Quantcast

Maximum PC

It is currently Tue Sep 23, 2014 7:39 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 1:59 pm 
Willamette
Willamette
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 3:23 pm
Posts: 1035
Location: Not where i want to be......
i was laughing when i finished the mag because the add on the back was the same powersupply that mpc just thouroughly owned. WORSHIP THE POWER


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 13, 2005 5:14 pm 
Team Member Top 500
Team Member Top 500
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:55 pm
Posts: 1670
Some of you, particularly the editors at MPC might be interested in this thread concerning the recent PSU roundup.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 2:52 am 
8086
8086

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:12 pm
Posts: 9
Im sorry i have to agree with the article written and hope that MAXPC doesnt become offended.

I have the OCZ520ADJ - 520W as they tested and it does have the "Active PFC" as stated on the OCZ site. I also have to agree that they failed to write that the OCZ model was capable of handling the lower voltage with an easy adjustment to the pot screws for the voltrage rails, this is why they put them there! I also have to say that they failed to recognize that the OCZ is the most future proof than any of them as it has every conceiveable connection available, which lets admit in the computer world, being future proof has to account for something here as it changes every six months (approx). I can go on but whats the point, the damage has been done unless maxPC is willing to make a small retraction!!!?

At any rate i do respect MAXPC for their reviews and suggestions and dilligence with everything hardware but i must admit, i think you dropped the ball on this article and because i am a subscriber to the mag i think i am entitled to share that with you.

Now the question is this, are you willing to make a retraction or atleast give credit where credit is due???!!! Atleast giving the OCZ model a 9-KICKASS is in order i think!

Cheers!


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 11:13 am 
Maximum PC Editor
Maximum PC Editor
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 2308
FORD wrote:
I also have to agree that they failed to write that the OCZ model was capable of handling the lower voltage with an easy adjustment to the pot screws for the voltrage rails, this is why they put them there!


So during the next brownout or power sag, you're going to open up your PC, adjust the screw, and protect your machine from crashing? I don't think anyone will do that.

///Will


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:23 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:12 pm
Posts: 9
Will,

Common sense is in order here, it was a measurement that stated it had dropped still within spec. I suggested that if you are putting a demand on your machine you can use the adjustable voltage to round it up or off depending.

As for your brownout suggestion i thing your arrogance deservews some in return, if you dont use a UPS with proper protection then you are most likely going to get burned as a real brown out with a PCF protection or not will most likely fry your system regardless so i think anyone who is mindful will have a UPC with proper protection and the supporting insurance you find with a good UPS to protect you, not going into your machine to adjust anything or mearly relying on any PSU to protect you. Didnt you know that or were you unaware?!

Well its a good thing i was here to help you huh! :roll:


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 3:52 pm 
Maximum PC Editor
Maximum PC Editor
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 2308
It was one of the things we test. We always recommend people use a UPS, however most people don't. Hence the sag test we ran in the story.

I misunderstood your initial comment because it wasn't written clearly. I thought you were complaining about the sag test, rather than the load test.

Regardless, the tests we ran were fair and repeatable. The only real problem with the story is the lack of any SLI testing, which was impossible as there weren't any final SLI systems to test with when we wrote the story. We'll address that in coming months with some followup testing with SLI rigs.

///Will


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 4:14 pm 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 7:48 pm
Posts: 614
Location: Canadian Poop Land
Hey will, do u like hippos better or wildebeasts?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 4:21 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2004 1:00 pm
Posts: 86
Gotta disagree on this Will, extended drops to 60v are not an issue that is relevant to high performance computing. Anyone that spends serious money on a high performance computer and doesn't protect it from power failures and brownouts with a quality UPS is a simply fool. That's also why such tests are rarely run down to such levels by others doing testing of switching power supplies. If this were an article in "Beginner Computing" or "Computing For "Dummies" perhaps, but the name of the book is "Maximum PC" after all. Sometimes I feel that maybe the title should be "Routine Gaming Computers", but I digress....

In general industry, and even in the instrument business, people generally look at 90v as the lowest input voltage that equipment should have to deal with. That's because the standards organizations in the EU, North America and Asia typically specificy 90v. When organizations set out to get UL, CE, CSA, etc. approval, they are going to design to the specs demanded by those organsizations. Exceeding specs in this regard carries no bragging rights because it's a functional "so what" issue.

oc


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 5:45 pm 
8086
8086

Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 8:12 pm
Posts: 9
Will,

I apologize if i came across strongly as i first thought you were attempting to berate me rather than debate me about the issue.

I do again agree with the oddlycalm as it is true that most hardcore or in this case maximum users like ourselves would have a quality UPS to aleviate the need for any problems due to a brownout issue.

At this point i am still wondering why there were not some other test's run to show the true shortcomings of the Antec unit which i my opinion has been given a rather high rating and at the expense of the OCZ unit and i hope this hasnt happened because of the politics due to sponsorship/advertising issues?...dont get me wrong i am not saying maximum PC is giving into the pressures of doing business to save face but it it really does seem lopsided in this tests and certainly hasnt given the OCZ unit its fair share of recognition.

In lieu of this i am not going to type out all the tests i think should have been done to really determine the outcome of this but i think it is prudent of Maximum PC to atleast add OCZ in this reveiw as being deserving of a 9 kick ass as this truely is a piece of hardware that deserves it!\

Cheers~!


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 5:54 pm 
Smithfield*
Smithfield*
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 9:17 am
Posts: 7159
Location: In HyperTransport
we accept your argument, but you have to think about what the other sides argument is. i'm in the process of building my 5000 dollar dream machine and its on my bench, not at my desk with my UPS. i plug it in to update bios, run metest and w/e else and i get a power sag. now if MPC gave the PSU a 10 kickass without the sag test i'd be pissed because thats a real-world factor even for smart people. i personally have a UPS at my desk and workbench. but i'd say no more then 5% of people in the world make sure every time they plug in their computer that they're protected from flucuation. your point is as valid as mine.

as for running more tests i'd asy the more the better, if there are more tests that have to do with real-world functionality that are repeatable then by al means i want those to be factored in. but when i look at synthetic benchmarks i take them with a grain of salt because real world performance is what its about, right?

i put my confidence in MPC that their ratings dont have to do with sponsership or affiliations, i'm a trusting person. and i agree that the OCZ is a great PSU, there are a lot of OCZ whores that praise OCZ on the forums and they've said nothing but good things about OCZ.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:29 pm 
Maximum PC Editor
Maximum PC Editor
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 2308
FORD wrote:
In lieu of this i am not going to type out all the tests i think should have been done to really determine the outcome of this but i think it is prudent of Maximum PC to atleast add OCZ in this reveiw as being deserving of a 9 kick ass as this truely is a piece of hardware that deserves it!\


You're new here, so I'm going to go easy on you. But, so you know, I take implications that Maximum PC is on the take from vendors very badly. Imagine how pissed Sam Jackson would be if you told him that you met his mom as part of her freelance prostitution racket. That's about how I feel now.

If you still think we're in some power supply vendor's pocket, I point you to the final page of the issue with the power supply story. Turn back to the story and look at page 54. If we were in vendor's pockets, I don't think we would have given a score of FOUR to the power supply that is advertised on the back cover of the magazine. To reiterate, the product that is advertised on the back cover of the mag (one of the high dollar ad spots btw) received THE SECOND LOWEST SCORE IN THE ROUNDUP!

I think that if we were in these company's pockets, we probably wouldn't have done that, would we?

You have yet to give more than one compelling reason that the OCZ power supply deserves a higher score than it received. All I've hear right now is "I bought an expensive OCZ power supply, and I like it a lot, so it deserves a higher score, despite the fact that I haven't done any kind of testing on it at all."

For the record, Maximum PC isn't here to make you feel better about your hardware purchases. We're here to tell you about the best hardware we've tested. If you have a problem with our testing procedure, we love to enter into constructive conversations about it. Describe your problem clearly, and I'll talk to you about it all day, and may even change the testing procedure. If you're just going to troll, you will be banned from the se boards.

Your pal!

///Will


Last edited by willsmith on Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:32 pm 
Maximum PC Editor
Maximum PC Editor
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 2308
oddlycalm wrote:
In general industry, and even in the instrument business, people generally look at 90v as the lowest input voltage that equipment should have to deal with. That's because the standards organizations in the EU, North America and Asia typically specificy 90v. When organizations set out to get UL, CE, CSA, etc. approval, they are going to design to the specs demanded by those organsizations. Exceeding specs in this regard carries no bragging rights because it's a functional "so what" issue.


That is certainly true. We mentioned that all the power supplies made it to 90V with little to no fluctuation on the 12V lines. We didn't knock points for power supplies that failed to survive at 60V, instead supplies that survived got a small bonus.

///Will


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject: False Advertising
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:36 pm 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:57 pm
Posts: 461
Location: Georgia
It is funny how the X-Connect Power Supply ad on the back of the January 2005 issue says "Plus, the X-Connect PSU's advanced power output technology delivers peak power 100% of the time." and in the same magazine issue for the review it says "Ultra claims the X-Connect can continously deliver 500 watts of power, but our load test proved otherwise."

Talk about false advertising...


Last edited by Radek194 on Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:41 pm 
Smithfield*
Smithfield*
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 9:17 am
Posts: 7159
Location: In HyperTransport
call the BBB and tell them if your so inclined


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:47 pm 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:57 pm
Posts: 461
Location: Georgia
gramaton cleric wrote:
call the BBB and tell them if your so inclined


whats that supposed to mean?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:57 pm 
Smithfield*
Smithfield*
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 9:17 am
Posts: 7159
Location: In HyperTransport
If you feel your being ripped off by their false advertising to buy something that promises but doesnt have the good call the BBB(Better Business Buerau) and complain and they'll do something about it.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 6:58 pm 
Team Member
Team Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 6:57 pm
Posts: 461
Location: Georgia
like they'd listen to a 14 year old.. I wouldnt do it anyways...


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:01 pm 
Contributing Writer
Contributing Writer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 8:09 pm
Posts: 9602
Location: Land of the Lounge Lizards
I can't knock MPC for reporting what they find, nor can I say that advertising plays a roll in their outcome. I don't buy into those conspiracy theories lightly.

I do, however, have a question. When you "simulated a severe power fluctuation", did any PSU's fail to operate or result in any instability, hardware damage, or other undesirable effects? If not, how important is such a test in determing a PSU's final score, or active PFC in general?

I'm not anything near an electrician, so those are genuine questions. I can't help but to wonder how important those measurements are if the systems/PSU's survived, especially taking in account the room temperature, loads, and overall conditions those PSUs were tested in.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:13 pm 
Smithfield*
Smithfield*
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2004 9:17 am
Posts: 7159
Location: In HyperTransport
i'm no electrician either but i'd imagine the importantness(i know its not a word) of each feature is factored into the score....ie if it has PFC you add 2 points but if you have modular you add .5 points and so fourth. so if a vital features affect score more so then non-vital things(think adjustable rails).


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2005 8:21 pm 
Contributing Writer
Contributing Writer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 8:09 pm
Posts: 9602
Location: Land of the Lounge Lizards
gramaton cleric wrote:
i'm no electrician either but i'd imagine the importantness(i know its not a word) of each feature is factored into the score....ie if it has PFC you add 2 points but if you have modular you add .5 points and so fourth. so if a vital features affect score more so then non-vital things(think adjustable rails).


No, let me clarify my question. I'm not asking how important those are in MaximumPC's verdict (they obviously play a role) - what I'm asking is how important is active PFC and/or the 60V test to real world usage? MaximumPC did everything in their power to simulate piss-poor operating conditions with extreme room temperatures, poor line conditioning, heavy loads, etc. If the PSU's and overall systems survived the torture tests and were stable (as well as no hardware damage), then how important or relevant is it to include those tests in a PSU roundup? Does a PSU deserve a lower rating even though the negative measurements didn't translate into adverse computing conditions? Or did, in fact, adverse computing conditions/stability exist as a result?


Top
  Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 66 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group