• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

oc'd e6600 and 8800GTX powered from 380W PSU - why not?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
Thunder - i can see how it can be taken as an endorsement, easy. on the other hand, it's hardly a danger - i do want to believe that at least most people who read articles in places like overclockers.com can make up their own minds based on fact and research. so, i don't think i've convinced the populace to rush and buy puny psu's to run their monster rigs yet :p

now, the experts. don't take me wrong, i like big and powerful things as much as the next guy but lets face it, the question of longevity of smaller psu's is not answered. so far no one came up with hard data or calculations to support their claim except Neur0mancer (good work there man, i still want to see more data though, if you can).

i'd like to believe the experts but only if they have proof. numbers, graphs, statistics - that's what i want to see.

as for the criticism, that could have been a problem if i were a sensitive type :p . i don't care, the more people talk about a subject, the more we learn.


Techno - yes, good point about the rails. it's a bit more complicated though, breakers and all. i was planning to paste GlasMan's explanation here, thanks for reminding me.

here it is, GlasMan's of pcper.com nice insight into how rails in psu work:

Almost all have one 12v source very few have them seperately regulated, but each rail is amperage limited with a circuit breaker that will shut down the psu if you draw too much. This hodgepodge was developed to meet the ATX 2.0 and 2.1 spec. .Some recent psu's quietly let out that they are not actually current limited, but I would have to go with their published specs when trying to choose one. With the end of the ATX 20 amp limit, I hope to see more flexible ratings of the rail(s). It also seems that sometimes the only difference between 2 psu's of the same brand is the amperage limit/rail (see the TT 1200 and 1000 for one example). On a multi rail psu that didn't have them limited, the 1000 would be be more useful then the rating of a 1200 (an example using the #'s, not directly related to the TT's)
Another improvement I hope to see is information of what connectors are linked to which 12v rail.
Research Silverstone, I believe their top psu had a problem 2 pci-e connectors with one on the cpu rail so a 2nd card would overload it, while a 3rd rail was limited to regular molex's. Since corrected.
Many of the high watt psu's devote a rail per pci-e connector, so like the cpu rail, you have lost half the output. On a load tester they can load the rail to max but in real life you would have to splice in another connector to fully load the rail. This isn't tested in reviews, mostly because it is extremely hard to get a computer to fully stress the rails (you need 4 gpu's to get close).
Of course people are now used to drastically increasing power requirements due to 12v cpu's, gpu development, and sli, plus quad cores upcoming. Overkill is the word if you want your investment to last. With split rails rated 12v wattage levels have climbed dramatically, much higher than the actual amount needed, indeed faster in fact then a computer can be built to use it* and in the US more than house wiring can deliver (2000 watt psu's soon for 220v regions) *I am going to try though with my "Folding Farm in a Box" 8 cores and at least 4 gpu's.
With accurate info on how the power is distributed (for instance, which rail does the 12v delivered through the 24 pin delivered too? Why have the 8pin etx connector on a seprate rail than the 4 pin atx?) and on your power requirements you can work out which psu meets your needs with a safety margin without paying $300-500 for one that can do everything, while making up to 50% of the output unusable, more unused.

Capacitor life is effected by temp, I believe 18%/10C, not load directly.

Silent pc'ers want to have their psu at maximum efficiency at their normal power levels. Less waste heat means lower fan speeds to get rid of the excess heat. Over clockers on the other hand want to increase power needs beyond the best voltage regulation limits of such a psu and doesn't care about the heat or waste so haven't thought about it. It is only recently that it has been given any thought. There is a lot of useful information at sites like silentpcreview.com. They are really trying to solve many of the same problems, just causing them for different reasons. Many overclockers seem a bit stuffy to the uninitiated as well.
 
rainless said:
@Neuro

Most of what you said was wrong (i.e. "electronics require more power as they age.") I'll elaborate further, but right now I'm too tired, but I'll draw-up a chart when I wake up.


Sweet I am looking forward to it, I have no problem admitting I am wrong if I am proven so. (Heck I will argue stuff I KNOW is wrong just till someone proves just for the sake of arguing) however in this case.. I do not believe I am. You mentioned chart so I will provide one.

figure1.gif


(note: this is not my chart but taken from a company that manufacturers capacitors.)

EDIT: Those are decade hours... so one hour means (i think) one hour a day for ten years... Or just multiply by 3650... Which is what 5 months of 24/7 usage?
EDIT: Just found the same term used on another dielectric site that uses it to mean *10.. as in the lossless capacitors change 5% in 10,000 hours and the general class 2 dieclectrics change 15% in 10,000 hours.

Take note that teh x7r is considered an "ageless capicator"
Meaning it doesnt age.. .yet we see it actually does. granted it is less then 1% age coefficent. 4-7% aging coeficent is consider average with the old wet style running up to 20% From what I understand if you take them off and bake them at 130-150C for an hour it realigns the crystals and in effect "deageifys" them. So technically caps dont "age" with maintenance. (high voltage can also realign the crystals.. in fact high voltage (and even soldering) can damage the caps by causing a misalignment of the crystals in the semiconductor)

Now something im not 100% on. To give you fuel to dispute my theory

Why it causes more elctrical consumption. Im not an EE so I cant tell you if the semi-conductor crystal becoming realigned cause more conductivness, and there fore the psu has to work overtime to try and supply the rated voltage (would be effected by the draw not the Cap itself) or if the semiconducter becomes more of an insulator andtherfore needs more juice to "bridge the gap" and this is both a drain on PSU as well as dangerous for the draw items because a larger current is getting through. Because... a larger curreent is need to jump the plates... but the insulator doesnt actually reduce the current any..

If an EE can explain that I would appreciate it.


WOW

I am in good company if JG thinks the article is dangerous :)


ADdendum: I n a year.. .when you see a glut of RMAed under 500W psus on ebay... you will be able to get a good deal for your older PC :)
 
Last edited:
lemme see... the graph than means, what...

does it mean that at one hour a day full load (or is it just some regular theoretical load or is it 20%?) a regular wet capacitor will age 15% in 10 years? or is it 27%? sorry, i've slept through Materials :p
 
mcoleg said:
lemme see... the graph than means, what...

does it mean that at one hour a day full load (or is it just some regular theoretical load or is it 20%?) a regular wet capacitor will age 15% in 10 years? or is it 27%? sorry, i've slept through Materials :p

no those are <1% (x7r) and 3% ( i think) capicators. Wets would ruin the cahrt.. .and totally make my point... im trying not to be subjective, but objective...only represent what is used ... these are normal caps... one is common (the 3 percent) the x7r are high quality caps (are they the solid state caps... i dont know, they are the long lasting stuff...and less then 1% is LONG lasting )) mobos dont use wet caps ...you need to hit up old ham radios for that stuff...ceramics is common now..

And no a wet cap will be at 20% degradation in the 1 hour time frame on that chart....(which equals 3650 hours of use).

Want to test the low wattage theory? (technically low amperage)

Run folding for 1 year and if your 380watt PSU still runs... then bully you are right :) Although that doesnt incluse vidcard draw does it... hmm still i bet it doesnt


EDIT : I actually got into a nice discussion about this wit freagent and no proof was provided on either source of course.. this was just a discussion... He argues that CPUs are designated to run their ability for their life span. Whic hwe both agreed was 10 years. What we diagreed on was "lifespan"

Servers are designed to run 24/7 desktop PCs are not... its the differnce between the 1 million hour Mean time before fail of a an enterprise class drive liek a raptor... and the 100,000 hour mean time before fail of a standard drive. in a a normal desktop computer... you are not going to hit either....

People can argue that silicon doesnt age... those people havent seen pics of pamela lee recently... :)


EVERYthing ages.. cant fight the truth...
 
Last edited:
Neur0mancer said:
mobos dont use wet caps ...you need to hit up old ham radios for that stuff...ceramics is common now..

If by wet caps you mean electrolytics, they are used on about 99.5% of all the mobos I can think of. Good 'lytics will last years, if not decades depending on the environment they're used in. I have two Hitachi TV's made in 1975 that are only now losing some of the smaller Chemi-Con caps in there to Father Time.
 
Neur0mancer - thanks for the info man

Wolf - in that picture, looks like there's a few small ceramic and polyester film capacitors as well? i haven't looked too closely at electronics in a while :p
 
mcoleg said:
Wolf - in that picture, looks like there's a few small ceramic and polyester film capacitors as well?

There are others, but the important input and output filtering is done by electrolytics.
 
Well I just spent the last hour reading all 4 pages of this thread.

Lots of good info mcoleg. Just want to say kudos for your efforts :)

Are you still running the 380?



Wolf... my understanding was that "wet" caps are the old style of elctrolytic that used paper soaked in grease as the semi-conducter, versus the dry medium used in today's caps.
(I was told they stopped using wet caps MANY years ago.. like the 60s/70s not sure of this though just what I was told).
 
Wolf, Neur0mancer - sorry guys; trying to get info on MTTF (or MTBF, as they call it here...), correlation of it with life expectancy; etc, etc...

a bit tiresome; i think i am trying to go about it the hard way.
 
Neur0mancer said:
Sweet I am looking forward to it, I have no problem admitting I am wrong if I am proven so. (Heck I will argue stuff I KNOW is wrong just till someone proves just for the sake of arguing) however in this case.. I do not believe I am. You mentioned chart so I will provide one.

figure1.gif


(note: this is not my chart but taken from a company that manufacturers capacitors.)

EDIT: Those are decade hours... so one hour means (i think) one hour a day for ten years... Or just multiply by 3650... Which is what 5 months of 24/7 usage?


Take note that teh x7r is considered an "ageless capicator"
Meaning it doesnt age.. .yet we see it actually does. granted it is less then 1% age coefficent. 4-7% aging coeficent is consider average with the old wet style running up to 20% From what I understand if you take them off and bake them at 130-150C for an hour it realigns the crystals and in effect "deageifys" them. So technically caps dont "age" with maintenance. (high voltage can also realign the crystals.. in fact high voltage (and even soldering) can damage the caps by causing a misalignment of the crystals in the semiconductor)

Now something im not 100% on. To give you fuel to dispute my theory

Why it causes more elctrical consumption. Im not an EE so I cant tell you if the semi-conductor crystal becoming realigned cause more conductivness, and there fore the psu has to work overtime to try and supply the rated voltage (would be effected by the draw not the Cap itself) or if the semiconducter becomes more of an insulator andtherfore needs more juice to "bridge the gap" and this is both a drain on PSU as well as dangerous for the draw items because a larger current is getting through. Because... a larger curreent is need to jump the plates... but the insulator doesnt actually reduce the current any..

If an EE can explain that I would appreciate it.


WOW

I am in good company if JG thinks the article is dangerous :)


ADdendum: I n a year.. .when you see a glut of RMAed under 500W psus on ebay... you will be able to get a good deal for your older PC :)

So what is "CHG", and why does it look like it's actually consuming *less* power over time?
 
rainless said:
So what is "CHG", and why does it look like it's actually consuming *less* power over time?

I'm guessing % Charge? Note that graph only shows that caps do in fact age over time, but it does not in any way indicate that such aging is related to the amount of current coming in.

Caps are usually rated for a certain voltage and temperature of operation, and those will kill the cap if exceeded, but more current shouldn't.

In fact it is the charging of the caps which causes a large inrush current when a PSU is first turned on:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inrush_current

As far as the surge at startup from power usage for actual components, I don't think thats a big deal, sure all the drives spin up at the same time, but your CPU and GPU which are the major power abusers are nowhere near full load.
 
I did not say that the Aging was related to the load (or did I)..

Rainless said that computers dont age. I said they do.

Thats why I posted the chart. To show capicator aging. I would not doubt that on an overclocked (overvolted) system that caps age faster due to draw on the device beyond its rated capacity. But I am not saying it does, just that I would not be surprised to find out it did. Just read on Johnson Dielectrics... Time temperature and voltage all have an effect of capicator aging. (voltage is munite but im sure they are assuming within specs)

Also in my previous post when trying to figure out why the draw was harder on the power supply... current should be teh first part and voltage the second part not the other way around (too many :beer: sitting in front of the keyboard I guess :))

EDIT: Oh yah CHG = change.


Good read on how and why can be found here
 
Last edited:
Neur0mancer said:
I did not say that the Aging was related to the load (or did I)..

Rainless said that computers dont age. I said they do.

Thats why I posted the chart. To show capicator aging. I would not doubt that on an overclocked (overvolted) system that caps age faster due to draw on the device beyond its rated capacity. But I am not saying it does, just that I would not be surprised to find out it did. Just read on Johnson Dielectrics... Time temperature and voltage all have an effect of capicator aging. (voltage is munite but im sure they are assuming within specs)

Also in my previous post when trying to figure out why the draw was harder on the power supply... current should be teh first part and voltage the second part not the other way around (too many :beer: sitting in front of the keyboard I guess :))

EDIT: Oh yah CHG = change.


Good read on how and why can be found here

Well you mentioned PSU load at startup and then capacitor aging and it seemed like you were trying to link them to form a cohesive argument.

Capacitor aging does in fact accelerate indirectly with load in a poorly designed psu because higher load = higher temperature. But in a well designed PSU this should not be a problem as proper cooling would be provided.

I am fairly certain that the amount of current will not significantly effect the life of the capacitor especially in a situation like this where we are talking about percentage increases and not order of magnitude increases in current. The amount of current passing through the capacitor actually depends directly on the voltage across the capacitor (or the derivative of that voltage actually) and the capacitance, so I'm not sure that an increased load CAN force more current through a cap unless of course the voltage changes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capacitor#Energy_storage
 
funnyperson1, Neur0mancer, rainless - i've read up on different caps for several days...

as i mentioned before - i've slept through Materials :p ; have to catch up big time.

the conclusion so far - the electrolytic capacitors age because of heat. simply put - electrolytic fluid evaporates over time.

the solid variety of capacitors will succumb to current damage and deterioration over time. they are not as heat-dependent as electrolytic capacitors though.

if we look at the tolerances for both and discount infant mortality and improper maintenance, majority of modern caps, electrolytic or solid, should survive inside a psu for the duration of their rated life-expectancy with pretty high loads all the while.

the improper maintenance is the subject i am researching right now. it seems like a good way to kill a psu.

here's why - majority of load-bearing caps used in psu's today are electrolytic. heat it up and boom goes the cap :p

i found one that claims to have solid capacitors:

http://www.seasonic.com.tw/new/twevent20070612.htm

if more follow the suite, we'll have to start doing those aging calculations pretty soon.



edit: oh yah, another thing. tell me if this statment is wrong - the modern psu is always under load, even if pc is off. the caps remain charged therefore there's no starting shock to the components.

Neur0mancer - i looked at the previous posts; to answer your question - i took it out three days ago; i am putting together a lower-powered system to measure load temps in the psu and compare them to the ones i've got with the system i've tested.
 
Last edited:
I think this PSU will do well enough. The overkill with psu's started with the old PSU's that had really few amps on the 12V when the 4 pin CPU connector came in. Poor quality PSU's advertised as quality ones, helped this mith to grow. Also the run for quiet systems made people to use overkill PSU's on their systems so that the fans spin really slow.

http://www.antec.com/specs/EA380_spe.html
If the specs are true, I think this PSU should have no problems for some years on most systems.

The capacitators test procedure is overheating. Mobo's are inserted in an oven and overheated for a time. If the caps are not bulged it's OK. At least this was in the socket A days. At that time all capacitators on mobo's where electrolitics.
Excuse my english :).

Edit: Sometimes PSU's that are to much for the system give the buzzing coil effect(empiric:D)
 
Last edited:
Great thread and great discussion! mcoleg, those who are criticizing your contribution are almost certainly doing so because it contradicts what they've been preaching for years now. I'm not sure what there is to criticize--your system is still running strong at full load with a power supply that, by their standards, is terribly inadequate for the hardware you're running. You haven't stated that we should all buy 400W PSUs for our high-end gaming rigs, you've just given us some very interesting data to consider. Some people seem to want to descredit these results, for what I can only assume are self-serving reasons. Fortunately, most of us can absorb this data with an open mind and make sensible judgments. Thank you very much for your hard work!
 
I agree with planoru AND KillrBuckeye. I think we can conclude from this thread and discussion the following:

1) PSUs are underrated nowadays. People usually go for 2x the Power they need. Having the extra power is not bad, in fact, it's proper and right. But this shows that having that extra power is based entirely on future upgrades / self relief rather than a must have.

2) PSUs have changed. From the time there werent 4pin 12V connectors, where the 5V rail had huge current drain (or source, same thing). They went through changing to the +12V1 and then the designers starting to pump the 12V rails, because it was the new demand. Now, therefore, a 400W with 12V rails as basic current source is NOT the same as a 400W or 500W oldie PSU, with 5V and 3.3V as main current source.

Finally, even though I agree with Nade and the others supporting the idea that mcoleg's test will be significant and reliable in scientific, technical and practical matters only after the test has gone through a sufficient amount of time (1 year as they say), I am completely glad that he did this test. This thread was the starter of a very interesting, nurturing and practical discussion about PSUs. In fact, before this, I didn't know jack about PSUs (and I thought I did some).

It's because enthusiasts like him (and us, who follow the thread, add important notes, criticice with facts and show interest) that we can get to "discoveries" of this kind.
 
hey guys, me again :p

i have a couple of questions i hope some one knows answers to:


1. where would one get a lifespan numbers for a psu?

2. MTBF; just as an example - sometimes it says simply 100,000 Hours @ 25C. at some places i saw 100,000 Hours @ 25C Ambient. so, which one is it? and what is the ambient - the temperature of the room or inside a case. now, this is the tricky one, seeing as the psu is a case inside a case, the ambient for it should be the computer case temperature; on the other hand it could be the outside temperature, i just don't know.

3. any idea why they are using MTBF instead of MTTF? i understand it's a multicomponent device but the weakest components are not really repairable and it's not like anyone actually repairs psu's nowadays.

4. please tell me if this statement is wrong - "modern psu is constanly drawing current, therefore there is no inrush current".


any ideas or leads would be appreciated; thanks guys :)
 
Back