Enermax Revolution X’t II 750W Power Supply Review
Enermax recently released a successor to the Revolution X't line and the new models are made by CWT, featuring 80 PLUS Gold efficiency, Japanese caps and a quality fan. Today, we're testing the ERX750AWT model.
Why you can trust Tom's Hardware
Efficiency, Temperature And Noise
Efficiency
Our efficiency testing procedure is detailed here.
Using the results from the previous page, we plotted a chart showing the ERX750AWT's efficiency at low loads, and loads from 10 to 110 percent of its maximum-rated capacity.
Under normal loads, the ERX750AWT is highly efficient and passes the high-end Corsair RM750i/x units, losing only to EVGA's 750 GQ. Efficiency isn't as good under light loads though, showing that this platform is tuned with normal loads in mind.
Efficiency At Low Loads
In the following tests, we measure the efficiency of the ERX750AWT at loads significantly lower than 10 percent of its maximum capacity (the lowest load the 80 PLUS standard measures). The loads we dialed were 20, 40, 60 and 80W. This is important for representing when a PC is idle, with power-saving features turned on.
Test # | 12V | 5V | 3.3V | 5VSB | DC/AC (Watts) | Efficiency | Fan Speed (RPM) | Fan Noise | PF/AC Volts |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 1.206A | 0.491A | 0.469A | 0.195A | 19.64 | 60.36% | 805 | 30.1 dB(A) | 0.894 |
12.073V | 5.085V | 3.400V | 5.086V | 32.54 | 115.1V | ||||
2 | 2.441A | 0.979A | 0.970A | 0.391A | 39.73 | 78.18% | 805 | 30.1 dB(A) | 0.938 |
12.078V | 5.080V | 3.394V | 5.078V | 50.82 | 115.1V | ||||
3 | 3.674A | 1.465A | 1.475A | 5.070A | 59.78 | 83.24% | 805 | 30.1 dB(A) | 0.960 |
12.074V | 5.075V | 3.388V | 5.070V | 71.82 | 115.1V | ||||
4 | 4.903A | 1.974A | 1.949A | 0.787A | 79.78 | 86.08% | 805 | 30.1 dB(A) | 0.970 |
12.072V | 5.071V | 3.383V | 5.065V | 92.68 | 115.1V |
At very light loads (<40W), this PSU isn't particularly efficient. Only during the last two tests does the ERX750AWT pass 80 percent. The fan rotates at its lowest speed during those benchmarks, generating very little noise.
5VSB Efficiency
The ATX specification states that 5VSB standby supply efficiency should be as high as possible, recommending 50 percent or higher efficiency with 100mA of load, 60 percent or higher with 250mA of load and 70 percent or higher with 1A or more of load.
We take four measurements: one each at 100, 250 and 1000mA, and one with the full load the 5VSB rail can handle.
Test # | 5VSB | DC/AC (Watts) | Efficiency | PF/AC Volts |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 0.102A | 0.52 | 67.53% | 0.074 |
5.088V | 0.77 | 115.1V | ||
2 | 0.252A | 1.28 | 74.85% | 0.153 |
5.085V | 1.71 | 115.1V | ||
3 | 1.002A | 5.08 | 76.28% | 0.367 |
5.067V | 6.66 | 115.1V | ||
4 | 2.502A | 12.60 | 74.25% | 0.472 |
5.035V | 16.97 | 115.1V |
The 5VSB rail is very inefficient, which is a shame in a Gold-rated PSU.
Power Consumption In Idle And Standby
In the table below, you'll find the power consumption and voltage values of all rails (except -12V) when the PSU is idle (powered on, but without any load on its rails), and the power consumption when it's in standby mode (without any load, at 5VSB).
Mode | 12V | 5V | 3.3V | 5VSB | Watts | PF/AC Volts |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Idle | 12.190V | 5.090V | 3.407V | 5.091V | 9.10 | 0.553 |
115.1V | ||||||
Standby | 0.12 | 0.012 | ||||
115.1V |
Phantom power is low enough, though that doesn't seem to improve the 5VSB rail's efficiency.
Fan RPM, Delta Temperature And Output Noise
Our mixed noise testing is described in detail here.
The first chart below illustrates the cooling fan's speed (in RPM), and the delta between input and output temperature. The results were obtained at 36 °C (96.8 °F) to 47 °C (116.6 °F) ambient temperature.
The next chart shows the cooling fan's speed (again, in RPM) and output noise. We measured acoustics from one meter away, inside a small, custom-made anechoic chamber with internals completely covered in sound-proofing material (be quiet! Noise Absorber kit). Background noise inside the chamber was below 18 dB(A) during testing, and the results were obtained with the PSU operating at 36 °C (96.8 °F) to 47 °C (116.6 °F) ambient temperature.
The following graph illustrates the fan's output noise over the PSU's operating range. The same conditions of the above graph apply to our measurements, though the ambient temperature was between at 28 °C (82.4 °F) to 30 °C (86 °F).
The fan's noise is kept close to 30 dB(A) for most of the ERX750AWT's operating range and under normal thermal conditions. This makes it an especially quiet unit that won't bother anyone with a sensitivity to fan noise.
Current page: Efficiency, Temperature And Noise
Prev Page Load Regulation, Hold-Up Time And Inrush Current Next Page Cross-Load Tests And Infrared ImagesStay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Aris Mpitziopoulos is a contributing editor at Tom's Hardware, covering PSUs.
Security experts claim new 'Perfctl' malware could pose a risk to any Linux server
Lunar Lake allegedly smokes Z1 Extreme handheld gaming champ in early gaming benchmarks
CUDA-beating ZLUDA breathes new life with financial backing from unknown party — pivots to AI workloads across multiple GPU vendors
-
powernod The fact that the PSU collapsed during the "Hold-UP time / Power_OK" tests, clearly proves -in my opinion-, how important these tests are, since they are an indication of how properly a PSU can react during stressful situations. ;)Reply -
turkey3_scratch Good unit. Has some things that could be improved, but good. Wish there was much more to say.Reply -
Aris_Mp actually I rarely see a PSU going boom in these tests. Will wait for the second sample to arrive and see how it goes under the same scenario.Reply -
turkey3_scratch 17939497 said:actually I rarely see a PSU going boom in these tests. Will wait for the second sample to arrive and see how it goes under the same scenario.
Oh I thought you already got the second sample and it tested fine, guess I misread that. -
GearUp The older line X't have been selling for around $82 so I would have hoped for a lower price as well. Personal experience still favors Enermax since 0/6 of my units failed within 3 months while it was 1/3 for each of 2 different competitors. I still factor in return costs at this point.Reply -
Aris_Mp Just finished testing the second sample and no fireworks this time, so apparently the incident with the first sample (during the hold-up time tests) was just an isolated one.Reply
In addition I confirmed that there is no OCP on the minor rails either, as I suspected. -
android_dev The older Enermax Revolution 87+ series have better build quality ,features and performance than their X't counterparts. Then again it was a more expensive platform to begin with.Reply -
GearUp Correction on returns: Only one supply was returned within 3 months which is good for returns. The other failed due to the motherboard or graphics card after 16 months. Some supplies have return rates well over 20 percent.Reply