Fractal Design Edison M Series 750W Power Supply 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.

Quality Construction And Good Performance

In our opinion, Fractal Design made the right decision to team up with Seasonic to build its Edison M PSUs. Seasonic enjoys a good reputation and has lots of experience in this field. The Edison series offers reliability and high performance in the mainstream and mid-capacity PSU segment, which are of high interest to most users. The Edison M 750W PSU we evaluated today performed well overall, and if it didn’t have a sudden increase in ripple at 5V during higher loads, it could have easily achieved a better performance score. In addition, we would have liked to see lower inrush current readings and a bit higher efficiency levels. This is definitely an affordable Seasonic platform, designed to keep costs down and not offer high-end performance. However, we had to compare it with more advanced products, and the competition in this market segment is tough.

This product's high price is its Achilles’ heel. Priced more aggressively, it could be considered a good deal, but at the time of this review, it's not. Fractal Design should reconsider what it's charging for the Edison M 750W, especially if the company wants it to do well in the U.S. market. Moreover, under normal conditions and under light loads, the PSU is quiet enough. However, when it's overworked, the fan can be really noisy, which won’t make most users happy. So, if you don’t want noisy system components and your system can apply high stress to a PSU with 750W capacity, then I suggest you look elsewhere.

Although Seasonic and Fractal Design do use a good-quality FDB fan in this unit, the fan has a smaller diameter than the typical 140mm fans found in most PSUs today. Therefore, to remove the heat from the PSU’s internals, it rotates at increased speeds, thus producing more noise. The truth is that smaller-diameter fans can offer more focused airflow than larger ones. However, we believe that in high-efficiency units like this one, a larger fan could do the job equally well, at the same time significantly lowering the output noise under full load conditions.


MORE: Who's Who In Power Supplies, 2014: Brands Vs. Manufacturers
MORE: Power Supplies in the Forums

Aris Mpitziopoulos is a Contributing Editor for Tom's Hardware, covering Power Supplies.

Follow us on Twitter @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

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
  • maxwellmelon
    there are several issues with there testing. first power good signal is not a good base for testing as its simple to "Cheat" the 16ms hold up.how about actually watching power good vs output voltages also. also the thermal camera scall changes every time how about using a fix scale as modifying scales leads to making things show hot that are not really that hot.
    Reply
  • Aris_Mp
    First of all I measure AC loss to PWR_OK hold-up time since it is much easier to show it in my graphs and explain it. For me it is as easy to measure "AC loss to PWR_OK hold-up time" plus "PWR_OK inactive to DC loss delay" but I prefer it the way I do it.

    Also where do you base this? That the PG signal is simple to cheat and the manufacturers actually do this? From the moment the mainboards take seriously into account PG if this was the case then most likely there would be huge problems with lots of them. According to the ATX spec PG is de-asserted to a low state when any of the main rails falls out of 5% v. reg. Simply as that.

    It just gives room for 1 ms till the PG signal sees the change at least in the ATX spec.

    As for the thermal camera how it can show things hotter than it is? The scale is for this reason and from the moment the camera sees something from a different angle and a different region the scale is changing automatically. Nothing I can do about it. This is why I provide also actual temperature readings on all IR images.


    Reply
  • PaulBags
    A quick opinion on the edison vs similar range seasonic own brand would be nice. Is it a new design, or an exact rebrand of a seasonic design? Quality of components vs?
    Reply
  • Aris_Mp
    This is based on the same platform with the Seasonic G series and I state this in the "look inside" page. I haven't tested the G750 so far but I believe that since they are based on the same platform performance will be similar. Seasonic might used Enesol polymer caps (something that they usually do in their G units) instead of Chemi-Cons that Fractal chose, but both cap brands are very good so don't expect to see any real performance difference on them (although I prefer Chemi-Cons).

    So the design is nothing new and this is a Seasonic rebrand with minor differences at the internals (most likely the caps selection as I stated above).
    Reply
  • Aris_Mp
    Forgot to mention that besides caps the cooling fan is also different since on all Seasonic G units that I have tested so far have an ADDA double-ball bearing fan while the Edison PSU uses an FDB fan. However lately I noticed that many Seasonic units use Hong Hua FDB fans instead of ADDA double-ball bearing ones, so it is possible that this change might have affected the new bunches of G units.
    Reply
  • redgarl
    The Newton Series is much better.
    Reply
  • Sakkura
    You say that you'd prefer if the unit was fully modular, but I don't really see the point.

    The fixed cables are the ones that will always be in use for any system using a 750W power supply, so the ability to disconnect those cables would not be beneficial. In fact it would lead to higher cost and also an extra point of failure and a slight loss of efficiency since a connector can never quite match an uninterrupted cable.
    Reply
  • Aris_Mp
    fully modular cables provide easier installation and cable management. Also you can easily change them with longer/shorter ones if you like or replace them in case there is a problem with them or simply you want something fancier.

    Loss of efficiency isn't a reason any more, on the contrary with bus bars or thick cables transferring power to the modular PCB energy losses can be minimized. In addition no cables block the secondary side caps, something that besides increasing their lifetime also allows for more relaxed fan profiles and better airflow inside the chassis.

    Also the cost of a semi-modular to fully modular isn't high and in a 750 W PSU that costs 140 bucks already the cost reason doesn't stand (for fully modular design).
    Reply
  • Sakkura
    15924995 said:
    fully modular cables provide easier installation and cable management. Also you can easily change them with longer/shorter ones if you like or replace them in case there is a problem with them or simply you want something fancier.
    No they don't. The connector on the power supply end adds complexity and reduces cable flexibility.

    You cannot easily change them because other cables are often incompatible - there is no common standard for modular PSU cables. Using incompatible cables can be downright dangerous. Here is a cautionary tale.
    Reply
  • Aris_Mp
    I didn't say that you can change them with anything, did I? Also it is common sense that every manufacturer uses their one design on modular cables. Thing is that with modular PSUs you can get an extra cable kit since most manufacturers sell one for their PSUs (e.g. Corsair, EVGA).

    Also I still cannot understand how the connector on the PSU end adds complexity and reduces cable flexibility! Cable flexibility depends on the gauges' thickness and not on the cables modularity design (or not).

    Anyway I believe I made my opinion clear on why I prefer fully-modular PSUs.
    Reply