A computer components & hardware forum. HardwareBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » HardwareBanter forum » Processors » Overclocking
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Power supply EXPLOSION



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #71  
Old July 23rd 04, 05:29 AM
kony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:39:05 -0500, David Maynard
wrote:

kony wrote:


My argument was that a 3 year warranty isn't a guarantee that it
will work for 3 years, that warranties are a marketing tool


Well, the implication you seem to be trying to make that a 'marketing tool'
is an otherwise 'useless' thing with no purpose but to 'sell' misstates the
case. 'Everything', features, cost, and yes, warranty, is a 'marketing
tool' in that people don't buy a product for 'nothing'. These things all
have a perceived 'value', and that is what a company is 'selling'.


No, I would've came right out and wrote "useless" or similar
enough if that were my opinion. I was suggesting that warranty
is not an indicator of actual lifespan.


the
manufacturer would just as soon do away with if possible,


Which flies in the face of your subsequent assertion below that it is of
"very little cost." Manufacturers generally love 'near free' marketing tools.


No, there are many "little costs" a product manufacturer would
just as soon do away with if they hadn't done so initially. It
is simply one of many expenses.


But again, the way you put it gives a distorted impression. Companies sell
perceived 'value' and cost, from whatever source, eats away at that. They'd
"just as soon do away with" advertising costs, if they could sell just as
much without it. And they'd "just as soon do away with" manufacturing
costs, if the products would just magically appear on their own. And they'd
"just as soon do away with" R&D, if they could sell the same thing forever.


Hardly. Product must be advertised if sales contracts aren't
secured for sufficient % of target manufacturing capacity.
Manufacturing costs themselves are also a very basic requirement
of producing this type of good, while a retail lenghtly warranty
is not, and futher it isn't offered for same period of time by
lower-cost competitors' products.


Problem is, all those things, and more, are necessary to do business, stay
in business, and sell product. As is a reliable product and a competitive
warranty.


Yes/no/maybe

World's biggest manufacturer, Delta, doesn't advertise retail at
all. No 3 year warranties either, yet I'd take a Delta of same
wattage over a Thermaltake any day.


There is very little cost associated
with this,


Simply not true, even from simply the direct cost aspect. Throw in
reputation and the "who'd buy this piece of junk" potential company killer
and it's a quite serious matter.


You are completely misreading what I wrote.
I made no reference to quality as a design decision, nor of
companies reputation, only that the cost of fullfilling waranty
is easily offset by a much higher retail price... nothing more
than that as it would be pointless to examine every potential
aspect of a business model in this thread just as it would be in
any other hardware part thread.


It costs just as much to make the ones 'lying around' as it does the ones
being sold to make profit, except they generate no revenue and, instead,
eat up costs for the stocking, before you even get to the cost of the
actual warranty replacement.


On the surface it would seem to cost as much for the added stock,
but it does not. Cost per unit goes down with higher number of
units.


The higher cost of the
unit previously linked (I am confident it's quite high priced
compared to other name brand PSU of same amperage specs) is way
more than enough to offset warranty replacement costs.


One certainly hopes so or else you have a seriously flawed business model.


.... which is all I was writing in the first place but it seems
you read more into it than I meant.
  #72  
Old July 23rd 04, 06:31 AM
David Maynard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

kony wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:39:05 -0500, David Maynard
wrote:


kony wrote:



My argument was that a 3 year warranty isn't a guarantee that it
will work for 3 years, that warranties are a marketing tool


Well, the implication you seem to be trying to make that a 'marketing tool'
is an otherwise 'useless' thing with no purpose but to 'sell' misstates the
case. 'Everything', features, cost, and yes, warranty, is a 'marketing
tool' in that people don't buy a product for 'nothing'. These things all
have a perceived 'value', and that is what a company is 'selling'.



No, I would've came right out and wrote "useless" or similar
enough if that were my opinion. I was suggesting that warranty
is not an indicator of actual lifespan.


That may have been what you 'meant' in the first half of the statement but
it isn't the implication of the last part.


the
manufacturer would just as soon do away with if possible,


Which flies in the face of your subsequent assertion below that it is of
"very little cost." Manufacturers generally love 'near free' marketing tools.



No, there are many "little costs" a product manufacturer would
just as soon do away with if they hadn't done so initially. It
is simply one of many expenses.


You say it's a 'marketing tool' and I point out manufacturer's like 'low
cost' marketing tools. Which is why I say it flies in the face of it being
'of little cost' because you claim they'd just as soon do away with it.
Why? if it's a marketing tool of such little cost?

But again, the way you put it gives a distorted impression. Companies sell
perceived 'value' and cost, from whatever source, eats away at that. They'd
"just as soon do away with" advertising costs, if they could sell just as
much without it. And they'd "just as soon do away with" manufacturing
costs, if the products would just magically appear on their own. And they'd
"just as soon do away with" R&D, if they could sell the same thing forever.


Hardly. Product must be advertised if sales contracts aren't
secured for sufficient % of target manufacturing capacity.


Which is what I said.

Manufacturing costs themselves are also a very basic requirement
of producing this type of good,


Which is what I said.

while a retail lenghtly warranty
is not,


That's purely your opinion.

and futher it isn't offered for same period of time by
lower-cost competitors' products.


And the cost isn't the same and the features may, or may not, be the same
and they may sell through different channels. They all go into the product
mix and business strategy.

Problem is, all those things, and more, are necessary to do business, stay
in business, and sell product. As is a reliable product and a competitive
warranty.


Yes/no/maybe


I won't even try to correlate 3 replies into 5 or more points.

World's biggest manufacturer, Delta, doesn't advertise retail at
all. No 3 year warranties either, yet I'd take a Delta of same
wattage over a Thermaltake any day.


Is this supposed to 'prove' something? Because all you've done is describe
a part of their business model and, presumably, a part of how you make a
buying decision, in that particular case. Other companies and people make
their own judgments and they're not necessarily the same as yours.


There is very little cost associated
with this,


Simply not true, even from simply the direct cost aspect. Throw in
reputation and the "who'd buy this piece of junk" potential company killer
and it's a quite serious matter.


You are completely misreading what I wrote.
I made no reference to quality as a design decision, nor of
companies reputation,


I didn't 'misread' what you wrote. I'm simply explaining that those things
are a part of the warranty, or lack thereof, 'cost' and a company's
decision process regarding them, whether you happened to have mentioned
them or not.

only that the cost of fullfilling waranty
is easily offset by a much higher retail price...


And how do you come to the presumption that anyone can just arbitrarily
raise price? much less 'easily'? Or that the 'high price' isn't a result of
other factors, such as volume, increased component cost, etc..

nothing more
than that as it would be pointless to examine every potential
aspect of a business model in this thread just as it would be in
any other hardware part thread.


Except that you are specifically making business model assumptions, if not
outright declarations, with your assertions of how much someone can
arbitrarily raise price, how 'little' warranty costs are, and the rest.

It costs just as much to make the ones 'lying around' as it does the ones
being sold to make profit, except they generate no revenue and, instead,
eat up costs for the stocking, before you even get to the cost of the
actual warranty replacement.



On the surface it would seem to cost as much for the added stock,
but it does not. Cost per unit goes down with higher number of
units.


If you're making so much 'warranty' stock as to significantly affect your
cost per unit ratios then you're in deep doo-doo.

The higher cost of the
unit previously linked (I am confident it's quite high priced
compared to other name brand PSU of same amperage specs) is way
more than enough to offset warranty replacement costs.


One certainly hopes so or else you have a seriously flawed business model.


... which is all I was writing in the first place but it seems
you read more into it than I meant.


ANY successful business model is going to have warranty costs covered in
the price of the product. That, in and of itself, is not 'revealing' of
anything.

  #73  
Old July 23rd 04, 08:22 AM
kony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:31:39 -0500, David Maynard
wrote:


No, there are many "little costs" a product manufacturer would
just as soon do away with if they hadn't done so initially. It
is simply one of many expenses.


You say it's a 'marketing tool' and I point out manufacturer's like 'low
cost' marketing tools. Which is why I say it flies in the face of it being
'of little cost' because you claim they'd just as soon do away with it.
Why? if it's a marketing tool of such little cost?


Because no matter how little the cost might be, it is still a
cost, one they would gladly reduce or eliminate if done without
impact on their bottom line... simple as that.


But again, the way you put it gives a distorted impression. Companies sell
perceived 'value' and cost, from whatever source, eats away at that. They'd
"just as soon do away with" advertising costs, if they could sell just as
much without it. And they'd "just as soon do away with" manufacturing
costs, if the products would just magically appear on their own. And they'd
"just as soon do away with" R&D, if they could sell the same thing forever.


Hardly. Product must be advertised if sales contracts aren't
secured for sufficient % of target manufacturing capacity.


Which is what I said.

Manufacturing costs themselves are also a very basic requirement
of producing this type of good,


Which is what I said.


Yes, but the difference here is one of basic requirement. It is
a basic requirement to spend the $ on manufacturing the product,
perhaps even marketing to a certain extent, but features like a
warranty are not absolutely essential, not one that lengthly.
When seeking OEM sales there is need to keep quality at a certain
standard while warranty isn't the factor it would be to retail.
In other words, the focus on their core market. IMO, dropping
quality is more of a risk to OEM sales than dropping warranty
length would be to retail sales.


while a retail lenghtly warranty
is not,


That's purely your opinion.


Name all the power supplies you know of with 3 year warranty. Do
they account for majority of sales?
Historically there is seldom if ever discussion of PSU warranty
length as criterion for selection.

Call it my opinion if you like, but it also looks statistically
sound at first glance.


World's biggest manufacturer, Delta, doesn't advertise retail at
all. No 3 year warranties either, yet I'd take a Delta of same
wattage over a Thermaltake any day.


Is this supposed to 'prove' something? Because all you've done is describe
a part of their business model and, presumably, a part of how you make a
buying decision, in that particular case. Other companies and people make
their own judgments and they're not necessarily the same as yours.


Never claimed they were did I?
You seem stuck in argument mode again, it's doubtful anything
productive will be accomplished at this point.

I downplayed the importance of a warranty period and gave an
example where it's not needed, yet you throw manufacturing costs
into the mix... One can be lowered with less devastating effects
than the other, and is.


Simply not true, even from simply the direct cost aspect. Throw in
reputation and the "who'd buy this piece of junk" potential company killer
and it's a quite serious matter.


You are completely misreading what I wrote.
I made no reference to quality as a design decision, nor of
companies reputation,


I didn't 'misread' what you wrote. I'm simply explaining that those things
are a part of the warranty, or lack thereof, 'cost' and a company's
decision process regarding them, whether you happened to have mentioned
them or not.


Certainly you did misread, as I never suggested cost-cutting to
reduce quality as a good alterative, yet that is what you wrote
about.


only that the cost of fullfilling waranty
is easily offset by a much higher retail price...


And how do you come to the presumption that anyone can just arbitrarily
raise price? much less 'easily'? Or that the 'high price' isn't a result of
other factors, such as volume, increased component cost, etc..


How would you come to the presumption that anyone can't?
Anyone CAN just raise the price in a free market, and often be
successful at that if they differentiate the product, even in
ways unessential or detrimental to it's function.

When arguing that high-price is a result of volume of such a
commodity item, we have a chicken-or-egg scenario. High price
reduces sales volume, units are selling so production goes down
or ceases... or vice-versa, the limited production in itself
artifically keeps price high only due to manufacturer's blunder
or limited resources.


nothing more
than that as it would be pointless to examine every potential
aspect of a business model in this thread just as it would be in
any other hardware part thread.


Except that you are specifically making business model assumptions,
if not
outright declarations, with your assertions of how much someone can
arbitrarily raise price, how 'little' warranty costs are, and the rest.


Clearly you made the assumptions of where I was going with my
inital posts towards some point you wanted to make. Go ahead and
make the point but keep in mind Ithat your summary of my position
is not accurate.


It costs just as much to make the ones 'lying around' as it does the ones
being sold to make profit, except they generate no revenue and, instead,
eat up costs for the stocking, before you even get to the cost of the
actual warranty replacement.



On the surface it would seem to cost as much for the added stock,
but it does not. Cost per unit goes down with higher number of
units.


If you're making so much 'warranty' stock as to significantly affect your
cost per unit ratios then you're in deep doo-doo.



Wouldn't that be a "business model assumption" you just made?
It would also be only an opinion, without knowing what the cost
is to run off a few more units from an assembly line already set
up and running, parts already purchased (so many are shared
between different models), workers trained and lines running.
Cost per unit as an average of total produced is different than
cost per unit of an additional run, the former being much higher
cost. That is a basic truth in mass manufacturing, disagree all
you like as I'm not going to bother arguing it.




ANY successful business model is going to have warranty costs covered in
the price of the product. That, in and of itself, is not 'revealing' of
anything.


.... which is basically a restatement of my original point.
  #74  
Old July 23rd 04, 09:16 AM
Franc Zabkar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:10:11 +0100, "Peter Hucker"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 06:02:25 +1000, Franc Zabkar wrote:

However, I have heard of an electrician in the
navy who used to locate fused circuits by running two fingers down a
bank of fuses until he felt a bite.


Not too bad as the current is limited by the appliances. Mind you on a big ship.....


No, the current is/was limited by the fuse. That's why it blew. ;-) I
think the procedure is not as dangerous as it may first appear for two
reasons. Firstly, I doubt whether you are likely to find a good ground
on a ship. Secondly, the current would flow from one finger tip to the
other finger tip, not directly through the heart.

And then there's my former
employer who liked to demonstrate his faith in a TV's protection
circuits by holding on to the 25kV anode as he powered on the set.
AFAIK he's still with us.


I didn't know they had protection circuits for that - is that to prevent the flyback from exploding in case of a short?

Did he feeel anything or did it take a bit to cut out?


The CRT beam current is limited to about 1mA by an ABL circuit. The
TV's power supply may also hiccup when the FBT is placed under
excessive load. Both protection mechanisms are very fast acting.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.
  #75  
Old July 23rd 04, 09:25 AM
David Maynard
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

kony wrote:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 00:31:39 -0500, David Maynard
wrote:




snip of arm waving


If you're making so much 'warranty' stock as to significantly affect your
cost per unit ratios then you're in deep doo-doo.


Wouldn't that be a "business model assumption" you just made?


No.

You wouldn't even GET to a 'business model' with those assumptions.

It would also be only an opinion, without knowing what the cost
is to run off a few more units from an assembly line already set
up and running,


You were not talking about running of a 'few more units'. You were claiming
so many more units that your volume purchasing costs are dramatically
affected. SO affected that the replacement units were 'cheap' compared to
the ones made for sale.

parts already purchased (so many are shared
between different models),


Doesn't alter the fact that your volume purchasing is driven by
manufacturing items for sale and not replacements for defective units.

workers trained and lines running.
Cost per unit as an average of total produced is different than
cost per unit of an additional run, the former being much higher
cost.


It's an 'opinion' based on experience. Failure rates high enough to
necessitate replacement production of that magnitude means your
manufacturing and/or design is hopelessly screwed up.

That is a basic truth in mass manufacturing, disagree all
you like as I'm not going to bother arguing it.


I have no problem with 'truth in mass manufacturing'. It's your invention
of wholly unrealistic scenarios I dispute.

ANY successful business model is going to have warranty costs covered in
the price of the product. That, in and of itself, is not 'revealing' of
anything.



... which is basically a restatement of my original point.


You're trying to argue the merits of fanless power supplies by attacking
the purpose and meaning of warranties because the other poster made a
presumptive claim regarding them. But it's a non sequitur for BOTH of you,
just as arguing how fast a car is by what color it's painted would be. It
might actually work once in a while, if people who like fast cars happen to
often like 'red', but it's only coincidentally related (compounding the
misperception with 'anecdotal' stories) without a direct cause and effect
relationship, just as your warranty theory doesn't really apply to your
apparent argument over fanless PSUs.

You were correct, as I agreed in an earlier post, that a long warranty
doesn't say much, if anything, about lifespan but neither does all this arm
waving about how 'cheap' a warranty is, your 'marketing tool'
characterization, or any of the rest.

  #76  
Old July 23rd 04, 09:31 AM
Peter Hucker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 18:16:28 +1000, Franc Zabkar wrote:

On Thu, 22 Jul 2004 21:10:11 +0100, "Peter Hucker"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 06:02:25 +1000, Franc Zabkar wrote:

However, I have heard of an electrician in the
navy who used to locate fused circuits by running two fingers down a
bank of fuses until he felt a bite.


Not too bad as the current is limited by the appliances. Mind you on a big ship.....


No, the current is/was limited by the fuse. That's why it blew. ;-)


What I assumed was he ran one finger along one side o the fuses and the other finger along the other side, hence zero potential difference for a working fuse, but a blown one you are in series with the applicance. Which atually doesn't limit the current as I forgot, there was a fault that blew the fuse in the first place, so he could very well be getting the full supply voltage.

I
think the procedure is not as dangerous as it may first appear for two
reasons. Firstly, I doubt whether you are likely to find a good ground
on a ship.


As above I assume one finger is live, the other is nuetral (via the (shorted) appliance).

Secondly, the current would flow from one finger tip to the
other finger tip, not directly through the heart.


Feels pretty weird that does, fingers vibrate at 50 Hertz.

And then there's my former
employer who liked to demonstrate his faith in a TV's protection
circuits by holding on to the 25kV anode as he powered on the set.
AFAIK he's still with us.


I didn't know they had protection circuits for that - is that to prevent the flyback from exploding in case of a short?

Did he feeel anything or did it take a bit to cut out?


The CRT beam current is limited to about 1mA by an ABL circuit. The
TV's power supply may also hiccup when the FBT is placed under
excessive load. Both protection mechanisms are very fast acting.


So it's not really dangerous at all? Still, it's 25 watts. Not sure how you work out what's dnagerous.


--
*****TWO BABY CONURES***** 15 parrots and increasing http://www.petersparrots.com
93 silly video clips http://www.insanevideoclips.com
1259 digital photos http://www.petersphotos.com
Served from a pentawatercooled dual silent Athlon 2.8 with terrabyte raid

If you can't beat your computer at chess, try kick boxing.
  #77  
Old July 23rd 04, 09:53 AM
do_not_spam_me
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Peter Hucker" wrote in message news:opsbh8amiiaiowgp@blue...
On 21 Jul 2004 13:21:24 -0700, do_not_spam_me wrote:


In the process of testing the water cooling, did you put a
temperature probe on each of the power components?


Transformer saturation is a big concern among power supply
designers, and heat makes them saturate at lower power
levels.


I checked the heatsink temperatures with my finger.


Did you measure the voltage on the heatsink before you did this, in
case it had 170VDC riding on it?

Didn't think anything else would need it.


Haven't you ever noticed how other transformers, including those
inside AC wall adapters, sometimes run very hot? Even the filter
inductors on the outputs of an ATX supply run so hot that temperature
sensors are sometimes mounted on them for fan speed vs. temperature
control or for thermal shutdown.

Kony wrote:

Nope, there are ZERO nice new fanless ones.
The highest quality, best specs and longest lasting PSU are all
actively cooled. Effective passive cooling for a modern system
will require such large passive 'sinks that it won't come near
fitting into a PS/2 size allocation per the PSU casing or system
chassis. Best attempt is when huge fins stick out the back of
system, but even then there is no chance PSU will last as long
unless quite specifically made with different spec and type
components inside, which none have been due to greater cost.


Some I saw said 3 year warranty :-)


I believe a test of one done by www.silentpcreview.com was not very
enthusiastic, probably because the company simply took the same basic
65-75% efficiency design that's been in PCs since 1980 and tried to
make it fanless by merely enlarging the heatsinks and adding more vent
holes. They should have instead raised the efficiency to around
85-90% because such supplies are common for non-PC purposes. The best
I've seen was 96%, but it was expensive.


Fans can be made almost silent by balancing them and mounting them on
shock absorbers. Balancing can be done by sticking a small piece of
copper or steel tape on the fan at the exact right location, but
finding that location can require patience, unless you build a strobe
light balancer. At the very least, have a fan that automatically
comes on if the temperature gets too hot. It won't make nearly as
much noise as 15 explosions.
  #78  
Old July 23rd 04, 12:15 PM
Peter Hucker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 23 Jul 2004 01:53:04 -0700, do_not_spam_me wrote:

"Peter Hucker" wrote in message news:opsbh8amiiaiowgp@blue...
On 21 Jul 2004 13:21:24 -0700, do_not_spam_me wrote:


In the process of testing the water cooling, did you put a
temperature probe on each of the power components?


Transformer saturation is a big concern among power supply
designers, and heat makes them saturate at lower power
levels.


I checked the heatsink temperatures with my finger.


Did you measure the voltage on the heatsink before you did this, in
case it had 170VDC riding on it?


The heatsink that was bolted the the earthed PSU chassis? No. Otherwise I would have done, as banging my head on the underside of the desk when I got a shock would not be very nice! Besides which, I'd be passing 170 volts through the water cooling system to the CPUs!

Didn't think anything else would need it.


Haven't you ever noticed how other transformers, including those
inside AC wall adapters, sometimes run very hot? Even the filter
inductors on the outputs of an ATX supply run so hot that temperature
sensors are sometimes mounted on them for fan speed vs. temperature
control or for thermal shutdown.


I found one hot inductor/coil/transformer/whatever it is (just two wires to it) that was warm, I put a passive heatsinnk on that and it kept it at less than doby temperature.

Kony wrote:

Nope, there are ZERO nice new fanless ones.
The highest quality, best specs and longest lasting PSU are all
actively cooled. Effective passive cooling for a modern system
will require such large passive 'sinks that it won't come near
fitting into a PS/2 size allocation per the PSU casing or system
chassis. Best attempt is when huge fins stick out the back of
system, but even then there is no chance PSU will last as long
unless quite specifically made with different spec and type
components inside, which none have been due to greater cost.


Some I saw said 3 year warranty :-)


I believe a test of one done by www.silentpcreview.com was not very
enthusiastic, probably because the company simply took the same basic
65-75% efficiency design that's been in PCs since 1980 and tried to
make it fanless by merely enlarging the heatsinks and adding more vent
holes. They should have instead raised the efficiency to around
85-90% because such supplies are common for non-PC purposes. The best
I've seen was 96%, but it was expensive.


75% to me sounds rediculously low, but then I don't know much about the design of switched modes. I thought switched modes gave of a lot less heat than the old ones?

Fans can be made almost silent by balancing them and mounting them on
shock absorbers. Balancing can be done by sticking a small piece of
copper or steel tape on the fan at the exact right location, but
finding that location can require patience, unless you build a strobe
light balancer. At the very least, have a fan that automatically
comes on if the temperature gets too hot. It won't make nearly as
much noise as 15 explosions.


I have actually got a thermostat here and some large fans to try this with. If they come on a lot, or are too loud at 5 volts, then perhaps I'll go and buy some panaflows which Kony claims are very quiet.



--
*****TWO BABY CONURES***** 15 parrots and increasing http://www.petersparrots.com
93 silly video clips http://www.insanevideoclips.com
1259 digital photos http://www.petersphotos.com
Served from a pentawatercooled dual silent Athlon 2.8 with terrabyte raid

Before marriage, a man yearns for the woman he loves. After marriage, the 'Y' becomes silent.
  #79  
Old July 23rd 04, 10:05 PM
kony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Fri, 23 Jul 2004 03:25:39 -0500, David Maynard
wrote:


snip

This is drifting off-topic and with no possible productive
outcome since you still assume you know what I mean without my
ever writing it. Since it'd pointless to argue in this way I'll
leave you to your assumptions.
  #80  
Old July 23rd 04, 10:11 PM
kony
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 23 Jul 2004 01:53:04 -0700,
(do_not_spam_me) wrote:

snip

Some I saw said 3 year warranty :-)


I believe a test of one done by
www.silentpcreview.com was not very
enthusiastic, probably because the company simply took the same basic
65-75% efficiency design that's been in PCs since 1980 and tried to
make it fanless by merely enlarging the heatsinks and adding more vent
holes. They should have instead raised the efficiency to around
85-90% because such supplies are common for non-PC purposes. The best
I've seen was 96%, but it was expensive.


yes, that is a pretty good summary... they add large passive
'sinks but don't redesign whole thing. Pushing limits of part
spec isn't a good idea... if a part is spec'd up to 105C or so,
that doesn't mean it'll last very long at that temp, nor even at
50-75% of it.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
basic power problem BrianBloodaxe General 19 July 26th 04 08:48 PM
help, please, with Compaq Presario power supply problem Jacques Clouseau General 6 June 9th 04 06:44 PM
power supply, or ...? ynotssor General 10 June 1st 04 01:19 AM
How can I make motherboard to restart after power loss automatically? Amiran General 1 September 24th 03 11:35 PM
Power Supply on its way out? w_tom General 5 July 31st 03 03:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 HardwareBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.