EVGA 850 B3 PSU Review

Reviews
By
published

Why you can trust Tom's Hardware Our expert reviewers spend hours testing and comparing products and services so you can choose the best for you. Find out more about how we test.

Performance, Value, Noise & Efficiency

Performance Rating

The following graph shows the 850 B3's total performance rating, comparing it to other units we have tested. To be more specific, the tested unit is shown as 100 percent, and every other unit's performance is shown relative to it.

Click Here For More Results

Compared to the SPR-0850F-R and EVGA 850 BQ, the 850 B3 is way ahead. But keep in mind that this PSU didn't survive our protection features testing, which is obviously a problem. Since we don't have any other 850 B3 samples to re-test, we won't alter the PSU's performance rating for now. If we do determine its platform suffers a major design flaw, we will revise our marks accordingly.

Performance Per Dollar

The following chart may be the most interesting to many of you because it depicts the unit's performance-per-dollar score. We looked up the current price of each PSU on popular online shops and used those prices and all relative performance numbers to calculate the index. If the specific unit wasn't available in the United States, we searched for it in popular European Union shops, converting the listed price to USD (without VAT). Note that all of the numbers in the following graph are normalized by the rated power of each PSU.  

Click Here For More Results

The 850 B3's performance per dollar rating is amazing. We can't emphasize this enough, though: our store-bought example died during the OPP evaluation, so you're assuming some risk by buying this model.

Noise Rating

The graph below depicts the cooling fan's average noise over the PSU's operating range, with an ambient temperature between 30°C and 32°C (86°F to 89.6°F).

Click Here For More Results

For such a low-efficiency PSU, we gather some impressively low noise results. Of course, if you want to see less than 30 dB(A), you have to go with a higher-efficiency power supply.

Efficiency Rating

The following graph shows the average efficiency of the PSU throughout its operating range, with an ambient temperature close to 30°C.

Click Here For More Results

Compared to PSUs with higher efficiency ratings, the 850 B3 naturally trails. But it's still ahead of its direct competition.


MORE: Best Power Supplies


MORE: How We Test Power Supplies


MORE: All Power Supply Content

See more Power Supplies Reviews
Aris Mpitziopoulos
Aris Mpitziopoulos
Contributing Editor

Aris Mpitziopoulos is a contributing editor at Tom's Hardware, covering PSUs.

12 Comments Comment from the forums
  • orionfotl
    There's a typo in the Final Analysis: "Although we're glad the 850 B3 didn't blow up like the 450W model, this is our second (so fat) B3-series power supply to die on the bench."
    So fat.

    Shame on the PSU.
    Reply
  • Aris_Mp
    (so far) Thanks!
    Reply
  • Realist9
    Part of what I got from this review and the associated charts is that my next psu will likely be a Corsair unit.
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    It seems like the general wisdom is still "Don't buy a PSU unless it has a 7- to 10-year warranty." The best products from the best OEMs always come with those warranties lately.
    Reply
  • Aris_Mp
    If you ask me the warranty isn't an indication from the moments it is 5 years long. On the other hand when a company avoids sending some specific PSUs for review, then the whole thing looks suspicious.
    Reply
  • dstarr3
    20217010 said:
    If you ask me the warranty isn't an indication from the moments it is 5 years long. On the other hand when a company avoids sending some specific PSUs for review, then the whole thing looks suspicious.

    I don't necessary mean that longer warranty = better product. I just mean that there are some OEMs that are better than the rest, and their best PSUs are the best on the market, and all those best PSUs happen to have 7- to 10-year warranties on them. So if you see that warranty on a PSU right now, you can reasonably assume that it is one of the best models from one of the best OEMs.
    Reply
  • Olle P
    I don't totally agree with the "Pros" and "Cons":
    * Six 8-pin PCIe-connectors are supposed to be capable of delivering up to 900W. This PSU can't handle that.
    * The efficiency is as advertised. That's neither a "Con" nor a "Pro". (In fact I'm impressed with the efficiency at 20W load. Expected worse.)
    * Sleeve bearing is what makes the fan relatively quiet, so it's not a "Con" per se. Had it been a ball bearing fan you'd written "High noise level" as a "Con" instead.
    Reply
  • Aris_Mp
    Efficiency is a con in general. It is low

    If the fan had DBB and an optimal fan profile then it wouldn't be a con. A sleeve bearing fan in a 100 buck PSU doesn't look good and those type of bearings are suited for horizontal installation so they should normally be avoided in PSUs.
    Reply
  • obsidian86
    Seasonic focus 850 currently for $10 more than this settles it
    Reply
  • al3xand3r
    Hi Aris, congratulations for the wonderful review and all of your work.
    I've seen all of your reviews, but one thing I do not understand compared to other review sites and that's related to the advanced transient tests. For example, the be quiet! Pure Power 10 600W PSU, in Advanced Transient Test at +12V, 20% - 20ms has a voltage drop of 0.211V. At 50% load 20 ms is a voltage drop of 0.222 volts. Instead, at ardOCP, the same PSU records a 0.520 volt voltage drop at 20% load - 10 ms and 0.540 volts at 50% load – 10ms. And that's a huge difference. And I do not think this difference is because of the reduced time from 20ms to 10ms because at 1ms wich is tougher the drops it's not as high. What is wrong with ardOCP methodology?
    Is it possible that a quality PSU like this to have a voltage drop in load so high (0.52 Volts)? And that's just an example. At all the PSU’s I've seen on both sites are differences like this. Same as when you were doing only 50ms or 200ms. Is there any explanation for these figures that do not coincide?
    Thank you
    Reply