Surge protector for two computers, is there something better that just power strips?

[Thraxan]

My hubby and I have almost twin setups next to each other. There are only two plugs in the room (we're renting) and I am unsure what to do. At the mo I have a Duronic 10 tower doing:
My PC (PSU = 650w)
Monitors (27") x 2
Printer
Light
MiniFridge
Speakers

Can I also add my partners setup too that as well?
His PC (PSU = 650w)
Monitors (27") x 2
Light
Speakers

Or will that be dangerous from just one outlet?

Is there something else I can look at to use that would be safer? I don't mind spending a bit of money on something to protect our gear.

Thank you for any help! As you may have guessed I do not know as much about how wall sockets and extension leads work :/

 

[punahou1]

You need to focus on amperage. Look next to where the power goes in to each device for the power info, and add up the amperage of all devices. Once you have the total you then need to go to the circuit breaker for that plug and see the amperage supported by the individual breaker. In most cases two PC's should be fine but when you add a minifridge and printer in to the mix that may exceed the amperage of the circuit breaker thereby causing it to trip. If everything is less than the breaker I would simply place the minifridge and light on one of the plugs and the surge protector on the other plug for the computer setup...

 

[Thraxan]

You need to focus on amperage. Look next to where the power goes in to each device for the power info, and add up the amperage of all devices. Once you have the total you then need to go to the circuit breaker for that plug and see the amperage supported by the individual breaker. In most cases two PC's should be fine but when you add a minifridge and printer in to the mix that may exceed the amperage of the circuit breaker thereby causing it to trip. If everything is less than the breaker I would simply place the minifridge and light on one of the plugs and the surge protector on the other plug for the computer setup...

I am looking at my PSU stats but to be honest I am way confused. Is it the Current 10A - 5A?

http://www.corsair.com/es-mx/rm-series-rm650-80-plus-gold-certified-power-supply

 

[punahou1]

Yes I can see how that may be confusing. Amps = watts divided by volts. So if we assume that you run your PSU at full power (650 watts) and your voltage is 115 (kind of an average standard in the US), the maximum amps you would pull would be 5.6. Chances are your not running your PSU at the 650 limit. In order to determine what it is running at usually requires a monitor or the ability to add up the wattage of individual components connected to the PSU. If you want to play it safe use 5.6 as the amps for everything connected to that PSU.

 

[Thraxan]

Yes I can see how that may be confusing. Amps = watts divided by volts. So if we assume that you run your PSU at full power (650 watts) and your voltage is 115 (kind of an average standard in the US), the maximum amps you would pull would be 5.6. Chances are your not running your PSU at the 650 limit. In order to determine what it is running at usually requires a monitor or the ability to add up the wattage of individual components connected to the PSU. If you want to play it safe use 5.6 as the amps for everything connected to that PSU.

Ah I see, in the UK and Ireland we have 230V AC so would that equate to: 2.8amps?
An 650w was about 50w over my PC specs. I have a GTX 770 so that covers 350w alone bleh.

 

[punahou1]

Yes that calculation would put you at 2.8 amps. I still think you may be a bit under because it is my understanding that graphics cards will draw some of the most power from your PSU. At least you are on the right track so hang in there!

 

[Thraxan]

Yes that calculation would put you at 2.8 amps. I still think you may be a bit under because it is my understanding that graphics cards will draw some of the most power from your PSU. At least you are on the right track so hang in there!

Thank you so much for the help! An yep GPU's only draw on how much power they need at the time. So on idle it is barely used at all. However when I run next gen games it tends to take up a fair percentage. I have only had it 100% once for a few seconds though. However it is great to know the max is only 2.8amps
Thank you again for all the help

 

[westom]

However it is great to know the max is only 2.8amps

It most likely does not draw even that much. At 650 watts, it could toast bread. It is not getting anywhere near that hot. If your machine was constructed by a computer assembler, well, that chart of amp numbers for each voltage is often confusing to them. Your computer is probably consuming 100 watts most of the time and never more than 300 in a spurt. So we tell computer assemblers to buy a 600 watt supply. Then help lines are not clogged teaching computer assemblers basic electrical concepts.

Your computer probably does not even draw a full one amp. It does not double as a bread toaster.

As for safety, well power strip surge protectors sometimes compromise robust surge protection already inside each computer. And in rare cases, have caused fires. Another, less expensive, and superior solution is available - to be located elsewhere.

 

[Thraxan]

However it is great to know the max is only 2.8amps

It most likely does not draw even that much. At 650 watts, it could toast bread. It is not getting anywhere near that hot. If your machine was constructed by a computer assembler, well, that chart of amp numbers for each voltage is often confusing to them. Your computer is probably consuming 100 watts most of the time and never more than 300 in a spurt. So we tell computer assemblers to buy a 600 watt supply. Then help lines are not clogged teaching computer assemblers basic electrical concepts.

Your computer probably does not even draw a full one amp. It does not double as a bread toaster.

As for safety, well power strip surge protectors sometimes compromise robust surge protection already inside each computer. And in rare cases, have caused fires. Another, less expensive, and superior solution is available - to be located elsewhere.

I built my own computer. I am a gamer and also use the CPU I have for processing certain things. I know how much it uses on idle, however since my CPU maxes at 100% in some cases and my GPU in other instances then it is fair to assume I would at least be using 400w. I chose the 650w PSU due to the fact that the next step down is a 550w. I would have prefered an even 600w but better to be prepared. I know that over power can cause instability for components however I feel 650w is relatively good and not OP.

"To be located elsewhere"
I can assume either you mean to move house? Not a chance I only just moved here 2 weeks ago.
Plug in another area. Not able to due to there only being two plugs in the house. I will call an electrician in the future and pay for more plugs to be installed however.

 

[westom]

. I know how much it uses on idle, however since my CPU maxes at 100% in some cases and my GPU in other instances then it is fair to assume I would at least be using 400w. ...
"To be located elsewhere"
I can assume either you mean to move house?

It is not fair to make those assumptions.

First, how do you *know* it only consumes 100 watts at idle? You measured? Numbers provided to computer assemblers are worst case excessively high so as to keep the help lines free. If you know it consumes 400 watts, then you measured it? Then you also know its power factor. What tool did you use to obtain hard numbers?

Others did same in a discussion last March entitled "What is your desktop power usage while browsing these forums?". Examples of their discoveries:

"41 watts idle - 109 watts running Prime95"
"gtx460 and 3770k puts me squarely at 75w"
"115W idle, and 260W full load (CPU + GPU doing BOINC)."
"Web Browsing - 52W Playing Mechwarrior Online - 150W"

Many were gaming machines. However, I believe one with a very power hungry machine measured somewhere below 400 watts. So why do so many think 750 watts is better?

Back to the point. Those power analysis calculators said you needed 477 watts because your machine is probably power hungry at up to 250 watts. Appreciate the difference between assumptions without hard numbers and conclusions based in numbers. That is the point.

Second,

Another, less expensive, and superior solution is available - to be located elsewhere.

Nobody said anything about moving the house. The solution must be located elsewhere. Also stated is the reason why.

power strip surge protectors sometimes compromise robust surge protection already inside each computer. And in rare cases, have caused fires

A protector adjacent to computers creates problems. It does not claim to protect from surges that typically do damage. A solution, located elsewhere, does.

Again, numbers were provided. You know where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate with a proven solution. How many joules does your power strip claim to absorb? Again, the point. Best conclusions begin with numbers. What happens if that power strip tries to absorb hundreds of thousands of joules?

 

[Thraxan]

. I know how much it uses on idle, however since my CPU maxes at 100% in some cases and my GPU in other instances then it is fair to assume I would at least be using 400w. ...
"To be located elsewhere"
I can assume either you mean to move house?

It is not fair to make those assumptions.

First, how do you *know* it only consumes 100 watts at idle? You measured? Numbers provided to computer assemblers are worst case excessively high so as to keep the help lines free. If you know it consumes 400 watts, then you measured it? Then you also know its power factor. What tool did you use to obtain hard numbers?

Others did same in a discussion last March entitled "What is your desktop power usage while browsing these forums?". Examples of their discoveries:

"41 watts idle - 109 watts running Prime95"
"gtx460 and 3770k puts me squarely at 75w"
"115W idle, and 260W full load (CPU + GPU doing BOINC)."
"Web Browsing - 52W Playing Mechwarrior Online - 150W"

Many were gaming machines. However, I believe one with a very power hungry machine measured somewhere below 400 watts. So why do so many think 750 watts is better?

Back to the point. Those power analysis calculators said you needed 477 watts because your machine is probably power hungry at up to 250 watts. Appreciate the difference between assumptions without hard numbers and conclusions based in numbers. That is the point.

Second,

Another, less expensive, and superior solution is available - to be located elsewhere.

Nobody said anything about moving the house. The solution must be located elsewhere. Also stated is the reason why.

power strip surge protectors sometimes compromise robust surge protection already inside each computer. And in rare cases, have caused fires

A protector adjacent to computers creates problems. It does not claim to protect from surges that typically do damage. A solution, located elsewhere, does.

Again, numbers were provided. You know where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate with a proven solution. How many joules does your power strip claim to absorb? Again, the point. Best conclusions begin with numbers. What happens if that power strip tries to absorb hundreds of thousands of joules?

I have been trying to figure out why exactly I do not appreciate your answer. I hits me though, you assume I know nothing and that you know best. Ramming it down my throat is not helpful and makes me less likely to actually want your help. You are coming up with odd numbers that you say I said, I think you have me confused with someone else.
I have answered my question. Thank you and have a good day.

 

[westom]

I have answered my question. Thank you and have a good day.

That computer is probably consuming well less than 1 amp. A power strip is not protecting from surges that would do damage; as specification numbers demonstrate. Unfortunately eyes often glaze over with numbers.

 

[westom]

Destructive surges can be hundreds of thousands of joules. How many joules does the Ankway claim to absorb? At 1700, is will only absorb 970 and never more than 1140 joules. Where is protection from hundreds of thousands of joules? Best protection at any appliance is already inside the appliance.

Apparently a surge, too small to overwhelm protection inside appliances, was also large enough to destroy that undersized protector. This observation increases profits. If a protector fails, then consumers foolishly assume a protector 'sacrificed itself'. Any protector that fails did no protection. Let that surge current continue on into the attached appliance.

Remember how electricity works. If a destructive current is incoming into a protector, then at the same time, that same current is also outgoing into attached appliances. Where is protection?

Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate. Any solution that cannot define that is for other surges that typically do no damage.

Protection means no surge current is inside the building. That is how it was done even 100 years ago. Hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate in earth ground IF a hardwire or protector makes a low impedance (ie less than 3 meter) connection to single point earth ground. That means a protector must be located where wires enter the structure. At a common location so that all incoming wires (telephone, cable, AC electric, satellite dish) enter to make that low impedance (ie less than 3 meter) connection to earth.

Ankway is a USB charger. It is not and does not claim to be an effective protector. Protection is defined by what harmlessly absorbs hundreds of thousands of joules. Even the Ankway needs protection provided by 'whole house' protection.

More numbers. Lightning is typically 20,000 amps. So a minimal 'whole house' protector is 50,000 amps. Because a protector only does protection when it does not fail.

Apparently a surge too tiny to overwhelm protection inside attached appliances also destroyed a protector that was even less robust. Grossly undersizing a protector gets the naive to assume that protector did something useful. That phone, et al would have been undamaged even without the protector. But then you would not have known a tiny (non-destructive) surge existed.

If the protector does not have a low impedance (ie wire without any sharp bends and no splices) connection to earth, then it does not and cannot claim to protect from destructive surges. It claims to protect from another type of surge that typically causes no damage. Protection is about connecting that current to earth on a path that does not enter the building.

 

[westom]

> he said ’the surge protector took the hit and protected the phone.
> I'm buying two more, one to replace the old one and one spare. Its
> a lot cheaper to replace the surge protector than the phone’.

That is the urban myth commonly promoted when one has no idea what a surge protector does. Again, number for a 1700 joule protector are 970 and 1140. But even a 1700 joules protector is near zero.

Best protection in the phone is already inside that phone. The adjacent protector can even compromise that superior protection. As described with reasons why in the previous post.

Buying more Ankways is spending the most money for less protection. As made obvious by one sentence in that post that also says why.

Protection is always about where hundreds of thousands of joules dissipate. Any solution that cannot define that is for other surges that typically do no damage.

You have spent money to protect only from another type of surge that typically does not damage phones.

If the protector does not have a low impedance (ie wire without any sharp bends and no splices) connection to earth, then it does not and cannot claim to protect from destructive surges.

That is the Ankway. It clearly does not have a low impedance connection to earth. It does not claim to protect from destructive surges.

But it was so grossly undersized as to fail on a surge also too tiny to damage the phone. Yes, the phone was also confronted by the same current.

Undersizing gets naive consumers to *assume* it protected by failing. No protector does that. If a protector fails, then it did almost no protection. Effective protectors (for less money) remains functional after every surge. Fortunately phones already have better protection as required by industry standards that existed long before PCs existed.

Anyone who says a protector sacrificed itself to save something is using wild speculation or hearsay as knowledge. No effective protector does that. But highly profitable scams promote that myth - as was explained in a previous post that also said why with numbers.

Other solutions that also cost less will provide superior protection even from direct lightning strikes.

A protector that only absorbs 1700 joules is a near zero protector.

 

[westom]

i'm really confused, those days i watched some video on youbute. there are some many people said 'they surge protector much better than power strip' and especially the APC ups.

First, any claim not supported by numbers is best ignored. If one is better than another, then the recommendation cites the relevant specification number. Most who make recommendations (and this includes most computer assemblers) have no idea how electricity works. They only recommend based upon hearsay or advertising.

Second, which feature is better in one than another? Again, most have no idea what those features are. For example, if a surge protector is effective, then it says where hundreds of thousands of joules harmlessly dissipate. How many youtube discussions even mentioned energy? If a power strip is effective, then it must either block or absorb that energy. Why so many recommend and do not even say whether it blocks or absorbs that current? Why do so many not say how large that current can be? Or an incoming and outgoing path of that current?

Third, where is the surge protection in that UPS? How does a switch, that disconnects from AC and connects to a battery, stop what three miles of sky could not? That switch is only a millimeters gap. And yet it will stop what miles of sky cannot?

Fourth, why do many youtube videos not discuss earth ground. Not wall receptacle safety ground that is completely and electrically different. Earth ground. A protector is only as effective as its earth ground which does not exist on strip protectors or UPS. And is totally unknown to many who foolishly assume the protector magically absorbs those hundreds of thousands of joules.

Most who recommend protection only know what others have told them using subjective (qualitative) claims. Also known as junk science reasoning. Including a classic urban myth that a 'protector sacrifices to save a computer'. Nothing does that - except in fairy tales.

An AT&T forum describes surge protection; in this case for DSL. "How can I protect my DSL/dialup equipment from surges?" applies to protection of all electronics. Is based in how protection has been done even 100 years ago: Especially notice what is described; also called single point earth ground - although that name is not used. Earth ground that a power strip or UPS does not have.

Surge protection takes on many forms, but always involves the following components: Grounding bonding and surge protectors. ...

Grounding is required to provide the surge protector with a path to dump the excess energy to earth. A proper ground system is a mandatory requirement of surge protection. Without a proper ground, a surge protector has no way to disburse the excess energy and will fail to protect downstream equipment.

Bonding is required to electrically connect together the various grounds of the services entering the premises. Without bonding, a surge may still enter a premise after firing over a surge protector, which will attempt to pass the excess energy to its ground with any additional energy that the services surge protector ground cannot instantly handle, traveling into and through protected equipment, damaging that equipment in the process. ...

Now, if all the various service entrance grounds are bonded together there are no additional paths to ground through the premise. Even if all of the grounds cannot instantly absorb the energy, the lack of additional paths to ground through the premise prevents the excess energy from seeking out any additional grounds through that premise and the electronic equipment within. As such, the excess energy remains in the ground system until dissipated, sparing the protected equipment from damage. ...

By far, the whole house hardwired surge protectors provide the best protection. When a whole house primary surge protector is installed at the service entrance, it will provide a solid first line of defense against surges which enter from the power company's service entrance feed. These types of protectors can absorb/pass considerably more energy than any other type of protector, and if one does catastrophically fail, it will not typically be in a living space. ...

Plug in strip protectors are, at best, a compromise. At worst, they may cause more damage than they prevent. While they may do an acceptable job of handling hot to neutral surges, they do a poor job of handling any surge that must be passed to ground. ...

Then, to add insult to injury, some strip protectors add Telco and/or LAN surge protection within the same device, trying to be an all-in-one sale. Remember bonding? When Telco or LAN protection is added to a strip protector, if the premise ground, which is not designed to handle surges, cannot handle all of the energy, guess where that excess energy seeks out the additional grounds? You got it! The Telco and LAN connections now becomes the path, with disastrous results to those devices. ...

Fifth, did others define a 'secondary' and 'primary' protection layers? Each layer of protection is only defined by an earth ground - what absorbs energy. Above discusses the 'secondary' protection layer. A picture demonstrates what to inspect for your 'primary' protection layer:
http://www.tvtower.com/fpl.html

How many youtube videos discussed each protection layer - and what to inspect? How many provide perspective (numbers) with each recommendation? Most who recommend never did this stuff. I did. A difference is obvious. Those who actually know also provide numbers that say why.

Neither APC nor Belkin claim to protect from surges that actually do damage. Anyone can read those specification numbers.

 

[rgd1101]

To westom
KellyLauper is a spammer. post deleted
Ankway product probably crap.