Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
A PSU is a "dead" piece of hardware AFAIK. There is no software for it; it converts AC to DC, period, you can't control anything.
And about those surge protectors, search the forum to read what I've said about them (it aint pretty )...

---

Oh i think i put it wrong i ment sometimes on the bios it letsyou change the voltage of everthing and stuff if you get on that supports it. i no this as my mum has it on hers, i wouldnt like to fiddle anyway, i've blown up a PSU before and i dont exectly want to do it again

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
450W seems like a lot IMO and for many current systems (even seriously power machines) more than enough with plenty to spare...

---

I don't think so, with the all current technlogies, I don't think for a FX-57 and two 7800GTX's with SLI, will have enough for 450W, they eat alot of power, they even require their own source for better power.

quote:

---

Originally posted by msg_plus_freak
Oh i think i put it wrong i ment sometimes on the bios it letsyou change the voltage of everthing and stuff if you get on that supports it. i no this as my mum has it on hers, i wouldnt like to fiddle anyway, i've blown up a PSU before and i dont exectly want to do it again

---

Ah I see... Yes, but those settings have got nothing to do with the PSU. They are settings for your motherboard and how much voltage it will transfer to your CPU and what not... (also, you don't need extra software for this, if your mobo supports these settings, it will be in your bios)

------

quote:

---

Originally posted by brian

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
450W seems like a lot IMO and for many current systems (even seriously power machines) more than enough with plenty to spare...

---

I don't think so, with the all current technlogies, I don't think for a FX-57 and two 7800GTX's with SLI, will have enough for 450W, they eat alot of power, they even require their own source for better power.

---

We're talking normal PC's here, not beefed up overclocked leet machines which only pro's will use, so to speak

Even still, it is not because they need their own power source that they consume heaps (well, compared to other cards they do consume a lot, but not in the order you might think), it simply means that the normal voltage given by the mobo isn't sufficient and they need their own +12V line or whatever.

And about power consumptions, even on those leet machines the total power consumption of the PC often doesn't go above 350W-400W! On test machines and running at full speed and pressing everything out of it the power consumption of the whole PC is still +-350W (using 2x7800).

The 7800GTX uses at most +-100W and a normal (but powerfull) PC without any fancy graphics card, but with some big HDD, fans, and fast processor normally doesn't go above 200W.

450W is a lot you know.

Don't stare blind on "new and faster" technology for this. As a matter of fact many of these new and powerfull graphic cards actually consume less power than their older but similar models as the new technology provides more power for less power.. ermmm... I mean more graphics power for less electrical power .

-----------

EDIT:

quote:

---

Originally posted by XBitslabs
To load the graphics cards with work we launched the most complex of 3DMark05’s tests, that is the third one, and had it running in a loop in 1600x1200 resolution, with enabled 4x full-screen antialiasing and 16x anisotropic filtering.

The results are quite interesting: the GeForce 7800 GTX with its 302 million transistors, 24 pixel pipelines and 430MHz frequency consumed 80.7 watts under that load, while the much simpler GeForce 6800 Ultra had a consumption of 77.3 watts. There’s less than 3 watts of difference! So, the 0.11-micron tech process really helped NVIDIA to keep the power consumption of the GeForce 7800 GTX on the same level with the previous-generation model. By the way, the RADEON X850 XT Platinum Edition has a result of 71.6 watts which is slightly less than the consumption of NVIDIA’s cards, but it consumed much less than the GeForces on the 12V line (31 watts against 39-40 watts) and more on the 3.3V line (5 watts against 2 watts). The power consumption on the external line was similar with all the graphics cards, being about 33-35 watts."

---

Now, these figures aren't absolute, but they do show in what order you should think of when talking graphics cards.

-----------

The reason why certain low wattage PSU's fail (like the one from SunShine lately) is not neccesairly because of low wattage, but often because of heating problems or the max load vs. time it can take. However, a low wattage often also indicates lower quality in fan, load vs. time, etc. This is also the reason why I have no problems at all with my 250W and my PC (it is a very decent "quality" PSU; not simply the one you'll find in budget PC's). The wattage isn't the absolute figure, but is the figure which often (like in: almost always) indicates quality.


EDIT: which D:Frag also pointed out with an example in his post below...
Although he could've choosen a better example (why? read my reply)

quote:

---

Originally posted by CookieRevised
Ah I see... Yes, but those settings have got nothing to do with the PSU. They are settings for your motherboard and how much voltage it will transfer to your CPU and what not... (also, you don't need extra software for this, if your mobo supports these settings, it will be in your bios)

---

Ahhhhhh, sorry about that got a little mixed up

If you have the option of two US$29.99 PSU's like the following:

Powmax 480W ATX Power Supply PSDE480
and
ALLIED 300w Pentium 4 / AMD Power Supply - ATX

Which one would you get? I mean, the 300w and lower are really old technology, the 480w has dual ball bearing fans, one 120mm and one 80mm... talk about much lower noise, voltage overload protection and SATA connectors.

See my point? It's not just the wattage, it's the technology... why get the a PSU that already failed in your system again? A newer PSU obviously is going to be more reliable and with all those features virtually free, you're already prepared for future upgrades. A 480w PSU is not going to increase your energy bill if it is in the same system

Exactly my point , although not the best example...


guanako, the point is not to choose the fanciest one with the most options for the same price. But the point is that often (not always) the higher you go in wattage, the more quality is build in... But IMHO, the example just shows the opposite though. Nevertheless this is actually a good thing as it is a nice example of how "bigger" PSU's can also be bad.

Thus, as for me, personally, I would never buy that 480W one in that price range from that company.

In that price range I wouldn't be surprised at all if that "simple" 300W one is actual far better quality in the long run and much more solid than the fancy 480W.

Because for the cheap price of the 480W they had to put in all the fancy stuff. Compare this to the normal price of the 300W. Because they have far less fancy stuff, they could invest in better quality components. And because it is much simpler it is far more solid.

---

Remember that, when the price looks cheap, it quite often is cheap quality also...

This can also be "somewhat" tested by yourself in the store, although it also needs some practice. A decent power supply relativly weights a lot! If it seems like it weights almost nothing, leave it immediatly and buy another...

Cheap components means stripping down on stuff. True you can get 400W out of something very small. But the question is for how long? This also often goes hand in hand with how much heat the PSU produces (but you can't test this in the store of course). The more heat, the less quality. And since PC's are often ditched for a new one every 6 months on average and since many people like flashing lights and many big fans, companies often strip down on their quality components since it will be of no use anyways for the average user's PC lifetime and/or people like those big fans on the PSU, which often actually are also needed because it will heat up a lot because of the low quality of components.

Also, despite new technology, for a PSU, the smaller doesn't not mean the better. In fact it is the opposite for a PSU: the bigger and heavier it is the better (again comparing same classed PSU's with same wattages here)!.

An comparisson example I'd always like to use are batteries (and my car again ). A car battery of 12V is much more robust, has a much longer lifetime (even without the accumulator connected to charge it), much more steady output and can take much more load than a small 12V battery for some toy racing car... And if you think this comparisson is a bit unfair, then compare an AA battery with a smaller AAA battery. The smaller one has a far less lifetime because it can't take as much load over time, despite they provide the same voltage and thus the same power.

In short: simply invest in an equaly or higher "wattage"'d PSU than the one you had (but as D:Frag rightfully suggests, from a different brand), which is normally priced for its class range. A simple looking but decent PSU... And avoid the cheap "to good to be true" budget PSU's...

Yeah, I must say that I agree, I could use better examples, just wanted to support Cookie's previous point.

I read some good and bad reviews on that PSU being used in high end machines... but even if the components aren't the best quality, their design intent was for a 480w system... putting it in a machine that's not going to exceed the 300w means that it's not going to be stressed out like a 300w one... 

Personally, I would spend a reasonable amount more on a higher quality PSU that's going to be ready for my future upgrades.

I only want to add that when you go buy your PSU... don't get the same or similar as the one that already failed you (Where's captain obvious?)

Later, Luis