PSU tier list 2.0

Page 120 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh, one thought turkey, would it be possible if in your list, instead of using tiers, you could use a grade scale instead? It would be far easier to differentiate between lists if someone referred to a unit as a grade AA unit vrs a tier1 unit, or a grade F vrs tier5, then anyone would know the source of recommendation
 




:lol:

As for the ATX spec for load regulation, this is very strange, because he calculated load regulation but checks it in accordance with the 5% spec. I'm going to shoot over a question to him tomorrow.
 


Yes, I didn't mean to indicate that every UNIT should have a bulleted list of criteria next to or beneath it, but every TIER should state what the specific reason was that cause that unit to be in that tier and not in any other tier.


@turkey, Dottorent's list has been around a long time, and is the result of MANY peoples input in addition to Dottorent's own criteria. It's a suitable list and needs answer to nobody in that regard. If however you want to create a newer, more credible list, and have your selection and placement understood and taken seriously, then I imagine you'll need to provide the credible evidence to support it. You can make anything you wish without adhering to anything suggested here, that's no problem, but it doesn't mean it's going to garner any respect for the accomplishment if you expect to just be taken at your word and by only your own discretion that there is an actual method to the process.
 
I think something like we've discussed in the past would be beneficial to any list. Something like Excellent, Very Good, Good, Mediocre, Poor and Terrible would be clear and difficult to misunderstand by just about anybody. But I'm not making any tier lists so it's really irrelevant what I think.
 


Have to agree with this
 


+2^ to that approach
 
I disagree with wording choices. It's too easy for anyone to say 'it's an excellent unit' in conversation. On turkeys list, if ordered that way, the unit might be listed as 'very good' but not having used any list, the author might be going off personal opinion. I myself have referred to the XFX 550w or Seasonic M12-II 520w both as excellent units, and obviously they are both classed as tier2 currently. A, B, C, D, F would be perfect, as everyone has had dealings with that system and does allow for expansion, and almost everyone will understand the difference between a grade A unit and an obvious Fail grade F
 
I like JonnyLucky's "pass/fail" approach. He's got his Recommended PSU list, and his Lemon List. The fewer distinct tiers there are, the better; I'd like to see no more than four: Recommended, Not Recommended, Only if Necessary, and Unknown.
I may have missed the capacitor "argument," but add my voice to those who do not think Chinese caps in the secondary necessarily mean a lower tier. Unless the specific ones used are a known issue (e.g. Samxon "GF"), maybe note it, but it shouldn't cost a tier.

I'm also a little surprised you put a 10-score PSU (the Antec Signature) on tier-2, especially since you say you don't grade on efficiency (it's "only" bronze).

Overall though, it's not a bad effort.
 
I can't get over that there are tier 2 units which are the same or better than tier 1 units but are stuck in tier 2 due to capacitors made in a different country on a non-stressed part of the PSU which have not been shown to be any kind of issue at all.
 
This conversation is exactly the problem that we've encounted with THIS tier list, and ANY Tier list ANYBODY makes regardless of who or how well known they are. There are going to be differences of opinion on what belongs where, why they belong there, how many tiers there should be, variations in quality between iterations of a particular model and reuse of the same model number on entirely different units, whether units from the same series belong together in spite of differences between units with different capacities from the same series and whether or not the wrong color has been used to represent the fricking efficiency of the unit.

Even what the unit can acceptably be used with and for will be a source of contention depending on who you're asking.
 
Hi there. I currently want to buy AEROCOOL KCAS 700W with 80+ Bronze certificate. What can you say about one? Is it good for that PC configuration:
i5 4590 plus r9 390 ( or 390x ) plus DDR3 Kingston 16gb with 1600MHz plus HDD 1tb.

I'm looking forward for your answering.
 
You must not like your pc much. The only reason to use an Aerocool psu is if you intentionally want it to fry all your components so you have an excuse to get new ones. Avoid psus of this type like the plague. Either lookup tier2 or better units on this list at page1 or lookup the list by turkey3_scratch and follow that advice. Either way, psus high on the list are more recommended, psus at the bottom of the lists are to be avoided.
 
As per the PM KalashnjukUA sent me, I'm posting my response here so he'll see that my thoughts on this aren't limited to what can be said privately. I would not care to recommend ANY Aerocool power supply to anybody, ever. I don't even care if there are one or two minor reviews showing ok-ish results, I've seen too many of their units cause major catastrophes.

Aerocool power supplies are cheaply build with shiny exteriors making them look tempting. If you seek out professional reviews of any of their units you will find poor quality units that tend not to meet the specifications listed on their labels as well as having problems remaining within ATX specifications.

If you search Tom's hardware and other sources for threads and user reviews (Do NOT pay any attention to what you read from other users on Newegg or Amazon, for the most part those are from owners that wouldn't know the first thing about a power supply. Most of them figure if it turns their computer on, it's good.) you'll find a scary number of them are related to troubleshooting the unit or in many cases, actual damage and even fires. Strike-X is particularly known for this. I would avoid everything made by Aerocool with the exception of one or two cases and their Dead Silence series of fans.
Click to expand...
 
I see popular Youtubers recommend them, people who usually do gameplays and then suddenly decide ''Yeah, I'm going to make a PC Build guide!''. Saw Aerocool power supplies included a couple of times. Absolute shambles.
 
Okay, I just want to stress that on my list Tier 1 is supposed to be super good. If I see any unit with even 2% regulation on any rail, even the 3.3V, or if I'm seeing around 1.4% (generalized not exact numbers here) or higher on the 12V rail, it'll likely get Tier 2. There are very few units that only got Tier 2 because of capacitors, it was more often than not, 90% of the time the ripple or voltage regulation. Anyway, I do appreciate the concerns of everyone. I received a lot of hate on LTT forums by some, but there are also some who do really like my list, so I'm going to just conclude it with this: If you like my list, use it. If you don't, there are lots of other lists out there to use. Mine is just one coral in the sea, and some schools gather by my coral.
 
I recommend you note that your tier list has very little to do with general reliability. That's my biggest issue with it.

Since your list is more of a review of how psus test, and not how they perform in the real world, you really should rate the Corsair CX series a lot higher since they generally test really well, and mostly have great ripple control. If you're not going to If you're not going to take into account the long term reliability/performance of those Antec units, then you shouldn't with the CX series either. That is the reason why they're rated so low on dottorrent's list after all.

If you're going to make a tier list, you have to be fair, consistent, and objective all the way. You can't pick an choose when to be subjective.
 
It has to do with reliability. If I see Fujjhyu caps (I totally bombed that spelling) I take it into account, for instance. If users have a particular power supply dying on them frequently, that's all subjective to take something like that into account because it depends on how many of those are purchased, how abused the PSU was, etc. It's not real data, it's just a bunch of users whining on forums about their dead PSU, which I don't think is good enough solid factual information to judge reliability on.

Believe me, the whole of Jonnyguru already despises my list. But it does not matter to me. Of course Jonny brings up the classic example of me initially hating the G2 1000W and 1300W as tier 3 (I knew that would have caused riots, everyone always looks at the G2 G2 G2). Most people always go back to the classic G2 example, which is now uplifted to Tier 2 (thank god or my head would be above the fireplace).

How can I take into account long-term performance when all reviews are done on brand new units? There are two primary factors that would cause failure: PSU being abused and running too heavy-power components on it that it is capable of handling, causing diodes or whatever to burn; capacitors failing, which can even happen non-visibly. Even if a cap does not show physical signs of failure such as bulging or leaking, it still could be failed. If a PSU is treated well, and has all non-capacitor components that are capable of handling the current specified by the power distribution table, capacitors are really all there is to look at from a logical point of view.

I've never seen any non-capacitor component, ever, on any PSU review, being pointed out as "unreliable". I've never seen, "Ah, this PFC coil isn't very good."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom