News New EU packaging regulations spark misplaced fear of CPUs ditching stock coolers

[Admin]

New EU regulations spark concerns about CPU packaging, foregoing CPU coolers entirely.

New EU packaging regulations spark misplaced fear of CPUs ditching stock coolers : Read more

 

[Kentmos]

And there goes EU again.. Dictating how things shall be and how people shall live..

 

[Blastomonas]

Typical scaremongering from people that like to tarnish the EU. Some people will read the part that suits their already solidified opinions. Confirmation bias.

Rather than thinking that this is a sensible way of reducing waste and environmental impact..

 

[Cpdons]

And there goes EU again.. Dictating how things shall be and how people shall live..

Did you read the article? I didn't think so.

The packaging regs only effectively cover excess packaging. This excludes bundled coolers and air pockets designed for impact protection.

This isn't the EU "dictating" what poor, embattled manufacturers can and can't do with their products, but instead making some effort to prevent gigantic plastic boxes (like threadrippers) that are almost entirely full of air, and serve no purpose other than to have a higher carbon cost and send more materials to landfill.

Rest assured, you can put your libertarian cap back on the shelf and try to think rationally. This is not an affront to your personal freedoms, and I'm sure manufacturers will get over the heartache.

 

[Konomi]

And there goes EU again.. Dictating how things shall be and how people shall live..

There's no real negative. Unless you're the kind of person that puts an empty box on display for whatever reason. All that'd maybe happen is packaging may just become kind of bland with minimal designs - which at the end of the day, is not even a deal-breaker. Generally you want what is inside the packaging, not the packaging itself. But if you want a fridge box filled with packing foam and the like for an SSD for example, you do you.

 

[Kentmos]

Oh I'm sorry. I didn't mean to step on anyones toes! Of course You're all right!

 

[bit_user]

The packaging regs only effectively cover excess packaging. This excludes bundled coolers and air pockets designed for impact protection.

This isn't the EU "dictating" what poor, embattled manufacturers can and can't do with their products, but instead making some effort to prevent gigantic plastic boxes (like threadrippers) that are almost entirely full of air, and serve no purpose other than to have a higher carbon cost and send more materials to landfill.

The problem is worse than packages that are oversized merely for aesthetic reasons. One anti-competitive tactic dominant brands sometimes employ is to make their packaging so large that it literally crowds out their competition. Retailers only have a certain amount of shelf space, so if the box for a must-have item takes up too much space, the retailer might decide not to stock some competing products. CPUs aren't the best example here, but even in that case, it could result in some retailers dropping some lower-demand models of the competing brand.

So, the practice of excessive packaging can also harm consumers by way of artificially restricting choice.

 

[SirStephenH]

The regulation clearly doesn't ban bundling stock coolers, I don't understand how someone could "misread" it unless the "misreading" is intentional.

I personally see stock coolers as unnecessary waste. Stock coolers are barely adequate. How many people actually use a stock cooler now and days when you can get a far better cooler for $20-$30? Every build I've seen for years utilizes an aftermarket cooler.

The author made a point that the extra packaging and shipping would be worse for the environment but there's a lot of overlap between the separate packaging and shipping of an aftermarket cooler and the extra packaging and shipping required to bundle a stock cooler. Then you add in the fact that the stock cooler most often never gets used and is simply tossed in the trash, so they're basically adding more waste in packaging and shipping in order to send trash to consumers, trash that has its own environmental impact to produce. I believe the environmental impact of unbundling coolers is net positive or negligible. Plus it's good for consumers to not have to pay for something they'll never use.

 

[Sluggotg]

I hate political debates on Tomshardware.com. I want to comment/debate on computer tech. I prefer to debate politics on political sites. The article is the kind that will always end up in a political debate. Then again I am reading and posting about the article.

 

[newtechldtech]

IMO all CPUs should be sold in tray mode but with a sealed holographic sticker on the plastic with s/n and CPU model. all the box is not needed at all.

 

[bit_user]

IMO all CPUs should be sold in tray mode but with a sealed holographic sticker on the plastic with s/n and CPU model. all the box is not needed at all.

You do need just enough packaging that if one falls off a shelf onto a hard tile-on-concrete floor, it won't get damaged. However, it doesn't take a whole lot of packaging to achieve that level of protection.

I also like when the IHS is visible through a window, so that you can clearly see the model number and can tell whether or not it was previously used (i.e. due to the presence or absence of marks on the IHS that usually occur when attaching a heatsink). Another bonus is that you can tell when it was made, in case there's a particular revision you're looking for.

BTW, a word of caution against buying OEM "tray" CPUs: the warranty is only through the seller. If you want a manufacturer warranty, buy the retail-boxed version (depending on where you live, you might also need to buy it through an authorized reseller).

 

[Konomi]

I hate political debates on Tomshardware.com. I want to comment/debate on computer tech. I prefer to debate politics on political sites. The article is the kind that will always end up in a political debate. Then again I am reading and posting about the article.

For the most part, the majority of us also prefer it to be this way. However, there's always one (or a few) that turn a perfectly fine discussion political for whatever reason. Whether or not you believe in the whole climate change issue or not in this instance for the purposes of this discussion is meaningless - it is a pretty harmless situation and not one where people's lives are being heavily impacted in a negative way. But if people would actually just read before posting..

 

[iocedmyself]

And there goes EU again.. Dictating how things shall be and how people shall live..

The purpose here is to prevent EXCESS PACKAGING. There is no justification for a product that clocks in at a few dozen grams and a few square inches to end up with a pound or more of packaging, less so when a significant portion of that packaging is plastic.

It's more expensive to produce, which makes the product needlessly more expensive.
It's occupies more space, making shipping less efficient, which increases fuel costs associated with shipping, which is both needlessly damaging to the environment, AND makes the product more needlessly expensive.
It increases WASTE, which again, makes it even more needlessly damaging to the environment.

Are you arguing in favor of those things?

Are you sad you won't be able to put your overly engineered, expensive packaging upon a shelf as background decoration in a youtube video for your 3 subscribers?

Edit: To whatever moderator took it upon themselves to edit my post, NO. When someone doesn't bother to read the article yet takes time to post a pointless and inflammatory response, that person deserve to be mocked. More over, there was no offensive language, no overt insults merely a question, which implied a subtle implication in reference to the quality and thought process being expressed.

Be less fragile.

 

[Broly MAXIMUMER]

Did you read the article? I didn't think so.

The packaging regs only effectively cover excess packaging. This excludes bundled coolers and air pockets designed for impact protection.

This isn't the EU "dictating" what poor, embattled manufacturers can and can't do with their products, but instead making some effort to prevent gigantic plastic boxes (like threadrippers) that are almost entirely full of air, and serve no purpose other than to have a higher carbon cost and send more materials to landfill.

Rest assured, you can put your libertarian cap back on the shelf and try to think rationally. This is not an affront to your personal freedoms, and I'm sure manufacturers will get over the heartache.

I'd hate to be the bearer of bad news but, things like Threadripper's "crazy" packaging is sorta old news already. By a few generations....

Just like the out of touch dinosaurs making these silly regulations.

Unless Intel or some other lesser firms are still going crazy with consumer "cpu packaging," this is literally wasting paper and keystrokes to put into law.

And in the end, really only matter for whats being sold in the EU, and there are many firms doing region specific models, packaging, and practices already so, meh.

 

[Broly MAXIMUMER]

I hate political debates on Tomshardware.com. I want to comment/debate on computer tech. I prefer to debate politics on political sites. The article is the kind that will always end up in a political debate. Then again I am reading and posting about the article.

Well the entire point is about REGULATIONS being put into effect that sorta affect the TECH industry.

Both aspects are there so it's honestly a bit silly to expect folk to fixate on only one side of the equation.

 

[KyaraM]

The problem is worse than packages that are oversized merely for aesthetic reasons. One anti-competitive tactic dominant brands sometimes employ is to make their packaging so large that it literally crowds out their competition. Retailers only have a certain amount of shelf space, so if the box for a must-have item takes up too much space, the retailer might decide not to stock some competing products. CPUs aren't the best example here, but even in that case, it could result in some retailers dropping some lower-demand models of the competing brand.

So, the practice of excessive packaging can also harm consumers by way of artificially restricting choice.

And yet another use of overly large packaging is to suggest there is more inside than there actually is, like with potato chips for example. Huge bags, 40% minimum of which is empty air.

Seriously, anyone whose knee-jerk reaction to this law is "it dictates people how to live!", when it got nothing but benefits for consumers AND don't tell them the first thing about how to live their lives need to get help, because blind consumerism obviously did some serious damage. (And before anyone interprets this wrong, I'm not talking to the person I replied to.)

 

[KyaraM]

I'd hate to be the bearer of bad news but, things like Threadripper's "crazy" packaging is sorta old news already. By a few generations....

Just like the out of touch dinosaurs making these silly regulations.

Unless Intel or some other lesser firms are still going crazy with consumer "cpu packaging," this is literally wasting paper and keystrokes to put into law.

And in the end, really only matter for whats being sold in the EU, and there are many firms doing region specific models, packaging, and practices already so, meh.

Do you SERIOUSLY think this is just about CPUs?!? It's ALL packaging, for ALL products! And a lot of that is pretty excessive. It would honestly benefit a few people to think before posting, and maybe do some background research.

"It's just for the EU" is also a bad argument, everyone should reduce packaging for all the reasons everyone with sense in this topic lined out already. Literally all of them benefit us, the consumers, in the end. But hey, if you want to pay a royalty to packaging, be my guest I guess...

The regulation clearly doesn't ban bundling stock coolers, I don't understand how someone could "misread" it unless the "misreading" is intentional.

I personally see stock coolers as unnecessary waste. Stock coolers are barely adequate. How many people actually use a stock cooler now and days when you can get a far better cooler for $20-$30? Every build I've seen for years utilizes an aftermarket cooler.

The author made a point that the extra packaging and shipping would be worse for the environment but there's a lot of overlap between the separate packaging and shipping of an aftermarket cooler and the extra packaging and shipping required to bundle a stock cooler. Then you add in the fact that the stock cooler most often never gets used and is simply tossed in the trash, so they're basically adding more waste in packaging and shipping in order to send trash to consumers, trash that has its own environmental impact to produce. I believe the environmental impact of unbundling coolers is net positive or negligible. Plus it's good for consumers to not have to pay for something they'll never use.

It 100% was intentional. On the topic of stock coolers being waste, you are forgetting that not every CPU sold is a high-power, high-performance gaming beast. A 12100, for example, does quite well with a stock cooler, reaching only about 75°C under full load even at 27°C ambient. Yes, I tested that.

That CPU, its successors and similar chips make a big part of the market. They are excellent office chips, for example, both for OEM and DIY systems, while doing reasonably well in games. Getting a big fat aftermarket cooler for them would frankly be stupid, and sometimes even impossible (eg in minis). The tier above them is similar in many regards, and will be fine with those coolers in most scenarios, though this will be stressing it a bit and depending on use case you should get alternatives. Anything above that, k-suffix or not, should not be shipped with a stock cooler, though. That's where they start to fail. Don't fully discount them, though, as outlined above. They have a justification.

 

[passivecool]

... a word of caution against buying OEM "tray" CPUs: the warranty is only through the seller. If you want a manufacturer warranty, buy the retail-boxed version (depending on where you live, you might also need to buy it through an authorized reseller).

This must be a US thing? In the EU, the difference is whether the transaction is B2b or B2C. Each has a set of prerequisites, expectations but also distinct protection rights. Although, generally, if you buy something, the delivery needs to fulfil the promised specs and maintain functionality for at least a minimum amount of time. ... But this is about packaging.

Well the entire point is about REGULATIONS being put into effect that sorta affect the TECH industry.

Both aspects are there so it's honestly a bit silly to expect folk to fixate on only one side of the equation.

Which would you recommend? TH shuts the blind eye to the cross-section between tech and politics. Irritatingly, they post highly political clickbait posts but then seem then suprised and annoyed that the ensuing discussion is not entirely technology-orientated. I understand that ensuing threads can quickly escalate out of scope to anything that an advertiser wants to see, and so... I begrudgingly understand their situation. That said, I would love to intelligently and differentially explore such issues, and would be thankful for a reference to a platform where this is allowed. And I would kindly suggest to the respected and valued TH Admin crew to then not themselves lean so far out the window with their personal opinions that any reaction to them must automatically be banned. *kisses*