Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

RD600 w00t!

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 17, 2006 11:17:26 AM

More about : rd600 w00t

December 17, 2006 11:45:46 AM

Seems to be a great Crossfire Update and According to Power consumption it's significantly lower at consuming power while providing you with clone like performance with all the extreme Intel and Nvidia Boards, It's befitting to say because of the power consumption it's a better board, and can give you over clocking similar to the Intel Board, if done carefully and with a proper cooler. And may overclock similar to the best if Tweaked just right with an Upgraded cooler.
December 17, 2006 12:35:11 PM

Shouldn't this been on the m/b section?

And from what I've read about this mobo is....uttter cr@p. To all who have been waiting for the ATi/DFI solution to chose a m/b for their next upgrade I have to say one thing: hahahahaha, you have waited for nothing. You could have been better off with a 975 or 965 since last summer!!!! I mean what is so special about this m/b??? 2x8 lane + 1x2 lane pci-e? The only good thing about it is power consumption. But in the enthusiast segment, who's gonna care about it?
Related resources
December 17, 2006 12:39:41 PM

Why better off with 975 of 965?
In which regards did you see these chipsets outperforming it?
December 17, 2006 12:41:26 PM

Quote:
Seems to be a great Crossfire Update and According to Power consumption it's significantly lower at consuming power while providing you with clone like performance with all the extreme Intel and Nvidia Boards

It's amazing what a power hog the nVidia 680i is.
Perhaps AMD should have really gone for an Ati solution with 4x4... :?
December 17, 2006 12:42:06 PM

did I say that?
I simply pointed out that waiting 6 months for 100 points in sisandra or whatever isn't worth it. It is marginally better at some. So what about it?
December 17, 2006 12:54:01 PM

Quote:

And from what I've read about this mobo is....uttter cr@p.
December 17, 2006 12:56:15 PM

Quote:

And from what I've read about this mobo is....uttter cr@p.
*

what was it that johny storm always said?

FLAME ON!!!!

*that was to heat things up!
December 17, 2006 12:59:18 PM

:roll:
okay, that's not my ideal type of discussion, so...
enjoy!
December 17, 2006 1:02:27 PM

ok (civilized mode on!). From what you have read about this mobo, can you justify waiting 6 months for it? Is it truly that awesome? And why DFI is the only manufacturer supporting this chipset?
December 17, 2006 1:11:55 PM

Well, waiting 6 months, probably not, except maybe for the slightly improved Xfire support.
I think it's a good mobo to buy today, but i don't see much sense into waiting for a mobo, unless it's because of a socket change which gives you a better future upgrade path.
From what i capture from the article (which i've just been skipping through anyway), my understanding is that DFI did a lot to design this mobo and helped Ati/AMD tuning its performance.
I guess this means they'll enjoy the exclusivity for a while then.
December 17, 2006 1:12:00 PM

Quote:
Seems to be a great Crossfire Update and According to Power consumption it's significantly lower at consuming power while providing you with clone like performance with all the extreme Intel and Nvidia Boards

It's amazing what a power hog the nVidia 680i is.
Perhaps AMD should have really gone for an Ati solution with 4x4... :?

AMD only did the 680i chips it gave Nvidia the bate, to keep Nvidia on their Good Side. If they went with ATI as their First Chipset, Nvidia would have pulled out from providing AMD anymore Chipsets or at least quality ones, on basis of them owning their Only Competitor ATI. *
Otherwise if or should i say when AMD does smarten up and eventually(secretly) release ATI Crossfire 4x4 boards, I would expect that those ATI based Boards would crunch down on the Nvidia 4x4 by a wide margin In both performance equavilance or even dominance while cutting down power consumption significantly allowing 4x4 to be within a power envelope to directly compete with Kentsfield and Clovertown, until the birth of K8L Quad cores by Mid 07.
December 17, 2006 1:23:39 PM

Quote:
Well, waiting 6 months, probably not, except maybe for the slightly improved Xfire support.
I think it's a good mobo to buy today, but i don't see much sense into waiting for a mobo, unless it's because of a socket change which gives you a better future upgrade path.
From what i capture from the article (which i've just been skipping through anyway), my understanding is that DFI did a lot to design this mobo and helped Ati/AMD tuning its performance.
I guess this means they'll enjoy the exclusivity for a while then.


I can't really consider from a buyers view that this chipset is provided by an exclusive manufacturer, is a good thing. Concerning troubleshooting and debug, I would think the more the merrier. Also, is it really future-proof? There have been talks about ATi's chipset division focusing exclusively on AMD cpu solutions. Nothing concrete, but it's there. Baring in mind that we are talking about the enthusiast segment of the market. I can't see others care what is under the hood, just how much it costs. DFI lanparty mobos for AMD were legendary, probably the best choice.

Taking all these into account I can only say that it came (to the market) a little too late. Yes, it's gonna be bought from some. But had it been at the launch of C2D maybe it stood a chance.
December 17, 2006 1:28:24 PM

Quote:
ok (civilized mode on!). From what you have read about this mobo, can you justify waiting 6 months for it? Is it truly that awesome? And why DFI is the only manufacturer supporting this chipset?


Some people waited 6 month for Core2... so another 6 month should not be a problem..
December 17, 2006 1:40:00 PM

Quote:
ok (civilized mode on!). From what you have read about this mobo, can you justify waiting 6 months for it? Is it truly that awesome? And why DFI is the only manufacturer supporting this chipset?


Some people waited 6 month for Core2... so another 6 month should not be a problem..

hmm. Ok, let me see if I got it right.
Lets say that right now there is a rumor that a new m/b-chipset will come out that outperforms the current etc etc. So you will wait another 6 months just to see if thats true? There is always something new coming every 6-9 months. If you always wait for something better, then you gonna wait a looooong time.

My advice is: if you really need the processing power of c2d right now (for gaming or video editing or whatever), buy it now. If you can afford to wait, there is always the chance that something better is coming sooner or later. But I'm pretty sure that c2d or quad is gonna be what we all gonna hear about at least for the next 2 years. Just like AMD 64 was for the last 3 years.
December 17, 2006 1:40:10 PM

Quote:

Otherwise if or should i say when AMD does smarten up and eventually(secretly) release ATI Crossfire 4x4 boards, I would expect that those ATI based Boards would crunch down on the Nvidia 4x4 by a wide margin In both performance equavilance or even dominance while cutting down power consumption significantly allowing 4x4 to be within a power envelope to directly compete with Kentsfield and Clovertown, until the birth of K8L Quad cores by Mid 07.

Hmm, no, a chipset can't help 4x4 in performance.
That's because the memory controller, which is the only component which has an influence on CPU performance, it's in the CPU, not in the chipset, for AMD.
However, at load the 680i seems to use 75W (!!) more power than the RD600, and 4x4 uses 2 northbridges.
I expect 680a (4x4) to use less power than 680i however, since 680a does not have a memory conroller.
Still, with 2 northbridge chips on 4x4, maybe using an ATi chipset could result in 70-100W lower than the current solution, which would certainly be beneficial, albeit i don't think that 4x4 could compete with Kentsfield even in power consumption.
December 17, 2006 1:44:03 PM

Quote:

Otherwise if or should i say when AMD does smarten up and eventually(secretly) release ATI Crossfire 4x4 boards, I would expect that those ATI based Boards would crunch down on the Nvidia 4x4 by a wide margin In both performance equavilance or even dominance while cutting down power consumption significantly allowing 4x4 to be within a power envelope to directly compete with Kentsfield and Clovertown, until the birth of K8L Quad cores by Mid 07.

Hmm, no, a chipset can't help 4x4 in performance.
That's because the memory controller, which is the only component which has an influence on CPU performance, it's in the CPU, not in the chipset, for AMD.
However, at load the 680i seems to use 75W (!!) more power than the RD600, and 4x4 uses 2 northbridges.
I expect 680a (4x4) to use less power than 680i however, since 680a does not have a memory conroller.
Still, with 2 northbridge chips on 4x4, maybe using an ATi chipset could result in 70-100W lower than the current solution, which would certainly be beneficial, albeit i don't think that 4x4 could compete with Kentsfield even in power consumption.

does the extra 75W include the cpu consumption, ram etc? Or is it solely responsible the northbridge about the extra wattage?
December 17, 2006 1:56:26 PM

Quote:

I can't really consider from a buyers view that this chipset is provided by an exclusive manufacturer, is a good thing. Concerning troubleshooting and debug, I would think the more the merrier. Also, is it really future-proof?

As is said, probably after some months other manufacturers will be able to produce mobos based on this chipset.
AMD traditionally used only a few select manufacturers at launch of its chipsets anyway.
Concerning future-proof, it is, as much as any other Core2 S775 mobo is...

Quote:
There have been talks about ATi's chipset division focusing exclusively on AMD cpu solutions. Nothing concrete, but it's there.

Yes, i'd expect them so, also their licence for the Intel bus, if i remember correctly, will expire soon.
But so what?
I don't think that future ATi products for Intel, or the lack thereof, is relevant in the decision to buy an RD600.

Quote:
Taking all these into account I can only say that it came (to the market) a little too late. Yes, it's gonna be bought from some. But had it been at the launch of C2D maybe it stood a chance.

Price is certainly gonna be important.
But if the price is right, i think this mobo can be pretty successful, as nVidia's 680i will be.
Intel's 965 chipset is becoming outdated (and its performance is inferior to the 975 which was benchmarked against Ati and nVidia).
For people who's buying today (which is the vast majority of the market, until now it was only the early adopters among the enthusiasts who bought Core 2), if the price is right, RD600 is an excellent choice.
December 17, 2006 2:02:52 PM

Quote:

does the extra 75W include the cpu consumption, ram etc? Or is it solely responsible the northbridge about the extra wattage?

75W should be the difference in consumption of the whole system.
But since the systems are equipped with exactly the same components, then this should mean that the chipset alone is responsible for the difference.
Now, that for 4x4 would make 2x75 = 150W.
But i assume the delta to be smaller there, since the AMD chipsets don't have a memory controller.
Hence i've speculated a possible overall difference of 70-100W, instead of 150W.
December 17, 2006 2:07:13 PM

Quote:
Price is certainly gonna be important.
But if the price is right, i think this mobo can be pretty successful, as nVidia's 680i will be.
Intel's 965 chipset is becoming outdated (and its performance is inferior to the 975 which was benchmarked against Ati and nVidia).
For people who's buying today (which is the vast majority of the market, until now it was only the early adopters among the enthusiasts who bought Core 2), if the price is right, RD600 is an excellent choice.


I still fail to see how a 680i priced at 300$ is a success. 2 years ago, would you consider paying 300$ for a m/b? But now it seems that paying that much for a m/b is a given. But thats just my 2 cents.
December 17, 2006 2:18:20 PM

Quote:

does the extra 75W include the cpu consumption, ram etc? Or is it solely responsible the northbridge about the extra wattage?

75W should be the difference in consumption of the whole system.
But since the systems are equipped with exactly the same components, then this should mean that the chipset alone is responsible for the difference.
Now, that for 4x4 would make 2x75 = 150W.
But i assume the delta to be smaller there, since the AMD chipsets don't have a memory controller.
Hence i've speculated a possible overall difference of 70-100W, instead of 150W.

Well now you got me thinking about something else, still related. Isn't it supposed that the integrated memory controller of amd cpu's was done to simply reduce the latencies and increase the bandwidth of those 2? Except that, is there also significantly greater wattage consumption included? (never heard of this b4).
December 17, 2006 2:21:39 PM

Hmm, well i agree, and i think you can get many good boards for half that price.
But the 680i (and the 975 as well) are clearly target at the very high end; that's why nVidia has also launched the 650i line.
BTW, i haven't seen any review yet about these 2 cheaper solutions.. i wonder if they overclock as well, even though they don't have all the bells&whistles.
nVidia ranks these chipsets, for FSB overclock, as "Good", while the 680i as "Best".
But that could just be their marketing buzzwords.
December 17, 2006 2:30:25 PM

I think i probably didn't explain it clearly.
4x4 has an abnormal power consumption.
Part of this is due to the use of 2 CPUs which have a high TDP by themselves (the FX-7x).
Another part is due to the use of 2 northbridges (to have 4 PCI-Express slots, 2x 16x + 2x 8x).
Now these northbridges are from nVidia's 680a chipset, which is a derivative of the 680i: the difference between those 2 is that the 680i has a memory controller, and the 680a doesn't (or shouldn't, since AMD CPU's have the IMC).
Now, we have just seen that the 680i is a power hog, consuming 75W more than the RD600; so my speculation is, that if 4x4 used 2x 680i chipsets, then it would consume 150W more than using 2x RD600 chipsets.
But 4x4 does not use the 680i, it uses the 680a, which probably consumes less power due to not having a memory controller.
Then my guess is, that by using a (non-existent) RD600a based on the RD600 (without memory controller), 4x4 could save some power, probably less than 150W, but maybe in the range 75-100W.
December 17, 2006 2:32:40 PM

I wouldn't say there a significant power increase. But there must be some power increase. Which is what is very interesting about the 65nm chips from AMD. With the memory controller on the cpu, and 200mhz higher clock than the 6600 Conroe, the power consupmtion is pretty close. I thought that was fairly impressive, the shrink yielded great power consumtion decrease.

As far as the ATI board, no one should wait for a new motherboard chipset, unless maybe it is a few weeks away. But, if I were buying today, I would go with the ATI based board, because it performs just as well as all the others, and it uses less power, which gives it the passive cooler. I have always been a fan of the DFI lanparty, I owned a few of them, but I hated the stock fan, it was loud and cheap. If I could get away with a passive cooler, and not sacrifice performance, I am sold...... that's all it has to be for me. Also, does 2 16x lanes offer any performance increase? Are these cards bottlenecked by the PCI E lanes? I don't think they are, but, if I am wrong, let me know.

wes
December 17, 2006 2:41:17 PM

Let me see if I got right this time around then!
Intel based m/b having the memory controller in the n/b are prone to have higher wattage consumption? In the case of 680i, some 75W more?
December 17, 2006 2:44:08 PM

Wait, did I read that correctly? It only has 8 lanes per PCIe slot? This may become a problem with the R600... :?
December 17, 2006 2:46:32 PM

Quote:
Let me see if I got right this time around then!
Intel based m/b having the memory controller in the n/b are prone to have higher wattage consumption?


Yes.
AMD's CPUs instead should consume a little bit more, because they have the memory controller in them.
But since CPUs are produced at smaller nodes than northbridges, i guess that the memory controller in the CPU should consume a bit less than in the northbridge.

Quote:
In the case of 680i, some 75W more?

Maybe, that's a number i just pulled out of my arse :lol: 
Probably it's much less than that, i was just trying to be conservative in estimating how much power could be saved on 4x4 with a more efficient chipset.
December 17, 2006 2:48:05 PM

I'll let Baron wet himself over the "potential" of the AMD version of this chipset.

Reading through Anand's article, this chipset really isn't THAT much better than what's out there with the exception being in power consumption. Since I already run 14 PC's in my home, having my core desktop consume a little more power really isn't going to have any impact on my bills.

That being said, I could never justify spending the cash that these boards will initially command, given the initial performance numbers. Aside from those, I'd wait and see if any stability issues creep up as with the 680i (I'm too lazy to find and link the articles). The Striker (and the underlying 680i chipset) seemed rushed to market to me and this chipset seems rushed as well.

I'm actually surprised that AMD even released an Intel CPU chipset.
December 17, 2006 2:51:05 PM

Quote:
Wait, did I read that correctly? It only has 8 lanes per PCIe slot? This may become a problem with the R600... :?


you read right. It may not choke a 7600gt. But if you think about enthusiasts, you can bet that they gonna pair it with a 8800GTX or some R600 crossfire setup. There lies the real problem.
December 17, 2006 2:55:01 PM

I can't imagine ATi designing an enthusiast chipset which cannot keep up with their own upcoming last generation GPU..
December 17, 2006 2:56:57 PM

yea it sounds kinda foolish if they did
December 17, 2006 3:00:33 PM

No,

This is not the case, the memory controller is still present in the system, it's just on the cpu, not on the chipset. They are measuring total system draw using the same componets with expeception to the chipset.

Idle
Intel975x- -171W
ATI -177W
Nvidia680 - 235W

Load
ATI -291W
Intel -326W
Nvidia -366W


They are all using Conroe based CPU's, so even the same cpu's are in the boards. It is plain and simple, the ATI, beats the other 2 platforms in power consumption, expect in Idle conditions, the Intel systems beats it by 6 watts, which is only about 3.5%.

So, today, in my opinion, if I were buying one of these 3 boards, I would go with the ATI based board. You won't notice a difference with the 8x lanes. And, you really won't if you don't x-fire. It will take an aweful lot to saturate those buses.

wes

Mimi, stop being a hater.
December 17, 2006 3:06:55 PM

Quote:
No,

This is not the case, the memory controller is still present in the system, it's just on the cpu, not on the chipset. They are measuring total system draw using the same componets with expeception to the chipset.

Idle
Intel975x- -171W
ATI -177W
Nvidia680 - 235W

Load
ATI -291W
Intel -326W
Nvidia -366W


They are all using Conroe based CPU's, so even the same cpu's are in the boards. It is plain and simple, the ATI, beats the other 2 platforms in power consumption, expect in Idle conditions, the Intel systems beats it by 6 watts, which is only about 3.5%.

So, today, in my opinion, if I were buying one of these 3 boards, I would go with the ATI based board. You won't notice a difference with the 8x lanes. And, you really won't if you don't x-fire. It will take an aweful lot to saturate those buses.

wes

Mimi, stop being a hater.


lol, if I am allowed to quote myself, I said in the case of 680i some 75W more. So we are saying the same thing.

I am a hater because I think that the brand new RD600 is outdated@launch already?

And it is minime. From Austin powers. As in mini-dr.evil clone?

peace!
December 17, 2006 3:13:33 PM

My bad about the name, I just glanced and didn't catch that one. Here is the deal, it uses 35W less than the Intel chipset under load, and 75W less than the Nvidia chipset under load.

That is a rather large margin in just the chipset. If it performs the same as the rest of the chipsets, and uses less power, I don't see how it can be outdated. The only way, you MIGHT be able to call it that, is by saying it doesn't have 2 16x lanes, but IMO, that is just a selling point, not an actual increase in performance.

Another big plus, especially over the Nvidia chipset, NO FAN. ATI produces some pretty damn good chipsets, that perform the same or better, while using less power. Great chipset in my opinion.

Less heat buildup in the case, less power draw from the wall.

wes

Edit: "The sheer flexibility of the memory controller and memory tuning options will allow you to tweak this board for your particular usage unlike any other board currently on the market. For once, we believe those of you who have purchased high-end memory will have a motherboard that can actually take advantage of it in several different ways, and at the same time users with lower end memory are still able to extract the best performance possible."
December 17, 2006 3:25:51 PM

Quote:
Wait, did I read that correctly? It only has 8 lanes per PCIe slot? This may become a problem with the R600... :?


you read right. It may not choke a 7600gt. But if you think about enthusiasts, you can bet that they gonna pair it with a 8800GTX or some R600 crossfire setup. There lies the real problem.

It can be problem, but if you read the article, the RD600 was faster in crossfire configuration than 975. With only one graphic card (lane 16), they were equally good. So the 8 lanes seems not to be problem.
Maybe in the future, but 1950XTX was not a problem.
Interesting to see what happens when R600 comes out, but if the power comsumption of r600 is so big than rumored, the ATI really need low power usage board...
December 17, 2006 3:26:15 PM

You are right about it being more efficient. But does it has to do with better design? From what I've read it isn't a very new chipset, just a revision of 480?
Does the smaller power consumption has to do with the less pci-e lanes or not? If not, cool for ATI/AMD! Since we are talking about enthusiast segment here, I think my assumption that it's gonna be paired with high end gfx is logical. Is the 8x lane pci-e sufficient for a 8800GTX? It will work, but I believe it will work better with the 16x lane one. And part of being enthusiast means that you gonna want the absolute best, even if it is only for bragging rights. How many enthusiasts with 750W~1000W psu gonna care about 50w less consumption? I think they gonna care more about the 1000 points gain in 3dmark06.

Had it been a midrange m/b, then yes I'll agree with you. It is great, consume less, has all the goodies.
December 17, 2006 3:32:56 PM

Quote:
Wait, did I read that correctly? It only has 8 lanes per PCIe slot? This may become a problem with the R600... :?


you read right. It may not choke a 7600gt. But if you think about enthusiasts, you can bet that they gonna pair it with a 8800GTX or some R600 crossfire setup. There lies the real problem.

It can be problem, but if you read the article, the RD600 was faster in crossfire configuration than 975. With only one graphic card (lane 16), they were equally good. So the 8 lanes seems not to be problem.
Maybe in the future, but 1950XTX was not a problem.
Interesting to see what happens when R600 comes out, but if the power comsumption of r600 is so big than rumored, the ATI really need low power usage board...That's fine when you're talking about X1950s, but the R600 is going to be at least 2x as fast, and the 8x lanes may be a problem for ATI's new cards.
December 17, 2006 3:45:51 PM

I don't think the power consumption has anything to do with the lack of 2 16x lanes. They tested the board in crossfire and single gpu mode. But, regardless of how they were running it, they were running the three boards the same.

ATI has been known for having very efficient chipsets, where, Nvidia, has been known for having very HOT chipsets. I have owned 1 ATI and many many Nvidia chipsets. I liked all the nvidia based boards alot, but, I would switch for the cooler, passive motherboard.

I honestly don't care if it is a revision of the 180(if that would have ever existed). If it performs as well or better than everything else, and uses less power, with passive cooling, I am sold(depending on features).

I consider myself to be an enthusiast, but I guess I am not in the phase of buying something that offers no benefit. I just consider it spending wisely. If I were running X-fire, and 2 16x lanes made a difference, I would buy it, otherwise, forget about it. I want good frame rates, if something doesn't contribute, the $$$ can be better spent elsewhere.

Also, it's not really the power consumption, the extra 75W you get from the Nvidia board adds alot of heat, and also alot of noise. And, it is right in the way of the video card!! They still fit, just sitting on the fan didn't sit easy with me. But, with all the other componets in the case that tend to get so hot, especially the new video cards, having a motherboard that runs much cooler will make for less extravagent cooling solutions, and might negate the need of slot exhaust fans.

I just have a different frame of mind when it comes to building systems. I have built around 10 systems. Many off of Lanparty boards, a couple off of Asus SLI and 5X boards, and an ATI based board. The passive heatsink on the Asus board can burn you it gets so hot, the DFI boards were extremly loud, and the crappy fan can induce vibrations. The ATI board, was quiet, and cool. That simple for me really. I don't care how old the tech is, if it doing more with less than the newest tech from the competitors..... then they did a great job.

Also, not sure if I can call any SLI midrange, as, SLI isn't midrange, but sure, there are two highend classes. And, this board, on paper, should probably lie in the lower of the two highend classes, but not in performance or power consumption..... crown it king IMO.

wes
December 17, 2006 3:49:51 PM

Quote:

Reading through Anand's article, this chipset really isn't THAT much better than what's out there with the exception being in power consumption.


Shouldn't this be a concern for all of us? You guys act as though global warming doesn't pose a threat. Idiots! Isn't it already too late? That doesn't mean you can just give up.
December 17, 2006 3:55:04 PM

You are right about the extra 75W adds to electric interference "noise" and also emits more heat from the m/b. Asus did some things to combat it. For example 8phase design and a jungle of heatpipes lying around.

It really comes down to personal taste. But at the same price I would still go for the striker.
December 17, 2006 4:00:10 PM

Quote:

Reading through Anand's article, this chipset really isn't THAT much better than what's out there with the exception being in power consumption.


Shouldn't this be a concern for all of us? You guys act as though global warming doesn't pose a threat. Idiots! Isn't it already too late? That doesn't mean you can just give up.

Do you really wanna talk about global warming?How about the US gov signed the kioto treaty (I think it was that one, correct me if I am wrong). But never actually implemented it. Like most countries also never did. Also global warming existed long before us humans started polluting the environment. It's a psychical phenomena. Go Google it. Yes pollution contributes to global warming, but not that much as they have you believed.
December 17, 2006 4:03:24 PM

Asus did a great job coming up with something that worked. I just like the idea of never introducing the need for that in the first place. If I didn't have a choice, well, then I would just take the most inovative design, which I wish DFI had come up with something better, but they didn't. But, since I do have a choice, I will choose the one that best suits my taste.

Back to the PCI issue. Like I was saying, I still don't think it will pose an issue. I admit, I could be incorrect, but, for one, I doubt ATI would release KNOWING x-fire with R600 will show decreases in performance. The PCI Express bus has alot of bandwidth, and I am pretty sure, we will see a new standard before we start to saturate that bus. Hell, when PCI Express was turned into the new standard, AGP 8X was still not saturated.

wes
December 17, 2006 4:14:02 PM

The Kyoto Protocol is fatally flawed. It only wants certain countries to be responsible, and is leaving, some of the worlds largest contributors to pollution in the clear, and even allowing them to make money off if the deal.
Another one of those, good ideas, but very bad implementation.....

wes
December 17, 2006 4:19:01 PM

quite true, but since it was never actually implemented, whats the point? You might as well say that it never existed. It was more of a media-trick to have people think that governments around the world are doing something whereas they are not doing anything at all. But for the average joe, since he heard it in tv, is just the same.
December 17, 2006 4:19:19 PM

Quote:
The Kyoto Protocol is fatally flawed. It only wants certain countries to be responsible, and is leaving, some of the worlds largest contributors to pollution in the clear, and even allowing them to make money off if the deal.
Another one of those, good ideas, but very bad implementation.....

wes

I agree with you concerning RD600.
About Kyoto's protocol, one of the 2 biggest polluters in the world signed it, and then retreated :?
And the other one never signed it in the first place.
You all know what countries i'm talking about.
December 17, 2006 4:21:50 PM

No, us Europeans are tree-huggers, left winged, environmentally concerned, and just plain moronic sometimes.
Hence, we'll let the USA and China beat our economies to a pulp, while we reduce our polluting emissions to their own benefit as well. :lol: 
December 17, 2006 4:23:56 PM

Are we? Sure China and US take the pollution crown, but Europe isn't that far behind.
December 17, 2006 4:24:48 PM

Nope, but we did sign the Kyoto protocol and started to apply it.. :?
December 17, 2006 4:35:51 PM

Let me put it this way. Look at heavy industries around the world. Say one in Germany that does business in shipping. It will employ around 3000 to 5000 workers. The german gov. goes and tells the owner that he must pay 1 billion euros to comply with the Kyoto protocol. Do you know what his reaction will be? He will take his business to china where they don't have those regulations or vietnam or india. So the gov. is faced with a dillema. Look the other way or have a town of 5000 families starve. Tough cookie!
It isn't as easy as you think. There are interests in direct conflict. I've brought this as a specific example, cause I'm into shipping. It wasn't out of my a$$! But you get the idea.
December 17, 2006 4:38:04 PM

Well, I wouldn't have signed Kyoto. If I were leading this Country, I would have come up with something much better.

I know the ultimate goal was supposed to be good, whether or not it would offer any real benefit. But, the damn thing was whack. It didn't take many things into account, and let many countries off the hook.

The thing is, if any country comes up with a protocol like that, and, unless it is well rounded, and, picks on every country evenly, you will have those "picked on" countries not sign it. I am not saying the US isn't a big polluter, or, being picked on. But, Kyoto was a poor attempt with good intentions. We need to come up with something much better than that in order to get the world in line with it.

The problem is the world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases is China. Yet, China was entirely exempted from the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol. India and Germany are among the top emitters. Yet, India was also exempt from Kyoto, and Germany exculded the coal industry.

I am pretty sure the states are taking measures, and it seems that the federal government is setting it's own standards, just not bound to Kyoto. And the US has signed the APPCDC.

wes

Edit: not that I am saying we are doing good enough, but, US carbon dioxide emisions have actually decreased per captia. But they have increased in absolute terms.
!