Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 A quick question about PSU, for future upgrade.

views
     
cstkl1
post Aug 2 2013, 12:45 AM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(westom @ Aug 1 2013, 09:24 PM)
That is classic junk science reasoning.  Some supplies are under greatest stress when only outputting half the rated power.  At half power, it must restrict more power causing greater stress, generating more heat, and operating at a less efficient operating point.  To say more always required spec numbers unique to each supply.  It demonstrates how to identify recommendations based in junk science reasoning.  Claims made without numbers (subjectively) may be classic junk science.

Another even implied a failing power supply will somehow stop a surge.  Total nonsense.  First the same surge current is everywhere in a path from cloud, through a building, to distant earthborne charges.  Much later, something(s) in that path fails.  If a surge is incoming to a PSU, then a same current is outgoing to the motherboard.  Then later, something in that path (ie PSU) fails.  Another example of junk science reasoning challenged.

  Does high power draw cause a PSU to explode?  Of course not.  Largest power draw is to short all PSU wires together.  Intel specs even define how thick that shorting wire must be.  Why?  Because all power supplies must provide all power levels and not be stressed.  Because a standard test for every supply is to short all outputs together and never have damage.  Another example of subjective reasoning and wild speculation trying to explain a PSU failure by ignoring ATX standards and numbers.

  Most failures are manufacturing defects (ie famous defective electrolytic caps that failed years later).  So many use wild speculation to, instead, blame surges.  Because advertising (and subjective reasoning) is somehow knowledge.  To say more required identification of each damage part.  One that exploded.  And the many others that have no visual indication.  Most failures are manufacturing defects.  Most failures have no visual indication.  Those recommended protectors do not claim that protection.  But that means reading numbers and ignoring every subjective recommendation.  Most failures (even those that occur many years later) are only manufacturing defects.

  Is your system so hot that you can toast bread?  Then it requires a 700 watt supply.  Most all computers work just fine with 300 watts.  However, we are selling power supplies to consumers who use wild speculation to know things.  And who always ignore numbers.  So we recommend a 700 watt supply to them so we waste no time on customer support lines.  A 700 watt supply was more than twice what was needed.  But only the fewer who actually first learn numbers would know that.
*
First classic junk science is with TDP involve. Efficiency has already came to a point of converting excess TDP into performance. So the rule of wattage loss has evolved. The theory is flawed as its still based on 10 years ago tech where TDP was a wastage. Old PSU tech efficiency was at the other end actually while today standards are different.

Old tech was onboard graphics with cpu and hence ATX specs were sufficient. In todays world even looking at the numbers on 5v rail with so many ppl charging and powering multiple devices... ATX spec is out of the door. Even pcie-sig spec cant keep up. Mobo manufacturers have start being creative with their power delivery and end of the day it all boils down to efficiency and consistency of ure PSUs.

Efficiency and better power delivery today can sustain most of our hardware with good mobo etc. But it all boils down to having a consistent power from PSU in low states and in current insane standards like AVX2 loads. If following intel AVX loads means trottling on cpu side. Motherboard manufacturers differ on that opinion with better cooling now massively available so screw intel and hence intel is already out of mobo manufacturing. System builders now are mainly taking from OEM manufactoers like Asrock, DFI and Foxconn.

Ppl who read hardware spec numbers vs ppl who load their system with a couple of DMM on their hands reading output. Whose rite.. i would think those with the numbers.

BTW for those who dont get what he meant by wires is .. shorting of all rails to trigger OVP. All hardwares nowadays has some form of TDP with OVp protection inbuilt with GPU, and CPu on the core with TJ max ceilings,
Rams with tREFs and going to the their board design with VRM OVP protection etc.

I will never advocate using the idea of ngam ngam psu on perfect load state and like a 300 watt comment on a norm load states. It all depends on ure config. PSU ultimately is a insurance of ure hardware. Most ppl have cheap hardware and hence cheap psu.

So if u want a system that can last longer and even to a point of upgrade to a new gen and still follow through. Get a higher wattage with higher efficiency psu's. The problem with Low end psu's is the always have insufficient 5v rails or share with 12v rails on max loads.

This post has been edited by cstkl1: Aug 2 2013, 12:58 AM
cstkl1
post Aug 2 2013, 09:08 AM

Look at all my stars!!
Group Icon
Elite
6,799 posts

Joined: Jan 2003

QUOTE(westom @ Aug 2 2013, 08:53 AM)
OVP is OverVoltage Protection.  Shorting all outputs together does not create a higher voltage.  Does not create an overvoltage.  It creates near zero voltage.  OVP does nothing on near zero voltage.  OVP is obviously completely irrelevant when all outputs are shorted together - as defined even by Intel ATX standards.

  Power supplies, long before PC existed, featured these many functions - standard.  Little has changed in PSU functions in over 50 years.  What has changed are designs that do the same things even better.

  As was true even before PCs existed - any load from near zero to maximum or short circuit will not overstress any properly designed supply.  In fact, normal is for a defective or undersized supply to still boot and run a computer normally.  And then cause failures months or years later.

  If your system is consuming 700 watts, then it can also toast bread.  No PC is consuming anywhere near that power.  Many myths claim otherwise.  But informed consumers instead measure power.

  Watts says little about a supply. Informed computer assemblers instead use current for each voltage to select a supply.  Others who would not know how to do that - we tell them they need a 700 watt supply for their 300 watt maximum computer.  It makes life easier for technical support.  And creates many popular myths where recommendations exist without numbers.

  A 520 watt supply should be more than sufficient for any upgrades.  However nobody can say with certainty without accurate current numbers for each load.  Or better answer this by using a multimeter that can see a defect or undersizing months before problems result.  To confirm hardware is really what it is supposed to be.

  Higher wattage does not reduce stress.  That remains a popular urban myth.  Once a supply meets a sufficient level, any larger sizing does nothing to increase reliability.
*
If ure following nominal values of atx 2.13 .. Might as well say bye bye to my gpu.
The specs are loose. Even 5v SCP n UVP is not covered.

Its not about higher wattage reduces stress on components, higher wattage reduces stress on the psu itself on rail distribution.

 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0160sec    0.58    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 29th November 2025 - 12:10 PM