Power Supply recomendation?

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

Hello,

What power supply would you recommend for the following set-up

AMD Athlon 3000+
Abit NF7
512 ddr ram
cdrom/and or dvdrom
floppy

I dont want anything fancy and expensive but something reliable and powerful
enough

Thanks
35 answers Last reply
More about power supply recomendation
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    If you are going to use a Readeon 9800 or a high-end Video Card, you
    may need around a 400 watt power supply. With a Nvidia 6800 you may
    need a 450-500 watt power supply. anything less than a Radeon 9800
    and you might get by with a 300-350 watt power supply. I prefer Antec
    Power supplies.
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    "Ben" <ben@ben.com> said:

    > I dont want anything fancy and expensive but something reliable and
    > powerful enough

    http://www.newegg.com/app/viewProductDesc.asp?description=17-103-481&depa=
    0
    --
    Mac Cool
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 22:08:39 GMT, "Ben" <ben@ben.com> wrote:

    >Hello,
    >
    >What power supply would you recommend for the following set-up
    >
    >AMD Athlon 3000+
    >Abit NF7
    >512 ddr ram
    >cdrom/and or dvdrom
    >floppy
    >
    >I dont want anything fancy and expensive but something reliable and powerful
    >enough

    You don't mention the number of hard drives or video card. Those two
    components largely determine if a larger PSU is needed.

    My first picks, given lack of above info, would be a Sparkle or Fortron
    400W or Antec Truepower 420-430W.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 22:08:39 GMT, "Ben" <ben@ben.com> wrote:

    >Hello,
    >
    >What power supply would you recommend for the following set-up
    >
    >AMD Athlon 3000+
    >Abit NF7
    >512 ddr ram
    >cdrom/and or dvdrom
    >floppy
    >
    >I dont want anything fancy and expensive but something reliable and powerful
    >enough
    >
    >Thanks
    >
    Thermaltake PurePower 420w
    http://shop.store.yahoo.com/directron/w0009.html

    regards

    Dud
    --
    Attempting to debate with a person who has abandoned reason
    is like giving medicine to the dead. - Thomas Paine
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    I will have 2 hard drives (maxtor 80 gig )
    and my video card will be CHAINTECH nVIDIA GeForce FX5200 Video Card, 128MB
    DDR, 64-bit, DVI/TV-Out, 8X AGP, Model "A-FX20" -RETAIL
    which is about $60, not the most fancy one I guess

    I was looking at Enlight ATX 420W P4 Power Supply, Model
    "EN-8420934" -RETAIL
    Is anyone familiar with Enlight power supplies?
    Are they reliable?

    Thanks again


    > You don't mention the number of hard drives or video card. Those two
    > components largely determine if a larger PSU is needed.
    >
    > My first picks, given lack of above info, would be a Sparkle or Fortron
    > 400W or Antec Truepower 420-430W.
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    I just wondered if anyone has tried out a Macron MT-400? I have been using
    one now for about 2 yrs. My mobo bombed the other day though.

    "Ben" <ben@ben.com> wrote in message
    news:HBMwc.84632$oQ6.30462@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
    > Hello,
    >
    > What power supply would you recommend for the following set-up
    >
    > AMD Athlon 3000+
    > Abit NF7
    > 512 ddr ram
    > cdrom/and or dvdrom
    > floppy
    >
    > I dont want anything fancy and expensive but something reliable and
    powerful
    > enough
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    >
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Sun, 06 Jun 2004 22:08:39 +0000, Ben wrote:

    > Hello,
    >
    > What power supply would you recommend for the following set-up
    >
    > AMD Athlon 3000+
    > Abit NF7
    > 512 ddr ram
    > cdrom/and or dvdrom
    > floppy
    >
    > I dont want anything fancy and expensive but something reliable and powerful
    > enough
    >
    I've tested these three with a Jetway S755MAX MB, 3000+, 2 HD, 2 CDR's,
    215meg, GF3.

    Lead Power 500ATX $12
    Lead Power 600ATX $24
    Power Magic 550 $15 (shipped)

    Any 500W or higher should work. Wouldn't buy anything less than 500W.


    --
    Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
    http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:53:54 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    wrote:


    >
    >Lead Power 500ATX $12
    >Lead Power 600ATX $24
    >Power Magic 550 $15 (shipped)
    >
    >Any 500W or higher should work. Wouldn't buy anything less than 500W.


    Use any of the above if you want to risk frying components, supporting
    fraud, and ending up with a power supply that's worse than most name-brand
    350W units.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 12:03:48 -0700, "Ben" <ben@ben.com> wrote:


    >
    >> You don't mention the number of hard drives or video card. Those two
    >> components largely determine if a larger PSU is needed.
    >>
    >> My first picks, given lack of above info, would be a Sparkle or Fortron
    >> 400W or Antec Truepower 420-430W.
    >

    >I will have 2 hard drives (maxtor 80 gig )
    >and my video card will be CHAINTECH nVIDIA GeForce FX5200 Video Card, 128MB
    >DDR, 64-bit, DVI/TV-Out, 8X AGP, Model "A-FX20" -RETAIL
    >which is about $60, not the most fancy one I guess
    >
    >I was looking at Enlight ATX 420W P4 Power Supply, Model
    >"EN-8420934" -RETAIL
    >Is anyone familiar with Enlight power supplies?
    >Are they reliable?
    >
    >Thanks again
    >

    The components you list should run from many good 300W PSU but preferribly
    at least 350W, will give more margin and room for later expansion. 420W is
    even better.

    Enlight makes decent PSU, at least in the >= 340W models. They're the
    same internally as a Chieftec or Thermaltake. My primary concern about
    their PSU are that they use only median-quality sleeve bearing fans. Come
    to think of it they may be one-ball & one-sleeve (per same fan), yet still
    might only be labeled as "ball bearing". If there's anyplace in a system
    that I strongly prefer top name-brand dual ball-bearing fans, it's the
    power supply exhaust... not so important for the PSU intake fan, it isn't
    subject to as much heat. Even so, the fan they use isn't so bad as many,
    it may last for at least a couple years but would most likley be the
    primary failure-point. IIRC, the Enlight 420W I have in a system here had
    a Nidec Beta SL fan installed on the rear.
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    What power supply should be used in his situation? Mine will be similar as
    I'm going with an Abit NF-7,(2) PC2100 DDR DIMM, (2) 40 Gig HDD's, XP2000
    CPU, Retail AMD CPU 4800RPM fan, CDROM 50X, Floppy Dr., 6.96 Watts Chassis
    Fan, AGP VGA ATI 7000 Video board + modem, sound board.

    "kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
    news:qo69c0119fa56n8fvnsd720j13lkfeb85m@4ax.com...
    > On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:53:54 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    >
    > >
    > >Lead Power 500ATX $12
    > >Lead Power 600ATX $24
    > >Power Magic 550 $15 (shipped)
    > >
    > >Any 500W or higher should work. Wouldn't buy anything less than 500W.
    >
    >
    > Use any of the above if you want to risk frying components, supporting
    > fraud, and ending up with a power supply that's worse than most name-brand
    > 350W units.
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    Antec Truepower 430W (~$60) should be more than sufficient. They also
    have a True Power 480W (~$75) and True Power 550W (~$95)

    IHMO, based on the modest requirements listed, 430W is more than
    sufficient. But for future upgradability and if you don't want to
    worry about undersupply, than you can get 480W or even 550W version.
    However, the latter is a bit overkill.


    "Doug" <fabien@toast.net> wrote in message news:<b59cbea8e869410670413fdb692bec64@news.teranews.com>...
    > What power supply should be used in his situation? Mine will be similar as
    > I'm going with an Abit NF-7,(2) PC2100 DDR DIMM, (2) 40 Gig HDD's, XP2000
    > CPU, Retail AMD CPU 4800RPM fan, CDROM 50X, Floppy Dr., 6.96 Watts Chassis
    > Fan, AGP VGA ATI 7000 Video board + modem, sound board.
    >
    > "kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote in message
    > news:qo69c0119fa56n8fvnsd720j13lkfeb85m@4ax.com...
    > > On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:53:54 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > > >
    > > >Lead Power 500ATX $12
    > > >Lead Power 600ATX $24
    > > >Power Magic 550 $15 (shipped)
    > > >
    > > >Any 500W or higher should work. Wouldn't buy anything less than 500W.
    > >
    > >
    > > Use any of the above if you want to risk frying components, supporting
    > > fraud, and ending up with a power supply that's worse than most name-brand
    > > 350W units.
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:44:43 +0000, kony wrote:

    > On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:53:54 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    > wrote:
    >>
    >>Lead Power 500ATX $12
    >>Lead Power 600ATX $24
    >>Power Magic 550 $15 (shipped)
    >>
    >>Any 500W or higher should work. Wouldn't buy anything less than 500W.
    >
    > Use any of the above if you want to risk frying components, supporting
    > fraud, and ending up with a power supply that's worse than most name-brand
    > 350W units.

    Just one question. Which of these PSU's did you test? I tested all of
    them, which you just happen to leave out of the reply. And if you haven't
    tested them, why are you even commenting? And to suggest supporting fraud
    is just ridiculous. That's like saying someone that you think had gotten
    some fake currency supports counterfeiting. You're more than welcome to
    your opinion but your statements have no backing.

    --
    Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
    http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 05:10:03 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    wrote:

    >On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:44:43 +0000, kony wrote:
    >
    >> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:53:54 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    >> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>Lead Power 500ATX $12
    >>>Lead Power 600ATX $24
    >>>Power Magic 550 $15 (shipped)
    >>>
    >>>Any 500W or higher should work. Wouldn't buy anything less than 500W.
    >>
    >> Use any of the above if you want to risk frying components, supporting
    >> fraud, and ending up with a power supply that's worse than most name-brand
    >> 350W units.
    >
    >Just one question. Which of these PSU's did you test? I tested all of
    >them, which you just happen to leave out of the reply.

    Please publish reports of the tests.
    So far you've only mentioned use powering parts that would run from a good
    250W PSU.


    >And if you haven't
    >tested them, why are you even commenting?

    Do I really need to fry my own systems to prove a pointor can't I just
    observe it happening to others?


    >And to suggest supporting fraud
    >is just ridiculous. That's like saying someone that you think had gotten
    >some fake currency supports counterfeiting.

    It's more like saying you knew the currency was fake, reprinted with ink
    to be a higher value, and you encouraged others to "buy" this fake
    currency. In this case we have your refusal to accept that these are
    mislabeled, apparently, and your ignorance of the importance of safety
    features. That mislabeling to sell them as higher wattage unit than they
    are, is fraud. You suggest purchase of these mislabled units and sadly
    enough, are clueless that a modern system as OP described doesn't need
    "Any 500W or higher", rather that your mislabeled generics need to claim
    such a high wattage to support the much lower wattage the system actually
    needs, ulike most name-brands.

    We have your one lone opinion countered by many others who've had to
    replace such generics and too often the components powered by them. It
    is not I that has need to prove anything, you have the majority against
    you. Nowhere else would a consumer think it's a good deal to buy a
    product claiming higher capacity than it actually is.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 06:44:00 +0000, kony wrote:

    > On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 05:10:03 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 16:44:43 +0000, kony wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 15:53:54 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>Lead Power 500ATX $12
    >>>>Lead Power 600ATX $24
    >>>>Power Magic 550 $15 (shipped)
    >>>>
    >>>>Any 500W or higher should work. Wouldn't buy anything less than 500W.
    >>>
    >>> Use any of the above if you want to risk frying components, supporting
    >>> fraud, and ending up with a power supply that's worse than most name-brand
    >>> 350W units.
    >>
    >>Just one question. Which of these PSU's did you test? I tested all of
    >>them, which you just happen to leave out of the reply.
    >
    > Please publish reports of the tests.

    How much or you willing to pay me for the work? Nothing? Then do your own
    test.

    > So far you've only mentioned use powering parts that would run from a
    > good 250W PSU.
    >
    AMD tech support recommends a minimum 450W for the A64. And I doubt if
    you'll find a 250W with enough juice on the 12v rail. Maybe, if you spend
    more than all 3 of the above together.
    >
    >>And if you haven't
    >>tested them, why are you even commenting?
    >
    > Do I really need to fry my own systems to prove a pointor can't I just
    > observe it happening to others?
    >
    IOW's, you have no knowledge of these units. Makes me wonder what your
    motives are.

    --
    Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
    http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 07:55:16 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    wrote:


    >> Please publish reports of the tests.
    >
    >How much or you willing to pay me for the work? Nothing? Then do your own
    >test.

    How completely backwards you are.

    I did not suggest use of those generics. I suggest proven viable
    solutions. You have suggested something without even testing it.


    >
    >> So far you've only mentioned use powering parts that would run from a
    >> good 250W PSU.
    >>
    >AMD tech support recommends a minimum 450W for the A64. And I doubt if
    >you'll find a 250W with enough juice on the 12v rail. Maybe, if you spend
    >more than all 3 of the above together.

    No, they don't as a system builder guideline. If you talked to a
    cluesless level 1 tech, or simply someone who didn't want to bother
    explaining power consumption, then perhaps they just took the quick
    answer, suggest more power than needed.

    AMD provides figures for consumption. Those are MAX values. Their
    figures show that clearly, the A64 uses same or up to 50W more than the
    Palominos did, yet they recommended 250-300W for Palominos, when they
    were expected to be a larger burden on the PSU due to more imbalanced
    power draw, most current from 3V + 5V rails.

    In other words, any of their 300W PSU that were recommened for a Palomino
    XP2000 would have an even larger margin for powering an A64 unless user
    had an atypical number of hard drives, in which case I too recommend more
    than 300W PSU. However, you are STILL CLUELESS. Your generic
    recommendations DO NOT PROVIDE WATTAGE STAMPED ON LABEL.

    You are suggesting purchase of power supplies that are worse than
    name-brands with lower rated wattage, without testing them yourself... at
    least you have made no mention of any testing, systems using them that
    would not run from a decent, name-brand 300W PSU.

    >>
    >>>And if you haven't
    >>>tested them, why are you even commenting?
    >>
    >> Do I really need to fry my own systems to prove a pointor can't I just
    >> observe it happening to others?
    >>
    >IOW's, you have no knowledge of these units. Makes me wonder what your
    >motives are.

    My motives are to point out that these amazing-bargain-cost power supplies
    aren't a bargain. If you want to risk your own systems that is your
    choice, but you suggest them as a high-wattage unit, which they are not.

    If you mentioned them as "320W PSU that're fraudulently labled as 500W
    with loose voltage shutoff to compensate for voltage drop" then I'd not
    have written a word.

    If you wrote that they're the "most" PSU one can buy for $15, then I'd
    agree.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:27:03 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:


    >same internally as a Chieftec or Thermaltake. My primary concern about
    >their PSU are that they use only median-quality sleeve bearing fans. Come
    >to think of it they may be one-ball & one-sleeve (per same fan), yet still
    >might only be labeled as "ball bearing". If there's anyplace in a system

    I've replaced noisy or dead 80mm fans in PSU's with new ones. Some PSU's
    are hard to get at the fan, others are very easy.

    Bob

    Remove "kins" to reply by e-mail.
  17. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 21:28:36 +0000, kony wrote:

    >>> Please publish reports of the tests.
    >
    > You are suggesting purchase of power supplies that are worse than
    > name-brands with lower rated wattage, without testing them yourself... at
    > least you have made no mention of any testing, systems using them that
    > would not run from a decent, name-brand 300W PSU.
    >
    How stupid are you anyway. I said I tested them in my system in the
    original message. Above, you even asked me to publish the report. You're
    just another fudster. You have never had one of them to test yet you
    spread fud around.

    > My motives are to point out that these amazing-bargain-cost power
    > supplies aren't a bargain. If you want to risk your own systems that is
    > your choice, but you suggest them as a high-wattage unit, which they are
    > not.
    >
    And you know this without ever even seeing one. Damn you're good, not!

    > If you mentioned them as "320W PSU that're fraudulently labled as 500W
    > with loose voltage shutoff to compensate for voltage drop" then I'd not
    > have written a word.
    >
    You 've never seen one of the units or tested one by your own admission,
    yet you know this for a fact. Are you known as the amazing pretzel?

    > If you wrote that they're the "most" PSU one can buy for $15, then I'd
    > agree.

    But I don't know if they are the best you can get for $15. So I wouldn't
    say that. All I said is that they worked without a problem. That's it.
    The person was on a budget and wanted something inexpensive and they will
    work. Then you start in on your fudster tyraid. That's it for me. You can
    try and spin this any way you want. Just sit on it first.

    --
    Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
    http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  18. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    Kony is right. Just think about it.

    "Wes Newell" <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net> wrote in message
    news:pan.2004.06.09.01.24.14.537937@TAKEOUTverizon.net...
    > On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 21:28:36 +0000, kony wrote:
    >
    > >>> Please publish reports of the tests.
    > >
    > > You are suggesting purchase of power supplies that are worse than
    > > name-brands with lower rated wattage, without testing them yourself...
    at
    > > least you have made no mention of any testing, systems using them that
    > > would not run from a decent, name-brand 300W PSU.
    > >
    > How stupid are you anyway. I said I tested them in my system in the
    > original message. Above, you even asked me to publish the report. You're
    > just another fudster. You have never had one of them to test yet you
    > spread fud around.
    >
    > > My motives are to point out that these amazing-bargain-cost power
    > > supplies aren't a bargain. If you want to risk your own systems that is
    > > your choice, but you suggest them as a high-wattage unit, which they are
    > > not.
    > >
    > And you know this without ever even seeing one. Damn you're good, not!
    >
    > > If you mentioned them as "320W PSU that're fraudulently labled as 500W
    > > with loose voltage shutoff to compensate for voltage drop" then I'd not
    > > have written a word.
    > >
    > You 've never seen one of the units or tested one by your own admission,
    > yet you know this for a fact. Are you known as the amazing pretzel?
    >
    > > If you wrote that they're the "most" PSU one can buy for $15, then I'd
    > > agree.
    >
    > But I don't know if they are the best you can get for $15. So I wouldn't
    > say that. All I said is that they worked without a problem. That's it.
    > The person was on a budget and wanted something inexpensive and they will
    > work. Then you start in on your fudster tyraid. That's it for me. You can
    > try and spin this any way you want. Just sit on it first.
    >
    > --
    > Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
    > http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  19. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 01:19:22 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    wrote:

    >On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 21:28:36 +0000, kony wrote:
    >
    >>>> Please publish reports of the tests.
    >>
    >> You are suggesting purchase of power supplies that are worse than
    >> name-brands with lower rated wattage, without testing them yourself... at
    >> least you have made no mention of any testing, systems using them that
    >> would not run from a decent, name-brand 300W PSU.
    >>
    >How stupid are you anyway. I said I tested them in my system in the
    >original message. Above, you even asked me to publish the report. You're
    >just another fudster. You have never had one of them to test yet you
    >spread fud around.

    Yes, you tested them in a system that doesn't actually need 500W, but then
    promote them as suitable highe-wattage alternative. Truely you are
    clueless if you can't fathom that the systems you mentioned don't need
    anywhere near 500W.

    >
    >> My motives are to point out that these amazing-bargain-cost power
    >> supplies aren't a bargain. If you want to risk your own systems that is
    >> your choice, but you suggest them as a high-wattage unit, which they are
    >> not.
    >>
    >And you know this without ever even seeing one. Damn you're good, not!

    Please point out where I wrote that i've never seen one.
    You jump to conclusions without reason, like your conclusion that an A64
    is some kind of high-demand platform that needs a pseudo-500W power
    supply, or that others would like for you to choose a power supply for
    them without mentioning of the drawbacks.


    >> If you mentioned them as "320W PSU that're fraudulently labled as 500W
    >> with loose voltage shutoff to compensate for voltage drop" then I'd not
    >> have written a word.
    >>
    >You 've never seen one of the units or tested one by your own admission,
    >yet you know this for a fact.

    So you don't have the facts about the power supply or this thread....


    > Are you known as the amazing pretzel?

    .... but you may have some strong drugs.


    >
    >> If you wrote that they're the "most" PSU one can buy for $15, then I'd
    >> agree.
    >
    >But I don't know if they are the best you can get for $15. So I wouldn't
    >say that. All I said is that they worked without a problem. That's it.
    >The person was on a budget and wanted something inexpensive and they will
    >work. Then you start in on your fudster tyraid. That's it for me. You can
    >try and spin this any way you want. Just sit on it first.

    They may work without a problem but only until they fail, and providing
    their true capacity is not exceeded or they're expected to have similar
    serviceable lifespan. It's fine to make an informed choice for your own
    needs but too often these are being mentioned as suitable for systems
    needing higher wattage PSU. There is little to no savings in cost if a
    fan fails, components are fried, or the system did actually need enough
    amps on a particular rail that they'd use a "true" 400W+ PSU.

    My initial claim was "Use any of the above if you want to risk frying
    components, supporting fraud, and ending up with a power supply that's
    worse than most name-brand 350W units."

    These generics may have a "slightly" higher capacity than LP's lower
    wattage units, but not more safety circuitry. Same failure of those will
    potentially fry components.

    They label them as 500-600W, when clearly they can't support that. What
    would you call it when they deceptively label these units to be higher
    wattage than they are, to cause a perception of higher sale value, if not
    a fraud? When you suggest these units, you are supporting their choice to
    relabel, since there are alternatives with more accurate labeled wattage.

    Worse than most name-brand 350W units... open a couple up and compare
    them... transformer size, inductors, capacitor size/ratings, safety
    circuits, fans, etc, etc

    Bottom line is that you're getting the bottom of the barrel parts that
    when combined, allow a PSU to be built and cost only $15. I didn't even
    mention the laborers who must be working for practically nothing making
    these things.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    Kony is quite right to demand numbers and facts. Your tests
    without actual measurements - without the numbers - means that
    even you don't know if your conclusions are valid. You, of
    course, shorted out all the outputs from each supply, removed
    the short circuit, and confirmed that did not damage
    motherboard, etc?

    Kony is right to ask for details of power supply tests. Too
    often the most electrically ignorant make claims that a power
    supply works - and are exposed only when others ask for
    details.

    Are you the classic computer assembler that has no
    electrical knowledge but still recommends power supplies? I
    hope not. But then those are the people who must then resort
    to insult words such as 'fudster' - so they don't have to
    provide technical answers. If not the classic and ignorant
    computer assembler, then you can provide test details that
    Kony requests. Only a fool would attach a power supply, see
    computer work, and then declare the power supply fully
    functional. But that is exactly what those technically naive
    computer assemblers do to proclaim a power supply as OK.

    Kony has asked for details that support your power supply
    claim - as any good and technically informed poster would.

    For others - be very suspicious of anyone who claims the $15
    power supply is a better buy. Typically when challenged, they
    must respond emotionally because their recommendation comes
    with no basic electrical knowledge. Somehow they just know
    the $15 supply is good enough and will therefore insult anyone
    who questions them rather than provide technical reasoning.

    Wes Newell wrote:
    > On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 21:28:36 +0000, kony wrote:
    >>>> Please publish reports of the tests.
    >>
    >> You are suggesting purchase of power supplies that are worse than
    >> name-brands with lower rated wattage, without testing them
    >> yourself... at least you have made no mention of any testing,
    >> systems using them that would not run from a decent, name-brand
    >> 300W PSU.
    >>
    > How stupid are you anyway. I said I tested them in my system in
    > the original message. Above, you even asked me to publish the
    > report. You're just another fudster. You have never had one of
    > them to test yet you spread fud around.
    >
    >> My motives are to point out that these amazing-bargain-cost
    >> power supplies aren't a bargain. If you want to risk your own
    >> systems that is your choice, but you suggest them as a
    >> high-wattage unit, which they are not.
    >>
    > And you know this without ever even seeing one. Damn you're
    > good, not!
    >
    >> If you mentioned them as "320W PSU that're fraudulently labled
    >> as 500W with loose voltage shutoff to compensate for voltage
    >> drop" then I'd not have written a word.
    >>
    > You 've never seen one of the units or tested one by your own
    > admission, yet you know this for a fact. Are you known as the
    > amazing pretzel?
    >
    >> If you wrote that they're the "most" PSU one can buy for $15,
    >> then I'd agree.
    >
    > But I don't know if they are the best you can get for $15. So I
    > wouldn't say that. All I said is that they worked without a
    > problem. That's it. The person was on a budget and wanted
    > something inexpensive and they will work. Then you start in on
    > your fudster tyraid. That's it for me. You can try and spin this
    > any way you want. Just sit on it first.
  21. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 19:27:03 GMT, kony <spam@spam.com> wrote:

    <snip>

    > IIRC, the Enlight 420W I have in a system here had
    >a Nidec Beta SL fan installed on the rear.


    What I meant to write was that I replaced PSU's original fan with the
    Nidec, not that it came with the Nidec preinstalled at the factory.
  22. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On 7 Jun 2004 21:14:19 -0700, email_invalid@mail2world.com (Email
    Invalid) wrote:

    >Antec Truepower 430W (~$60) should be more than sufficient. They also
    >have a True Power 480W (~$75) and True Power 550W (~$95)
    >
    >IHMO, based on the modest requirements listed, 430W is more than
    >sufficient. But for future upgradability and if you don't want to
    >worry about undersupply, than you can get 480W or even 550W version.
    >However, the latter is a bit overkill.
    >

    I've got a 550 and it's a decent, quiet psu for the price. I'd go 430
    or 550 depending how many hard drives you expect to have. I'd skip the
    480 for the price difference.

    If price were no object, I'd get the top of the charts psu, but they
    can get exponentially expensive.
  23. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On 10 Jun 2004 05:36:17 -0700, larrymoencurly@my-deja.com (larrymoencurly)
    wrote:


    >Anyone who makes a claim is responsible for backing it up, and you

    The claimant should be taken at his word unless he has lied before or makes
    incredible claims. If you doubt a claim, then test it yourself. It's a
    slippery slope when everyone must start proving everything to everybody. Or
    something like that. Nyuk nyuk nyuk!

    >didn't simply say that those PSUs worked in your system but that any
    >500W+ PSU should be fine. Considering that many cheap 500W+ PSUs look
    >less substantial than many of the better 300W PSUs, I find it hard to
    >believe that a 550W selling for
    >$15 can be trusted when lots of power is needed, unless it was a
    >surplus special.

    You hit on a very important principle. Better power supplies have heavy
    coils, lots of components and heat sinks stuffed inside. A good accurate
    postal scale would probably be as good an indicator of quality and
    performance as all the electrical test gear. :)

    Bob

    Remove "kins" to reply by e-mail.
  24. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.06.10.19.28.06.691636@TAKEOUTverizon.net>...
    > On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 05:36:17 -0700, larrymoencurly wrote:

    > > Considering that many cheap 500W+ PSUs look less substantial
    > > than many of the better 300W PSUs, I find it hard to believe
    > > that a 550W selling for $15 can be trusted when lots of power
    > > is needed, unless it was a surplus special.
    >
    > So now you want me to to provide data for all cheap power
    > supplies. I wouldn't hold my breath.:-)
    >
    > Now, since you say many cheap 500W PSU's are less substantial
    > than many of the better 300W's, why don't you prvide the data
    > to prove this. Rediculous as that sounds, it's exactly what
    > was asked of me. So for get it.

    Compare this: www.bit-tech.net/images/review/123/7.jpg

    to this: http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no20/open.jpg
    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no20/up02.jpg

    (lots of PSU internals pictured at
    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/ )

    If you didn't know anything else about either PSU, which one would you
    think had the higher power rating? The first PSU is a 550W Q-tec
    while the second is a 300W Powerman (Fortron-Source, also makes
    Sparkle), and unless the Q-tec's transformer has higher capacity for
    the same dimensions or is run at a higher frequency, how can it put
    out more power than the Powerman's? Similarly, unless the Q-tec is
    more efficient (fat chance), won't its heatsinks likely run hotter at
    any given power level than the Powerman's? But most of all, why do
    companies like PC Power & Cooling, Antec, and Fortron-Source use
    bigger capacitors, heatsinks, and transformers if they're unnecessary,
    especially when most customers don't care about the insides?

    Except for an Enermax, all the PSU failures I've experienced have been
    with cheapos. One didn't have good overload protection for the +3.3V
    (almost identical to the one shown by PC Power & Cooling as an example
    of a bad PSU), a low voltage capacitor in a Powmax failed (could have
    been one of those made with faulty electrolyte), and a Deer shorted
    several 16V capacitors, probably because it sent 50V spikes into them.
    And that failed Enermax was badly made 250W without an anti-surge
    thermistor.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net> wrote in message news:<pan.2004.06.10.19.28.06.691636@TAKEOUTverizon.net>...
    > On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 05:36:17 -0700, larrymoencurly wrote:

    > > Considering that many cheap 500W+ PSUs look less substantial
    > > than many of the better 300W PSUs, I find it hard to believe
    > > that a 550W selling for $15 can be trusted when lots of power
    > > is needed, unless it was a surplus special.
    >
    > So now you want me to to provide data for all cheap power
    > supplies. I wouldn't hold my breath.:-)
    >
    > Now, since you say many cheap 500W PSU's are less substantial
    > than many of the better 300W's, why don't you prvide the data
    > to prove this. Rediculous as that sounds, it's exactly what
    > was asked of me. So for get it.

    Compare this: www.bit-tech.net/images/review/123/7.jpg

    to this: http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no20/open.jpg
    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no20/up02.jpg

    (lots of PSU internals pictured at
    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/ )

    If you didn't know anything else about either PSU, which one would you
    think had the higher power rating? The first PSU is a 550W Q-tec
    while the second is a 300W Powerman (Fortron-Source, also makes
    Sparkle), and unless the Q-tec's transformer has higher capacity for
    the same dimensions or is run at a higher frequency, how can it put
    out more power than the Powerman's? Similarly, unless the Q-tec is
    more efficient (fat chance), won't its heatsinks likely run hotter at
    any given power level than the Powerman's? But most of all, why do
    companies like PC Power & Cooling, Antec, and Fortron-Source use
    bigger capacitors, heatsinks, and transformers if they're unnecessary,
    especially when most customers don't care about the insides?

    Except for an Enermax, all the PSU failures I've experienced have been
    with cheapos. One didn't have good overload protection for the +3.3V
    (almost identical to the one shown by PC Power & Cooling as an example
    of a bad PSU), a low voltage capacitor in a Powmax failed (could have
    been one of those made with faulty electrolyte), and a Deer shorted
    several 16V capacitors, probably because it sent 50V spikes into them.
    And that failed Enermax was badly made 250W without an anti-surge
    thermistor.
  26. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On 11 Jun 2004 07:25:12 -0700, larrymoencurly@my-deja.com (larrymoencurly)
    wrote:

    >Except for an Enermax, all the PSU failures I've experienced have been
    >with cheapos. One didn't have good overload protection for the +3.3V

    I once plugged the cables in backwards to an internal USB header. The PSU
    breaker kept tripping, and the board kept re-booting. It's AMAZING that
    something wasn't smoked. That sold me on Enlight PSU's and Gigabyte boards!

    So... what did YOU plug in backwards? :D

    Bob

    Remove "kins" to reply by e-mail.
  27. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:32:46 -0400, w_tom wrote:

    > Wes again posts as the classic naive 'expert'. Just because
    > his computer turned on means everything is 100% correct?

    As with any recommendation, you can take it or leave it. It works for me,
    100% of the time. Every voltage is within tolerances. To me, that means it
    works. What happens when it fails is yet to be seen, but I've never had a
    failed PSU take out hardware. You have, too bad.

    --
    Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
    http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  28. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 19:08:23 GMT, Wes Newell <w.newell@TAKEOUTverizon.net>
    wrote:

    >On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:32:46 -0400, w_tom wrote:
    >
    >> Wes again posts as the classic naive 'expert'. Just because
    >> his computer turned on means everything is 100% correct?
    >
    >As with any recommendation, you can take it or leave it. It works for me,
    >100% of the time. Every voltage is within tolerances. To me, that means it
    >works. What happens when it fails is yet to be seen, but I've never had a
    >failed PSU take out hardware. You have, too bad.

    PSU's normally fail with low or no voltage and current, not a spike in
    voltage or current. So it stands to reason that failures are annoying but
    not dangerous.

    Hey, instead of spending $60, maybe it makes sense to buy 4 of the $15 PSU's
    (as long as they make adequate clean power)

    Bob

    Remove "kins" to reply by e-mail.
  29. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 11:32:46 -0400, w_tom wrote:

    > Wes again posts as the classic naive 'expert'. Just because
    > his computer turned on means everything is 100% correct?

    And second, I never claimed to be a power supply expert. Although I have
    lots of experiences with them among many other things.

    --
    Abit KT7-Raid (KT133) Tbred B core CPU @2400MHz (24x100FSB)
    http://mysite.verizon.net/res0exft/cpu.htm
  30. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On 11 Jun 2004 07:24:52 -0700, larrymoencurly@my-deja.com
    (larrymoencurly) put finger to keyboard and composed:

    >But most of all, why do
    >companies like PC Power & Cooling, Antec, and Fortron-Source use
    >bigger capacitors, heatsinks, and transformers if they're unnecessary,
    >especially when most customers don't care about the insides?

    Here is a PC Power & Cooling 450W ATX PSU:
    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/index.html

    These photos show two 200V 1000uF 85 degC caps parked next to
    heatsinks:

    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/open.jpg
    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/side01.jpg

    A quality PSU would use 105 degC capacitors and would locate them away
    from sources of heat, if at all possible.

    Here's a 250W Nipron PCSA-300P-X2S PSU that uses a 105 degC cap:
    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no09/index.html
    http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no09/main2.jpg

    >Except for an Enermax, all the PSU failures I've experienced have been
    >with cheapos.

    Perhaps it's because "cheapos" outnumber the more expensive brands.
    Ten times as many cheapos means ten times as many failures, all things
    being equal. Or perhaps it's because the people who buy expensive PSUs
    opt for the higher rated ones.

    > One didn't have good overload protection for the +3.3V
    >(almost identical to the one shown by PC Power & Cooling as an example
    >of a bad PSU),

    I'm intrigued as to what PC Power & Cooling considers a bad PSU. Can
    you elaborate on this? Any URLs, photos, diagrams?

    > a low voltage capacitor in a Powmax failed (could have
    >been one of those made with faulty electrolyte), and a Deer shorted
    >several 16V capacitors, probably because it sent 50V spikes into them.
    > And that failed Enermax was badly made 250W without an anti-surge
    >thermistor.

    .... which proves that a higher price is no guarantee of quality.


    - Franc Zabkar
    --
    Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
  31. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    Franc Zabkar <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<uljkc0h6a9hul9m56uce8j0419j09190cb@4ax.com>...

    > Here is a PC Power & Cooling 450W ATX PSU:
    > http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/index.html
    >
    > These photos show two 200V 1000uF 85 degC caps parked next to
    > heatsinks:
    >
    > http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/open.jpg
    > http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/side01.jpg
    >
    > A quality PSU would use 105 degC capacitors and would locate them away
    > from sources of heat, if at all possible.

    > Here's a 250W Nipron PCSA-300P-X2S PSU that uses a 105 degC cap:
    > http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no09/index.html
    > http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no09/main2.jpg

    I don't have any PSUs that automatically adjust to the AC voltage the
    way that one does, but I noticed that all of mine, good and bad, use
    85C high voltage capacitors. Is this because those caps work only at
    low frequency and don't have square waves passing through them?

    > > Except for an Enermax, all the PSU failures I've experienced
    > > have been with cheapos.
    >
    > Perhaps it's because "cheapos" outnumber the more expensive brands.
    > Ten times as many cheapos means ten times as many failures, all things
    > being equal. Or perhaps it's because the people who buy expensive PSUs
    > opt for the higher rated ones.

    In my case they failed at much higher rates than the better ones did.

    > > One didn't have good overload protection for the +3.3V
    > >(almost identical to the one shown by PC Power & Cooling as
    > > an example of a bad PSU),
    >
    > I'm intrigued as to what PC Power & Cooling considers a bad PSU. Can
    > you elaborate on this? Any URLs, photos, diagrams?

    www.pcpowercooling.com/products/power_supplies/insidestory/

    I think that the comparison is a bit unfair because it's between a
    425W PCP&C and a 300W King Case/King Star, although this is disclosed.
    On my 250W King Star the high voltage filters were just 220-330uF,
    the +12V wasn't regulated, and there was no RFI filter at all (several
    empty spots on circuit board, tons of AM radio interference). Also
    that small circuit board on top of the heatsinks for the +5V standby
    regulator was held in place with just a single screw, and when that
    screw was loose it could almost short to the top of the case. I don't
    remember if mine had an anti-surge thermistor.

    PCP&C also has this comparison, between their 510W and an Enermax
    550W:

    www.pcpowercooling.com/pdf/Turbo-Cool_510_vs.pdf

    > > a low voltage capacitor in a Powmax failed (could have
    > >been one of those made with faulty electrolyte), and a Deer shorted
    > >several 16V capacitors, probably because it sent 50V spikes into them.
    > >And that failed Enermax was badly made 250W without an anti-surge
    > >thermistor.
    >
    > ... which proves that a higher price is no guarantee of quality.

    I shouldn't have included my Powmax because any PSU can have a bad
    capacitor. But I thought that Powmax was considered bad, even if it
    was manufacturered several years ago, before the brand was cheapened a
    lot.
  32. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On 13 Jun 2004 05:30:13 -0700, larrymoencurly@my-deja.com (larrymoencurly)
    wrote:


    >
    >I don't have any PSUs that automatically adjust to the AC voltage the
    >way that one does, but I noticed that all of mine, good and bad, use
    >85C high voltage capacitors. Is this because those caps work only at
    >low frequency and don't have square waves passing through them?

    It is less important for those to be of high temp grade, because there is
    less change in current at that point, voltage. Their ESR is not so
    significant a factor in "self" heating.


    >
    >> > Except for an Enermax, all the PSU failures I've experienced
    >> > have been with cheapos.
    >>
    >> Perhaps it's because "cheapos" outnumber the more expensive brands.
    >> Ten times as many cheapos means ten times as many failures, all things
    >> being equal. Or perhaps it's because the people who buy expensive PSUs
    >> opt for the higher rated ones.
    >
    >In my case they failed at much higher rates than the better ones did.

    The oddity of an Enermax, is that it's build quality is optimized towards
    "looking" good rather than performing well. Most name-brands would spend
    the $ on electrical design before adding gold-colored anodized heatsinks
    or cable sheaths, etc.

    >
    >> > One didn't have good overload protection for the +3.3V
    >> >(almost identical to the one shown by PC Power & Cooling as
    >> > an example of a bad PSU),
    >>
    >> I'm intrigued as to what PC Power & Cooling considers a bad PSU. Can
    >> you elaborate on this? Any URLs, photos, diagrams?
    >
    >www.pcpowercooling.com/products/power_supplies/insidestory/
    >
    >I think that the comparison is a bit unfair because it's between a
    >425W PCP&C and a 300W King Case/King Star, although this is disclosed.
    > On my 250W King Star the high voltage filters were just 220-330uF,
    >the +12V wasn't regulated, and there was no RFI filter at all (several
    >empty spots on circuit board, tons of AM radio interference). Also
    >that small circuit board on top of the heatsinks for the +5V standby
    >regulator was held in place with just a single screw, and when that
    >screw was loose it could almost short to the top of the case. I don't
    >remember if mine had an anti-surge thermistor.

    Sadly, they get even worst than the one pictured, it has a full frame
    rigid fan... probably sleeve bearing but likely better balanced.

    >
    >PCP&C also has this comparison, between their 510W and an Enermax
    >550W:
    >
    > www.pcpowercooling.com/pdf/Turbo-Cool_510_vs.pdf
    >
    >> > a low voltage capacitor in a Powmax failed (could have
    >> >been one of those made with faulty electrolyte), and a Deer shorted
    >> >several 16V capacitors, probably because it sent 50V spikes into them.
    >> >And that failed Enermax was badly made 250W without an anti-surge
    >> >thermistor.
    >>
    >> ... which proves that a higher price is no guarantee of quality.
    >
    >I shouldn't have included my Powmax because any PSU can have a bad
    >capacitor. But I thought that Powmax was considered bad, even if it
    >was manufacturered several years ago, before the brand was cheapened a
    >lot.

    Yes, todays power supplies follow same trend as yesteryears',
    manufacturers seem to target certain market segments, seldom jump from
    producing good units to junk or vice-versa.
  33. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On 13 Jun 2004 05:30:13 -0700, larrymoencurly@my-deja.com
    (larrymoencurly) put finger to keyboard and composed:

    >Franc Zabkar <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<uljkc0h6a9hul9m56uce8j0419j09190cb@4ax.com>...
    >
    >> Here is a PC Power & Cooling 450W ATX PSU:
    >> http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/index.html
    >>
    >> These photos show two 200V 1000uF 85 degC caps parked next to
    >> heatsinks:
    >>
    >> http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/open.jpg
    >> http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no41/side01.jpg
    >>
    >> A quality PSU would use 105 degC capacitors and would locate them away
    >> from sources of heat, if at all possible.
    >
    >> Here's a 250W Nipron PCSA-300P-X2S PSU that uses a 105 degC cap:
    >> http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no09/index.html
    >> http://terasan.okiraku-pc.net/dengen/no09/main2.jpg
    >
    >I don't have any PSUs that automatically adjust to the AC voltage the
    >way that one does, but I noticed that all of mine, good and bad, use
    >85C high voltage capacitors. Is this because those caps work only at
    >low frequency and don't have square waves passing through them?

    During their charging cycle these caps draw very large current pulses
    at twice the mains frequency (100Hz or 120Hz). During the discharge
    cycle the caps are supplying smaller current pulses to the chopper
    transistor(s) at the switchmode frequency (40kHz - 100kHz ?). As Kony
    states, these caps would have a relatively low ESR, so they would
    probably not be subject to the same self heating effects as smaller
    electrolytics. And space *is* a serious constraint in PC PSUs, so
    proximity to heatsinks is probably unavoidable. IME the most common
    problem with switchmode PSUs in general is the smaller electros on the
    primary side of the supply. When these leak and/or develop high ESR,
    the PSU will fail to regulate properly.

    Having said that, the additional cost to the manufacturer of a 105
    degC cap over an 85 degC one would have been pennies.

    >> > Except for an Enermax, all the PSU failures I've experienced
    >> > have been with cheapos.
    >>
    >> Perhaps it's because "cheapos" outnumber the more expensive brands.
    >> Ten times as many cheapos means ten times as many failures, all things
    >> being equal. Or perhaps it's because the people who buy expensive PSUs
    >> opt for the higher rated ones.
    >
    >In my case they failed at much higher rates than the better ones did.
    >
    >> > One didn't have good overload protection for the +3.3V
    >> >(almost identical to the one shown by PC Power & Cooling as
    >> > an example of a bad PSU),
    >>
    >> I'm intrigued as to what PC Power & Cooling considers a bad PSU. Can
    >> you elaborate on this? Any URLs, photos, diagrams?
    >
    >www.pcpowercooling.com/products/power_supplies/insidestory/

    Hmmm, it's technical, but it still sounds like little more than a
    sales pitch. And I notice that not all PC Power & Cooling PSUs will
    have all these touted features.

    >I think that the comparison is a bit unfair because it's between a
    >425W PCP&C and a 300W King Case/King Star, although this is disclosed.

    Well, that's marketing for you. Notice that PCP&C also have 300W
    "cheapo" PSUs which they euphemistically refer to as their "economy"
    line. ;-)

    > On my 250W King Star the high voltage filters were just 220-330uF,

    I bet they are no smaller than what you'll find in PCP&C's "standard
    250 ATX":
    http://www.pcpowercooling.com/pdf/econ-atx.pdf

    Notice that some specs are no better than what you would expect from a
    "cheapo" PSU:

    Operating Range: 95-132 VAC
    Regulation: 5% (+3, +5, +12)
    10% (-5, -12)

    Then there's this 300W PSU:
    http://www.pcpowercooling.com/pdf/T301U.pdf

    The regulation specs and safety features (OC & OV protection) are
    fairly basic.

    The same can be said for the 300 ATX-PFC:
    http://www.pcpowercooling.com/pdf/hp-atx-pfc.pdf

    This PSU has OV protection on the +3.3V and +5V rails, but not on the
    +12V rail.

    >the +12V wasn't regulated, ...

    I find this hard to understand. All the supplies I have seen regulate
    by sensing a weighted average of the +5V and +12V rails. That's why
    the +5V rail is affected by a change in the +12V load (eg extra HDs).
    FWIW, I sometimes adapt PC PSUs for 6V or 13.8V operation by removing
    and recalculating the sense resistors.

    >and there was no RFI filter at all (several
    >empty spots on circuit board, tons of AM radio interference).

    Yep, that's bad. I presume that the empty spots would normally have
    been populated by inductors and capacitors in a pi configuration?

    > Also
    >that small circuit board on top of the heatsinks for the +5V standby
    >regulator was held in place with just a single screw, and when that
    >screw was loose it could almost short to the top of the case. I don't
    >remember if mine had an anti-surge thermistor.

    I've had a PSU with a rivet rattling around inside. I don't recall the
    brand, though.

    >PCP&C also has this comparison, between their 510W and an Enermax
    >550W:
    >
    > www.pcpowercooling.com/pdf/Turbo-Cool_510_vs.pdf
    >
    >> > a low voltage capacitor in a Powmax failed (could have
    >> >been one of those made with faulty electrolyte), and a Deer shorted
    >> >several 16V capacitors, probably because it sent 50V spikes into them.
    >> >And that failed Enermax was badly made 250W without an anti-surge
    >> >thermistor.
    >>
    >> ... which proves that a higher price is no guarantee of quality.
    >
    >I shouldn't have included my Powmax because any PSU can have a bad
    >capacitor. But I thought that Powmax was considered bad, even if it
    >was manufacturered several years ago, before the brand was cheapened a
    >lot.

    You should never buy on brand alone. Some respected manufacturers will
    produce lesser quality products and sell them for more than they are
    worth simply by cashing in on their reputation. For example, I've seen
    the same mechanisms inside Sony and Palsonic VCRs, and in early Sonys
    and Sanyos. US Robotics, a respected modem manufacturer, is now
    rebranding Conexant softmodem chipsets. Badge engineering is one of my
    pet hates.

    Incidentally, I've been through PCP&C's online PSU selection process.
    The recommended PSU for my purposes was the Turbo-Cool 300 ATX-PFC.
    Their worst case home scenario, with max HDs and max RAM, requires
    only a Turbo-Cool® 425 ATX-Deluxe. Curiously, the on-line selector
    does not ask for the CPU type, or the type of graphics card, but it
    does ask how much memory will be used. I would have thought that power
    consumption for memory was comparatively small. <shrug>


    - Franc Zabkar
    --
    Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
  34. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    Franc Zabkar <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<r6ctc01iurk2apgicsp0oga3hp40686kkh@4ax.com>...
    > On 13 Jun 2004 05:30:13 -0700, larrymoencurly@my-deja.com
    > (larrymoencurly) put finger to keyboard and composed:

    > >www.pcpowercooling.com/products/power_supplies/insidestory/

    > >the +12V wasn't regulated, ...
    >
    > I find this hard to understand. All the supplies I have seen regulate
    > by sensing a weighted average of the +5V and +12V rails. That's why
    > the +5V rail is affected by a change in the +12V load (eg extra HDs).
    > FWIW, I sometimes adapt PC PSUs for 6V or 13.8V operation by removing
    > and recalculating the sense resistors.

    I traced it out and found that the +12V output consisted of just a
    transformer winding, 1-2 diodes, and some filter capacitors and coils.
    The output wasn't connected to any feedback circuit, so if the +12V
    was regulated it must have been done on the primary side.

    > >and there was no RFI filter at all (several
    > >empty spots on circuit board, tons of AM radio interference).
    >
    > Yep, that's bad. I presume that the empty spots would normally have
    > been populated by inductors and capacitors in a pi configuration?

    Yes, and transplanting some from an old AT PSU eliminated all the
    noticeable interference.
  35. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt (More info?)

    On 15 Jun 2004 10:28:28 -0700, larrymoencurly@my-deja.com
    (larrymoencurly) put finger to keyboard and composed:

    >Franc Zabkar <fzabkar@optussnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<r6ctc01iurk2apgicsp0oga3hp40686kkh@4ax.com>...
    >> On 13 Jun 2004 05:30:13 -0700, larrymoencurly@my-deja.com
    >> (larrymoencurly) put finger to keyboard and composed:
    >
    >> >www.pcpowercooling.com/products/power_supplies/insidestory/
    >
    >> >the +12V wasn't regulated, ...
    >>
    >> I find this hard to understand. All the supplies I have seen regulate
    >> by sensing a weighted average of the +5V and +12V rails. That's why
    >> the +5V rail is affected by a change in the +12V load (eg extra HDs).
    >> FWIW, I sometimes adapt PC PSUs for 6V or 13.8V operation by removing
    >> and recalculating the sense resistors.
    >
    >I traced it out and found that the +12V output consisted of just a
    >transformer winding, 1-2 diodes, and some filter capacitors and coils.
    > The output wasn't connected to any feedback circuit, so if the +12V
    >was regulated it must have been done on the primary side.

    I agree that it was probably unregulated. If so, then IMHO your PSU's
    design makes more sense than "typical" designs. By that I mean that
    the +5V rail should be accurately regulated because the +5V logic
    depends on it. OTOH, the +12V rail may be permitted to vary a great
    deal before it will cause problems for those devices that use it, eg
    HDs and COM ports.

    See this typical (?) "generic" PSU design which senses both the +5V
    (R26) and +12V (R25) rails:

    http://www.pavouk.comp.cz/hw/en_atxps.html

    >> >and there was no RFI filter at all (several
    >> >empty spots on circuit board, tons of AM radio interference).
    >>
    >> Yep, that's bad. I presume that the empty spots would normally have
    >> been populated by inductors and capacitors in a pi configuration?
    >
    >Yes, and transplanting some from an old AT PSU eliminated all the
    >noticeable interference.

    You must have loved that cheapo PSU to go to all that trouble. ;-)


    - Franc Zabkar
    --
    Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
Ask a new question

Read More

Homebuilt Hardware Power Supplies Systems