In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage westom <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On Aug 31, 9:45 am, Arno <m...@privacy.net> wrote:
>> So far for theory. In practice ElCheapo designers could not care
>> less what Intel demands and the typical cheap PSU (and some more
>> expensive ones) will not survive a short circuit and may even
>> die when operated at 100% load for more than a few minutes.

> True. Which is why fools buy computers assembled by the
> electrically naive. Which is why fools buy supplies only on dollars
> and watts. Why so many buy 500 watt supplies that are electrically
> equivalent to a 350 watt supply in a brand name computer.

> The informed computer assembler knows what many required power
> supply functions are so that computers are never damaged by the
> supply. And so that the load never damages a supply. Some examples of
> what so many Certified A+ computer techs never learn:
> Acoustics noise 25.8dBA typical at 70w, 30cm
> Short circuit protection on all outputs
> Over voltage protection
> Over power protection
> 100% hi-pot test
> 100% burn in, high temperature cycled on/off
> PFC harmonics compliance: EN61000-3-2 + A1 + A2
> EMI/RFI compliance: CE, CISPR22 & FCC part 15 class B
> Safety compliance: VDE, TUV, D, N, S, Fi, UL, C-UL & CB
> Hold up time, full load: 16ms. typical
> Dielectric withstand, input to frame/ground: 1800VAC, 1sec.
> Dielectric withstand, input to output: 1800VAC, 1sec.
> Ripple/noise: 1%
> MTBF, full load @ 25?C amb.: >100k hrs

> Power supplies that would cause disk drive failure are typically
> missing these and many other functions. Power supplies even 40 years
> ago were not damaged by the load. All power supplies from the
> monster sized to single chip supplies were not damaged by the load
> even 40 years ago. It was industry standard even that long ago.

> Supply failure is traceable to a computer assembler without
> electrical knowledge. Who buys a supply only on dollars and watts. A
> problem becoming severe in North America. Basic electrical knowledge
> has become so minimal that 60% of new Silicon Valley employees come
> from India or China. Finding enough Americans with basic electrical
> knowledge has become that difficult.

> The load must never damage a supply. And a supply must never damage
> its load (ie disk drive). Overloading must never damage a supply.
> But does when the supply is missing essential functions - when sold on
> price, When the consumer does always demand technical specs.


Your point? Damanding the world be different is very ineffective
as a problem solvong strategy....

Arno

--
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: (E-Mail Removed)
GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage mm <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> On 31 Aug 2010 15:13:45 GMT, Arno <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Ant <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> On 8/31/2010 6:49 AM PT, Arno typed:
>>
>>>>> Great. So what are good brand of these days that isn't so pricey these
>>>>> days for home users?
>>>>
>>>> You get what you pay for. I cannot really recommend
>>>> any manufaturer except Enermax. It seems they are
>>>> also the only ones that do design and manufacturing
>>>> all in-house.
>>
>>> Hmm, prices vary a lot on
>>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...ax+psu&x=0&y=0
>>> ... I hope I don't need 900 watts any time soon. Yes, I have lots of
>>> hardwares and play computer games (those darn video cards [even single
>>> card] suck a lot!).
>>
>>Hehe, no, you are unlike to need 900W unless you have
>>3-4 graphics cards or two very, very power hungry ones.

> I have a video card that also has a tv output. I think I can turn the
> tv output off except on the rare occasions I use it.

> Do you think it would use less power if it were off? More than a
> watt?

> I ask because during the really hot weather, 95+, my cpu and sometimes
> my mobo get very hot and I even may have to turn off the computer.

> Also, the video card seems to be failing. About 4 times in the last 3
> months the picture has been illegible, full of specks, with a pink
> ghost image of the text, and I've had to turn the computer off for
> that too.

> Do you think turning off the tv output make a difference?

Very inlikely in practice. I would advide you to get
better airflow in the case.

> (Every extra browser tab raises the temp a little, although closing
> Eudora doesn't seem to make a difference.)

Forget about that. No relevant influence.

Arno
--
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: (E-Mail Removed)
GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Simon Brown <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Arno wrote:
>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Ant <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>> On 8/30/2010 12:56 PM PT, Arno typed:
>>
>>>>> According to my notes: 4/24/2005 -- Replaced the dead Enlight 240
>>>>> watts PSU in Debian/Athlon XP box with an old PSU (Enlight
>>>>> EN-8341934; Model: HPC-340-101; 340 watts) I kept in my closet
>>>>> from previous machines. I guess the last PSU was too old? I don't
>>>>> remember if Enlight PSUs were good back then. :/
>>>>
>>>> Never heard of them. That suggests one of the following: ElCheapo,
>>>> memory loss on my side, or lack of knowledge on my side ;-)
>>>> Age is a factor though.
>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>>>> Hopefully, my current 600 watts SeaSonic S12 PSU (since 6/2006 --
>>>>> awesome so far -- might get another one as my future PSU brand) and
>>>>
>>>> Seasonic is MID-Range and should be fine as it has a lot
>>>> mior power than needed here.
>>
>>> Cool. I might get another SeaSonic PSU for my future PSUs. That is
>>> assuming they are still good. 2/2006 is over four years ago.
>>
>>
>>>>> Antec Basiq 500 Watt ATX Power Supply (BP500U) [started making fan
>>>>> noises and I only had it since 1/23/2010 -- ugh!]).
>>>>
>>>> Antec is prettied-up ElCheapo with a high price tag. I had
>>>> one server-grade EPS from them fail. Opened it and it turned
>>>> out to be an insufficiently cooled component, in a configuration
>>>> that I can only call either "incompetent" or "designed to fail".
>>>> The thing was running at about 40% permenant load and about 80%
>>>> load on startup (lots of disks). In addition the overall
>>>> impression was that of very cheap build design and component
>>>> selection.
>>>>
>>>> I will not buy Antec again.
>>
>>> Great. So what are good brand of these days that isn't so pricey
>>> these days for home users?
>>
>> You get what you pay for. I cannot really recommend
>> any manufaturer except Enermax. It seems they are
>> also the only ones that do design and manufacturing
>> all in-house.
>>
>> Arno

> That is a completely silly claim.

And why would that be?

Arno
--
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: (E-Mail Removed)
GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

Arno wrote:
>
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Ant <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > On 8/28/2010 11:03 PM PT, Rod Speed typed:
>
> > It has happened to me back in summer of 2005 with an old ASUS A7V333
> > motherboard/mobo. (lock ups and no more boot ups) and Quantum Fireball
> > Plus 30 GB IDE HDD (circuit controller died). They were damaged by a
> > recent PSU melt down. The mobo's circuit board had brown/orange coloring
> > on its circuit board, a horrible burning odor/smell, etc. The old HDD
> > also went dead too. I never bothered to recover that drive's datas
> > since I had a backup.
>
> It is possible, but it requires a) the PSU regulator failing into
> overvoltage and b) no output-overvoltage protection. Both failing
> is very rare, hovever cheap PSUs often come without the protection
> circuitry. Reason: Price. Let me give you an idea (say 400W):
>
> - ElCheapo : $20
> - Mid-range : $80
> - Enermax with all protection: $120
> - Industrial with 10 year lifetime: $300-$500
>
> Now, at the lower end, using cheaper components alone does not cut
> it anymore, you have to use a lot less components. That means
> cutting out protection circuirty, using cheaper, less reliable
> regulators, cheaper transformers with lower insulation rating,
> etc.. Also your ElCheapo 400W unit is more likely a 250-300W unit,
> while a 400W Enermax is more likely 500-700W.

According to JonnyGuru.com, which tests lots of power supplies,
Enermax is good, but so are many other brands, and in 400W size,
quality brands can often be bought for $30-60.

What's the difference between a retail Enermax and something like a
Seasonic, Fortron-Source, Enhance, Channel Well, or Delta? Most seem
to use the same standard controller and protection chips and have
transformers, chokes, and filter capacitors of comparable size. Even
the cheapest PSUs contain protection for overvoltage and overcurrent,
but I haven't seen crowbar protection in any ATX PC PSU. Some newer
high-power PSUs use only high-quality capacitors, including but not
just Enermax, but my old 350W was full of PCE-TUR caps from CEC
Industries.

Ant wrote:
>
> Hopefully, my current 600 watts SeaSonic S12 PSU (since 6/2006 --
> awesome so far -- might get another one as my future PSU brand) and
> Antec Basiq 500 Watt ATX Power Supply (BP500U) [started making fan
> noises and I only had it since 1/23/2010 -- ugh!]).

If that Basiq 500W was made by Fortron-Source, it's probably full of
CapXon brand capacitors that should be replaced. 8 of them are
1000uF, 16V, and 2 are 2200uF, 6.3V, all 8mm diameter, but I think
there's room for fatter 10mm ones. Newer Basiqs are by Delta.

Lots of Seasonics use OST brand caps that are also not the best.

Arno wrote:
>
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Ant <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > On 8/29/2010 11:01 AM PT, Arno typed:
>
> > According to my notes: 4/24/2005 -- Replaced the dead Enlight 240 watts
> > PSU in Debian/Athlon XP box with an old PSU (Enlight EN-8341934; Model:
> > HPC-340-101; 340 watts) I kept in my closet from previous machines. I
> > guess the last PSU was too old? I don't remember if Enlight PSUs were
> > good back then. :/
>
> Never heard of them. That suggests one of the following: ElCheapo,
> memory loss on my side, or lack of knowledge on my side ;-)
> Age is a factor though.

Enlight used several suppliers, and that was a Sirtec (High Power),
which made a wide range of quality.
>
> > Hopefully, my current 600 watts SeaSonic S12 PSU (since 6/2006 --
> > awesome so far -- might get another one as my future PSU brand) and
>
> Seasonic is MID-Range and should be fine as it has a lot
> mior power than needed here.
>
> > Antec Basiq 500 Watt ATX Power Supply (BP500U) [started making fan
> > noises and I only had it since 1/23/2010 -- ugh!]).
>
> Antec is prettied-up ElCheapo with a high price tag. I had
> one server-grade EPS from them fail. Opened it and it turned
> out to be an insufficiently cooled component, in a configuration
> that I can only call either "incompetent" or "designed to fail".
> The thing was running at about 40% permenant load and about 80%
> load on startup (lots of disks). In addition the overall
> impression was that of very cheap build design and component
> selection.
>
> I will not buy Antec again.

Antec has used several suppliers. The original SmartPowers and
TruePowers were by Channel Well Technology, but then the company
switched to Seasonic, Fortron-Source (original Basiqs), Delta,
Enhance, and again Channel Well, and I never paid more than $20 for
one (including the replacement capacitors), sometimes with a case.
The older Channel Wells were good until their horrible Fuhjyyu brand
capacitors failed.

Arno wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Simon Brown <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>> Arno wrote:
>>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Ant <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>> On 8/30/2010 12:56 PM PT, Arno typed:
>>>
>>>>>> According to my notes: 4/24/2005 -- Replaced the dead Enlight 240
>>>>>> watts PSU in Debian/Athlon XP box with an old PSU (Enlight
>>>>>> EN-8341934; Model: HPC-340-101; 340 watts) I kept in my closet
>>>>>> from previous machines. I guess the last PSU was too old? I don't
>>>>>> remember if Enlight PSUs were good back then. :/
>>>>>
>>>>> Never heard of them. That suggests one of the following: ElCheapo,
>>>>> memory loss on my side, or lack of knowledge on my side ;-)
>>>>> Age is a factor though.
>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Hopefully, my current 600 watts SeaSonic S12 PSU (since 6/2006 --
>>>>>> awesome so far -- might get another one as my future PSU brand)
>>>>>> and
>>>>>
>>>>> Seasonic is MID-Range and should be fine as it has a lot
>>>>> mior power than needed here.
>>>
>>>> Cool. I might get another SeaSonic PSU for my future PSUs. That is
>>>> assuming they are still good. 2/2006 is over four years ago.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> Antec Basiq 500 Watt ATX Power Supply (BP500U) [started making
>>>>>> fan noises and I only had it since 1/23/2010 -- ugh!]).
>>>>>
>>>>> Antec is prettied-up ElCheapo with a high price tag. I had
>>>>> one server-grade EPS from them fail. Opened it and it turned
>>>>> out to be an insufficiently cooled component, in a configuration
>>>>> that I can only call either "incompetent" or "designed to fail".
>>>>> The thing was running at about 40% permenant load and about 80%
>>>>> load on startup (lots of disks). In addition the overall
>>>>> impression was that of very cheap build design and component
>>>>> selection.
>>>>>
>>>>> I will not buy Antec again.
>>>
>>>> Great. So what are good brand of these days that isn't so pricey
>>>> these days for home users?
>>>
>>> You get what you pay for. I cannot really recommend
>>> any manufaturer except Enermax. It seems they are
>>> also the only ones that do design and manufacturing
>>> all in-house.
>>>
>>> Arno
>
>> That is a completely silly claim.
>
> And why would that be?

Its completely silly to claim that they are the only ones that do design and manufacturing all in house.

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Simon Brown <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Arno wrote:
>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Simon Brown <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>> Arno wrote:
>>>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Ant <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>> On 8/30/2010 12:56 PM PT, Arno typed:
>>>>
>>>>>>> According to my notes: 4/24/2005 -- Replaced the dead Enlight 240
>>>>>>> watts PSU in Debian/Athlon XP box with an old PSU (Enlight
>>>>>>> EN-8341934; Model: HPC-340-101; 340 watts) I kept in my closet
>>>>>>> from previous machines. I guess the last PSU was too old? I don't
>>>>>>> remember if Enlight PSUs were good back then. :/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Never heard of them. That suggests one of the following: ElCheapo,
>>>>>> memory loss on my side, or lack of knowledge on my side ;-)
>>>>>> Age is a factor though.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Hopefully, my current 600 watts SeaSonic S12 PSU (since 6/2006 --
>>>>>>> awesome so far -- might get another one as my future PSU brand)
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seasonic is MID-Range and should be fine as it has a lot
>>>>>> mior power than needed here.
>>>>
>>>>> Cool. I might get another SeaSonic PSU for my future PSUs. That is
>>>>> assuming they are still good. 2/2006 is over four years ago.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Antec Basiq 500 Watt ATX Power Supply (BP500U) [started making
>>>>>>> fan noises and I only had it since 1/23/2010 -- ugh!]).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Antec is prettied-up ElCheapo with a high price tag. I had
>>>>>> one server-grade EPS from them fail. Opened it and it turned
>>>>>> out to be an insufficiently cooled component, in a configuration
>>>>>> that I can only call either "incompetent" or "designed to fail".
>>>>>> The thing was running at about 40% permenant load and about 80%
>>>>>> load on startup (lots of disks). In addition the overall
>>>>>> impression was that of very cheap build design and component
>>>>>> selection.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I will not buy Antec again.
>>>>
>>>>> Great. So what are good brand of these days that isn't so pricey
>>>>> these days for home users?
>>>>
>>>> You get what you pay for. I cannot really recommend
>>>> any manufaturer except Enermax. It seems they are
>>>> also the only ones that do design and manufacturing
>>>> all in-house.
>>>>
>>>> Arno
>>
>>> That is a completely silly claim.
>>
>> And why would that be?

> Its completely silly to claim that they are the only ones that
> do design and manufacturing all in house.

Incidentially, they are. Give me one other manufacturer that
does it.

Arno
--
Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: (E-Mail Removed)
GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F
----
Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans

Arno wrote:
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Simon Brown <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>> Arno wrote:
>>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Simon Brown <(E-Mail Removed)>
>>> wrote:
>>>> Arno wrote:
>>>>> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Ant <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/30/2010 12:56 PM PT, Arno typed:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> According to my notes: 4/24/2005 -- Replaced the dead Enlight
>>>>>>>> 240 watts PSU in Debian/Athlon XP box with an old PSU (Enlight
>>>>>>>> EN-8341934; Model: HPC-340-101; 340 watts) I kept in my closet
>>>>>>>> from previous machines. I guess the last PSU was too old? I
>>>>>>>> don't remember if Enlight PSUs were good back then. :/
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Never heard of them. That suggests one of the following:
>>>>>>> ElCheapo, memory loss on my side, or lack of knowledge on my
>>>>>>> side ;-)
>>>>>>> Age is a factor though.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hopefully, my current 600 watts SeaSonic S12 PSU (since 6/2006
>>>>>>>> -- awesome so far -- might get another one as my future PSU
>>>>>>>> brand) and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Seasonic is MID-Range and should be fine as it has a lot
>>>>>>> mior power than needed here.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Cool. I might get another SeaSonic PSU for my future PSUs. That
>>>>>> is assuming they are still good. 2/2006 is over four years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Antec Basiq 500 Watt ATX Power Supply (BP500U) [started making
>>>>>>>> fan noises and I only had it since 1/23/2010 -- ugh!]).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Antec is prettied-up ElCheapo with a high price tag. I had
>>>>>>> one server-grade EPS from them fail. Opened it and it turned
>>>>>>> out to be an insufficiently cooled component, in a configuration
>>>>>>> that I can only call either "incompetent" or "designed to fail".
>>>>>>> The thing was running at about 40% permenant load and about 80%
>>>>>>> load on startup (lots of disks). In addition the overall
>>>>>>> impression was that of very cheap build design and component
>>>>>>> selection.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I will not buy Antec again.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Great. So what are good brand of these days that isn't so pricey
>>>>>> these days for home users?
>>>>>
>>>>> You get what you pay for. I cannot really recommend
>>>>> any manufaturer except Enermax. It seems they are
>>>>> also the only ones that do design and manufacturing
>>>>> all in-house.
>>>>>
>>>>> Arno
>>>
>>>> That is a completely silly claim.
>>>
>>> And why would that be?
>
>> Its completely silly to claim that they are the only ones that
>> do design and manufacturing all in house.
>
> Incidentially, they are.

Nope.

> Give me one other manufacturer that does it.

Ant wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> mm wrote
>>> Rod Speed<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote

>>>>> (Every extra browser tab raises the temp a little,

>>>> Thats mad.

>>> But true.

>> With what browser ?

> Or maybe he uses those browser and Flash that uses video acceleration like Chrome, Flash v10.1(?), etc.

Even if he does, he wont see any measurable effect going between say 60 and 61 tabs.

>>> Before it got hot out, (and also in the house, since my AC is
>>> broken), I might have 60 or 70 tabs open with no problem.

>> Fark, why do you have so many ? I find it VERY hard to believe that with say 60 tabs open, you can actually see a
>> temperature rise with 61 open.

>>> When it was 98 out and maybe 86 or 88 in the house, 10 tabs would
>>> be enough to overheat the CPU**. If I closed the browser the
>>> temperature went down.

>> That last is nothing like the first claim.

> Is the web browser hogging CPU?

Likely it is if its firefox and 70 tabs.

> Some sites seem to hog CPU if I have too many tabs open like http://neatorama.com

Yeah, a few that I use do too. I find it hard to believe that all 70 of his do tho.

> (yes, I do open like 30+ tabs at once).

Sure, I do too, but not 70.

I guess it might be possible with say stock trading and an individual tab for each
stock, all using the same site that does use a lot of cpu resources for each tab,
but even then, I find it VERY hard to believe that that would produce a measurable
increase in the temperature between say 70 and 71 tabs.

>>> **Well, I wasn't sure what "too hot" was, but if it went from a normal 146F up to 164, I closed Firefox or turned
>>> off the whole computer.

>> Firefox can be rather resource hungry.

> Yes.