78% efficiency for Fortron is WRONG!

[mcVAN]

Has no one else has noticed?? The review text reads: <i>"Fortron Source power supply draws 571 Watts when plugged into the wall to put out 397 Watts".</i> My math tells me that AC/DC conversion efficiency for the Fortron is therefore <b>69.5%</b>, NOT 78%. So is this an honest error or just a way by THG to make Fortron be noticed?

Not that I have anything against Fortron -- I am in the middle of testing the same PSU right now for <A HREF="http://www.silentpcreview.com" target="_new">http://www.silentpcreview.com</A> and find it to be quite good. My sample draws 560W at full power, which is 71% efficiency, slightly better than THG's sample. It's within standard sample variance and may also be attributed to the fact that THG is using 240VAC and I am using 120VAC. But taking erroneous data and using it as a headline and the basis of a strong recommendation seems a bit dubious...

 

[Stain]

Either way I don't care. What difference would it make if your powersupply took 1000watts to make 400 or 450watts to make 400. Efficiency is such a non-issue.

 

[alltaken]

well actually

IS YOUR COUNTRY INA POWER CRISIS.

i think not.

you realise that for environmentalists out there you are a DICK HEAD!!!!!!!!!

Coal, nuke, gas, oil powered powerstations pumping out WASTED ENERGY!!!!!!!



its like Washing machines and dryers now all use the star rating for efficieny its a BIG ISSUE. to think you can recude your powerbill by 20% by just switching all your lightbulbs to energy savers (which are just as bloody bright) and a few minor changes like unpuluging adaptors while not plugged in.

honestly i think its fu-cked up that a portable cd player can run on 2 batteries for about 90 hours. yet a cd player in a home deck will use that same power just turning on.

GEEZE.

so don;t say its a NON issue unless you really couldn't care if you could breath, or had sun, or lived in the same climate you currently do.

its just so selfish and ignorant to say that.




Alltaken

 

[mcVAN]

Efficiency is one of the most important aspects of PSU performance.

1) The PSU draws 570W AC to produce 400W in DC. Where do you think the "lost" 170W goes? It gets turned into HEAT that the PSU has to get rid of -- hence the heatsinks and fans.

2) That's at ~70% efficiency. If a PSU was really 78% efficient, it would draw only 512W. What does this mean? It means that it generates only 112W of heat (compared to 170W). <b>The 70% efficient PSU generates >50% more heat than the 78% efficient one. </b>

3) Because it runs so much cooler, the 78% efficient PSU could run with a lower airflow fan, allowing quieter operation without overheating or affecting stability. Then there's the 60-odd watt savings...

I know which one I'd want. HIgher efficiency is win-win all around.

This is why the <b>ERROR</b> THG made in citing this PSU's efficiency as being 78% when it really is only 69.5% is really a shame. I can only wonder how many people scanned the headline and said "oh cool, that's must be good" and will never come back to the article again and will never know that THG has effectively *lied* to them. An error statement is hardly likely to reach them all.

This is why I ask whether the error was deliberate. If caught, they say "Oh sorry for the mistake" and change the text. In the meanwhile, given their traffic, a million people think the Fortron has 78% efficiency. The promotion is done, the deal is complete.

Or am I being too cynical?

 

[Stain]

OMG tree hugger!

First of all, sucks to live in a country w/o power.

Second, computers dont even draw that much power to begin with. If your so concerned then don't leave it on all the time. More than half my electricity bill comes from one thing... electric water heater! Having a computer that draws a couple hundred more watts cause it's powersupply has bad efficiency isn't going to make any difference. Turn off a few lights and there you go! Skip washing your hands or don't open your fridge so often. Go without air conditioning or without TV for a little while.

I don't care if it costs me a quarter a month because my PSU's has the worst efficiency.

its like Washing machines and dryers now all use the star rating for efficieny its a BIG ISSUE

The only reason you can pretend that's true is because electric heat is a bitch.

so don;t say its a NON issue unless you really couldn't care if you could breath, or had sun, or lived in the same climate you currently do.

I don't care if having an inefficient power supply puts me
1/10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
of a percent closer to that world.

<i>[Edit: post [-peep-] up the flat view of the thread, fixed]</i><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by Stain on 06/14/03 01:09 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[Stain]

I guess I wasnt really thinking about the heat... I've never had a PSU that ran very hot.

<b>The 70% efficient PSU generates >50% more heat than the 78% efficient one.</b>

Do you have any links that can show this.

 

[mcVAN]

No links required. It's pure and simple math.

Divide the DC power produced by the AC power consumed - multiply the result by 100 = % conversion efficiency. The difference is always lost as heat. To go backwards, 400W/.78 = 512W. Thus, a PSU producing 400W at 78% efficiency consumes 512W of AC. 112W vs 170W -- 170W is 58W more, also 51.7% more than 112W.

Easiest way to think of this difference: your CPU probably generates ~60W of heat in the PC. You have some MF honkin' badass HSF to cool it. Well, if you used a 70% efficient PSU, compared to one of 78% efficiency, it would be like adding another CPU and having to deal with its heat -- but not getting any benefit. Unless you consider higher electricity consumption to be a benefit.

 

[Stain]

We'll the titles of Tom's article's concerning efficiency were <i>"Increased Efficiency Saves Energy"</i> and <i>"Raising Efficiency Saves Energy"</i> so you can see why I may have skimmed them not really getting that effiency indirectly (directly?) lowers CPU temps.

The point in my previous statements though was that a little more 1k-watt/hrs isn't going to break the bank.

 

[mcVAN]

Wow, I hadn't even considered the headline! What misleading baloney! This errant 78% is the only one of the whole bucnh that had efficiency any higher than normal, but THG has managed to convey the idea that an entire generation of PSUs are now really efficient. That's pathetic!

 

[Stain]

Is THG being blackmailed or taking bribes now?

BOOOOO THG!

 

[hopkin]

I hope the writers of this article will respond and deal with this issue asap!

 

[alltaken]

hey you know

for me to save 100w

i would need to turn off no less than "6" (thats SIX) light bulbs

0 0 0 0 0 0



thats coz "YAY" i don't use sh-it arse bulbs.


if you think there is somthing wrong with being considerate for the environment then wake up and smell the roses, do you Poo in your own bed??? (well honestly if you do thats your bussiness) get off the bloody computer and go outside, or didn't your mummy take you camping when you were young!!!!!!!!!!



all i can say is that i hope you never have kids coz they are gonna grow up with all your Sh-it.

efficiency is important.

just like full economy (or don't you care about that either)





p.s. my country has plenty of power!!!!
just not enough for everyone to waste it all.
no blackouts or anything not even brownouts. coz everyone was asked to save power before it became a problem. so a little foresight on hydro lake levels, meant that we never needed to suffer from it.


an efficient power supply and energy saving bulbs don't actually cause any inconvenience so why resist them?????



-B- -I- ;-) -T- -C- ;-) -H-

 

[Stain]

I'm through debating this with you. The only reason effiency matters is for less heat.


Just for you I think I'm going to go set my space heater in front of the air conditioner and turn them both to max for awhile in order to remedy all the energy saving you've been doing.

 

[FO_SHO]

so I'm guessing Stain is a kind of dumbass guy that goes out and buys a SUV that goes 10 miles per gallon huh.....

 

[jamarno]

I'd like to know why PC power supply efficiency hasn't improved since IBM's first PC. They're still at about 70%, despite the long time availability of 80-90% efficient switching supplies for other uses.

 

[alltaken]

jamarno

the only reason better technologys are not pushed forward is because of ECONOMICS, and CONSUMER voice.

you know Zip drives, well have you heard of somthing calle a superdrive (well i think thats the name)

it was better technology but it had worse marketing than Zip drive. a superdrive held 120Mb o a STANDARD size 1.44Mb disk (well i think the disk was different but it was the same size etc.... and the drive was backwards compatable)

what about RDRAM it was better than sdram and ddr sdram. but why is it gonna disapear (market forces)



the reason Power supplys are not important. is this

People like ^^^^^^ don't find it a priority to buy a powersupply that is efficient. its not marketed as a reason to go buy it, and its not publicly announced what efficiency a power supply uses.

look at dryers they have been marketed for power consumption so the POWER SAVING technology is being pushed for them as the most efficient will always sell faster.

as soon as power supplys that are efficient become more popular with consumers then the tech will be pushed.

currently the consumer drive is WATTAGE and not efficiency.

basicly we have been spoilt with power as its nearly always been available to to people in vast quantitys, but as soon as power becomes rare and more costly then people will start to look at consumption.




also a lot of people don't consider many effects of things, like "where your rubish ends up once in the bin" "where power comes from" "where the exhaust goes once out of the pipe"

this generation (my generation and the previous) are pretty greedy(through choice).


Alltaken

 

[svol]

Seems like it... he doesn't care about the rest of the world and only about himselve, egoist.

If all PC users had very unefficient PSUs then the energy comsumption by PCs will go sky high.

And even if he only cares about himselve he still forgets the extra costs, heat and shorter equipment life-time due to extra heat. Sounds pretty dumb if you ask me.

My CPU fan spins so fast that it creates a wormhole

 

[jihiggs]

its not home pc users that are contributing with inneficient psus. its buisnesses that have several hundered computers going in a office, the heat has to go some where and for creature comfort the air conditioners have to work even more, adding to the electricity needed.

<font color=red> black </font color=red> <font color=green> white </font color=green> <font color=blue> yellow </font color=blue> <font color=orange> purple </font color=orange> <font color=black> red </font color=black> <font color=yellow> green </font color=yellow> <font color=purple> blue </font color=purple>

 

[alltaken]

i don't understand why bussiness' don't just have a CENTRAL PSU one that has wireing all over the building e.g. no individual computer has a PSU but instead they just plug the computer into a soket that goes to the central PSU.

i reckon this would make more sense and get rid of the air conditioning problem (or reduce it)



what do you think???


i was wanting to make a renderfarm out of many PC's and have always wondered if i could get a single powerfull and more efficient PSU that could run them all.




Alltaken

p.s. there are equall numbers of home pc's as bussiness pc's as if you think about it every employee is likely to have one at home. its just in a bussiness they are all in the same room.

 

[svol]

The problem that transferring much power (hundreds of watts for a douzens of PCs) over low voltage is extremely inefficient. All wires create heat according to Q=I^2*R*t... now if you put 1000W through a cable on 5V you get an I of 200... 200^2=40000, even with very big cables the loss is to heat very high. The question is ofcourse if the loss is higher or lower then the loss all the PSUs make and how efficient the central PSU is.

My CPU fan spins so fast that it creates a wormhole

 

[knowan]

Soem server rooms do this, but it doesn't really make sense for desktop PC's. For one thing when they buy a PC a business will almost always buy from an OEM like Compaq, Dell, etc. These already come with a PSU. Since it works and is already paid for it makes no sense to replace it.

For another you would then have to run more power cables. Since the monitors need 110 volt AC this would be in addition to the power cables already installed. Plus there is likely a maximum length that the cables can extend before the voltage drops off.

--------------
Knowan likes you. Knowan is your friend.

 

[alltaken]

yeah i was wondering about loss of power and stuff over long distances.

perhaps a PSU for every group of cubicals or table of computers. perhaps 8 computers or somthing.

i dunno i just thought it would be better to have a single inductor than many inductors all over the place (it is an iductor that does the conversion right???)




Alltaken

 

[lhgpoobaa]

Which is one of the reasons why i got an enermax 550W unit.

As it runs WELL under full load it only puts out half the heat as the old unit, so chews up far less power. And can made a difference if your system is running 24/7.

<b>Melb_angel: PooBaa's <A HREF="http://www.secretarythemovie.com" target="_new">Secretary!</A></b>

 

[mcVAN]

You guys still don't seem to get it: This "error" might not be an error, it could be a case of dubious marketing by THG to fulfill some kind of marketing contract obligation to a client.

Client says: "Here's $20,000, Get me tons of positive PR and traffic to my website."

THG deliberately says this PSU's efficiency is 78% when it really is only 69.5%, and bases their high level coverage and recommendation based on this false info. In the span of a week or two, millions of people scan the headlines and say "oh cool, that's must be good" and never come back to the article again. <i>They will never know that THG has effectively <b>lied</b> to them. </i>

If caught, THG say "Oh so sorry for the mistake!" and changes the text. If THG issues an error statement it is hardly likely to reach more than a few. In the meanwhile, millions of people have the impression that the Fortron has 78% efficiency and because of that it is a great product THG recommends. The promotion is done, the deal is complete.

<b>Don't you get it guys? It looks like a SCAM! </b>The fact that they have not responded to this thread, not changed the "error", nor respond to my emails to the entire editorial team that did the review suggest even more strongly that it is just that -- a SCAM.

 

[alltaken]

could be a scam!!!!


who knows



Alltaken