

But the point is, if that works and goes online, that would literally solve all our energy problems - i always thought this is theoretical nonsense tbh, but it appears to be actually working…!?

 

(im also unsure about any possible  waste products  tbh, just because its round and leviating, doesnt make it inherently "green" still sounds somewhat "radioactive" lol) 

But apparently  its great!  : D

 

[Mister Woof]

7 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

This is purely speculation from me, but i think the reason this isnt more widely used is it would go against the already etablished indtustries, which rather keep doing what they're doing.

 

However, I watched this weird dude's video yesterday and he made some compelling arguments that "nuclear fusion" finally… finally… would be close to its *breakthrough*

 

Which was supported by the claim that *this year* would be the year the first, um, reactor, would be able to produce more energy than it uses to be run… which, well, would be the *breakthrough* they need…

 

I dont really know if that happened already, has been delayed, or whatever, but it didnt actually  sound like bs, i mean many european institutes, private companies, etc are actually working on this, and its been very costly, so far (also, china, japan, korea, etc all have their own - reasearch, i guess, facilities)

 

 

But the point is, if that works and goes online, that would literally solve all our energy problems - i always thought this is theoretical nonsense tbh, but it appears to be actually working…!?

 

(im also unsure about any possible  waste products  tbh, just because its round and leviating, doesnt make it inherently "green" still sounds somewhat "radioactive" lol) 

But apparently  its great!  : D

 

i love weird dudes' videos

 

where's the links?

[MageTank]

2 hours ago, jonnyGURU said:

WHICH "Gold rated" CWT PSUs?  Does it have the bust mode LLC controller?  (CM6500UNXIS, for example).  You're not going to pass without it.  If it's an off the shelf GPS or GPU platform, it's going to use a standard LLC Resonant controller.

 

But yeah... "high expandability" can most certainly get you out of the weeds.

I honestly have no idea what controller is inside of them. They call my department "engineering", but truth be told, I am awful at math and I mostly try to kill things before they get to customers. The list of PSU's we've tried (and failed) to pass Title 20 with are:

 

EVGA 220-GA-0650-RX (I think this might be made by Andyson?)

EVGA 210-GQ-0750-RX (No idea who makes the GQ series, doesn't look like Superflower like my older supernova)

High Power HP1-J700GD-F12S (No idea who the OEM is on this one either, if I had to guess based on aesthetics alone, I'd say maybe Sirfa?)

Thermaltake ToughPower GF1 ( I believe this would be our CWT unit, though I have no idea what LLC controller is in it).

 

We've also tried many of our older bronze PSU's and yeah... they didn't come close, lol.

 

If you have any recommendations on what you'd think would pass these requirements (assuming the rest of our system is decent), I'd definitely appreciate some pointers here. Our only requirements are that we would prefer UL/Intertek/TUV certs on PSU's 850W or higher and we'd have to be able to source thousands of them for mass production. The second hardest part of this Title 20 nonsense is actually getting our hands on PSU's with commitments from vendors thanks to the added impact of the industry wide shortages.

[Elisis]

2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

No idea who makes the GQ series

This is FSP

 

3 minutes ago, MageTank said:

No idea who the OEM is on this one either, if I had to guess based on aesthetics alone, I'd say maybe Sirfa?

Well, High Power is literally Sirfa under another name, so yeah, it's Sirfa.

[Mark Kaine]

10 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

i love weird dudes' videos

 

where's the links?

I promise hes super weird (and smart) (weird combo haha)

 

 

 

 

[MageTank]

Just now, Elisis said:

This is FSP

 

Well, High Power is literally Sirfa under another name, so yeah, it's Sirfa.

The guess I took was calculated, but boy am I good at guessing, lol.

[ARikozuM]

This is the "use less straws" argument for gaming. Instead of going for the actual polluters and consumers they would rather go after the commoner who barely puts an impact on the infrastructure.