Capacitor aging, where a PSU produces less total output due to heavy or extended use (normal wear) is a factor in all power supplies. It is recommended that one purchase a PSU that provides 30% more power than is needed to compensate. Doesn’t a PSU that is “capacitor aged” lose efficiency?
If the absolute best PSU efficiency available is 90%, in a perfect world, wouldn’t you want to replace your PSU once it has fallen below this efficiency margin so as not to waste electricity any more than necessary? it's suggested to purchase high efficiency PSUs, and at the same time, its encouraged to buy more power than is needed so that once that PSU starts being less efficient we still have enough power left to run our PC.
While this makes perfect sense to ensure your PC doesn’t stop functioning due to a lack of power, shouldn’t we be making it more clear that PSUs drop their stated efficiency after a year of regular use, and instead of buying so much more than is needed, shouldn’t we spend less money to buy less power to begin with, but change PSUs more often?
High quality brand name PSUs are expensive, but a higher wattage PSU is stilll more expensive than a lower wattage one - brand name or not. Isn’t it cheaper to buy something much closer to the expected full-load level, then replace it a year later? If it isn’t cheaper now, won’t it be cheaper when manufacturers realize that mid to high-end PSU users buy new PSUs every year, meaning more sales volume met with lowered prices?
Aren’t quality PSUs (Antec, PC P&C, Seasonic, Thermaltake) warrantied to run at their stated wattage for 3 years? No one wants to bet their hardware on that warranty, but, shouldn’t we be holding them to this?
If you knew you wouldn't add new components to your current build later on, would you still buy a PSU with 30% extra power now, or just what you needed, then buy a new one next year, assuming the price was right?
If the absolute best PSU efficiency available is 90%, in a perfect world, wouldn’t you want to replace your PSU once it has fallen below this efficiency margin so as not to waste electricity any more than necessary? it's suggested to purchase high efficiency PSUs, and at the same time, its encouraged to buy more power than is needed so that once that PSU starts being less efficient we still have enough power left to run our PC.
While this makes perfect sense to ensure your PC doesn’t stop functioning due to a lack of power, shouldn’t we be making it more clear that PSUs drop their stated efficiency after a year of regular use, and instead of buying so much more than is needed, shouldn’t we spend less money to buy less power to begin with, but change PSUs more often?
High quality brand name PSUs are expensive, but a higher wattage PSU is stilll more expensive than a lower wattage one - brand name or not. Isn’t it cheaper to buy something much closer to the expected full-load level, then replace it a year later? If it isn’t cheaper now, won’t it be cheaper when manufacturers realize that mid to high-end PSU users buy new PSUs every year, meaning more sales volume met with lowered prices?
Aren’t quality PSUs (Antec, PC P&C, Seasonic, Thermaltake) warrantied to run at their stated wattage for 3 years? No one wants to bet their hardware on that warranty, but, shouldn’t we be holding them to this?
If you knew you wouldn't add new components to your current build later on, would you still buy a PSU with 30% extra power now, or just what you needed, then buy a new one next year, assuming the price was right?
Rs. I don't even think it needs to be that old, 2-3 years of full load and near 24-7 operation, one should be tested to see how well it performs compared to a new one. 
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram