![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
I've never seen that, my current PSU manual does mention how to reset it after a safety feature trips if it doesn't start working again automatically(I believe you unplug it and switch it on and off a certain number of times).
![[Spectre]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/89/89728.jpg?1455675927){kind=avatar}
It's a Seasonic, I think they know and like I said it gave instructions on how to force the safety features to reset after tripping if they didn't do so automatically.
Permanent latch off is an acceptable response to certain faults.
That is correct, most also don't even mention them or say the PS will survive an abnormal condition because abnormal conditions can be very erratic and not predictable to design for. Now virtually all my power supplies have gone through some event and survived, here in Florida it is mostly brown outs, routinely, sometimes a couple a day followed by a month of no power loses. Bright to low lights -> voltage variation is also common. Now I was foolish in buying a cheap PS, Vampire, it did not shutdown on a short, maybe it was not low enough resistance. I had one of the dim plugs going to a switch which would turn on a second power supply. I did not mount the switch correctly and it was shorting out to the metal base which was grounded, the power supply did not shut down and the cable melted (fire hazard), I caught it because of the smell, if I was not in the room I am certain that cable would have caught on fire. In this case that PS did not protect against a ground enough to melt a dim power cable. About a week later the power supply failed, most likely with a big arc, I wasn't in the room at the time, the power supply power rail on its board basically looked like it exploded.
No kidding.
They need a test program to test? Consumers don't know anything about PSU's which is why tests are needed. Admittedly I'm disappointing that there was no discussion about the quality of the components themselves in the Gigabyte failing PSU's. Like what are the mosfets rated for? How robust is the OPP so my overpriced GPU isn't fried? In regards to the OPP on the Gigabyte PSU's, it's a fire hazard waiting to happen and GN proved that more than adequately. You couldn't pay me to use one of those in my PC unless you pay me exactly what my PC is worth in the current market. Did your review catch the failure of OPP on these units?
Who are you again?
Yeah, I think someone earlier in this thread got the email. Good on them. At least Newegg is trying to fix it, and I guess Gigabyte is doing something, assuming the problem is limited to those serial numbers.
Right but they only offered him a replacement! They may actually be monitoring forum/social media chatter haha. Being that everyone has been saying the same thing, to just give people refunds.
If you can't figure that out that is more a you problem than a me problem.Who are you again?
So your implication is, that GN is making up 'whatever they want' to make the unit fail?
Confirmation bias?? You reading minds now? You might try reading the above sentence and apply it to your own responses.
You tested power supplies for 15 years, so there's no way any of us can have any relevant opinion eh? And you most certainly know more about testing than anyone else, certainly more than a 'damn youtuber'!
Again, so you know how GN tests power supplies? You are making claims about something you have no way of knowing.
I'm sure I have read a few over the years.
No, at [H] we never tested anything with power supplies that did not have an industry defined specification. You need to go back and actually look at what we did.
No, clickbait is used because someone is complaining about something that has no specification or standard. By definition, that is click-bait.
No. I still test power supplies professionally.
I know how they tested OPP and it was not to any standard that is accepted. That is not a valid test.
Sounds like you haven't....
I already provided the proof earlier. There is no specification for what they claimed to have tested.
I can produce crap for hours on video too. Doesn't mean that it is valid. And no, they showed a unit that acted the way they expected. Not the way that is uniformly accepted by a standard. I can do the same thing for any unit. I can make one pass or I can make one fail if I work in the space of things that are not set down in specifications.
Dying much less blowing up when pushed too hard is pretty much a pass/fail test and you still haven't given any substantiative reasons as to why this should be the expected outcome when tested in this manner, actually I think you danced around the issue of whether this even should be expected which is the only good reason I can think of for disregarding the results entirely out of hand like you have.
You sound bought.
Just because a specification wasn't given doesn't mean one isn't there. Imagine if an auto manufacturer didn't give a specification for fuel pressure and as a mechanic you decided not to test it even though you totally could because of this reason. Your excuses are lazy at least and incompetent at most.
This is highly debatable. In my experience a person who claims to be a professional and then tells me how many years they've been doing this, usually knows nothing. This is where I step in and fix the problem they couldn't fix. Just cause you've been doing something for years doesn't mean you're good at it, and claiming to be a professional isn't an excuse for incompetence. You failed to perform a simply OPP test on this PSU and claim not to because of lack of a specification. The whole point of OPP is to prevent a catastrophic failure and you don't need a specification to test this. You push the PSU until it shuts down and then see if it survives as well as the rest of the PC. How is this hard for you to understand?
You need to crawl back into the hiding place you came out of. Nobody cares about OPP specification when it clearly failed spectacularly. If you can make any PSU go BOOM then it failed. The specification at that point is irrelevant.
Nothing is going to fall inline to any specification given by the manufacturer when it comes to OPP. Specification for OPP is just an excuse for Gigabyte. Why is 10 seconds intervals used to increase the load by 10%? My guess is that gives a more realistic scenario as to someone turning on their PC and then starting up a game. It also gives gigabyte a fighting chance instead of just going to 140% and waiting for the kaboom. Imagine someone buying a RTX 3090 along with a Intel 11900k and then you decide to overclock everything to the max. Then you could be going past this power supplies rated power and not trigger OPP but we know this PSU will fail before triggering OPP.
Lets assume that GN didn't do it correctly. So what should have GN done instead? If no specification was given then what GN did was find it, which was about 140%. If 140% isn't the specification then why was the OPP set to 140%? If the specification is something like 110% and you have to wait 5 minutes to increase the load then go away. It's not a realistic use case and doesn't explain why it takes to 140% load to finally kick in.
The old JG reviews tested PSUs beyond spec in both wattage and heat. I don't know if they went that high but it wasn't that uncommon in the more extreme tests for them to trip protections, iirc doing that out of spec wasn't considered bad unless it killed the unit. The first thing that happens when you push a unit beyond spec is the efficiency drops and is often one of the factors that goes into a wattage rating, for instance a unit might pass gold efficiency requirements at a lower wattage while also being fine at a higher wattage but only meet silver or bronze requirements(sometimes efficiency falls off a cliff above rated wattage too). Beyond that protections should kick in including protection from frying itself by running at way too high of wattage however it should be noted that is a failsafe and shouldn't relied on to work 100% of the time, it also shouldn't fail 100% of time either though.
Cool, does reminds me a lot of PSU just barely squeak by on their efficiency ratings lol. My old ABS 1100W was like that. I had issues with that one cutting out so I replaced it with a 1250.
Well, that is the thing. No. A flawed test can single out a particular product to fail. If I set the test up a different way I could make another other model fail if I wanted to.
Depends on the test and the parameters. It is not that simple as just shutdown always. There are events that are outside of normal design parameters that can not be accounted for that means that when they fail they do so in unexpected ways. But, again, I say this from a perspective of doing this professionally not sensationally.
I like they are extending testing to include Short Circuit Protection (which I think is very straightforward and very critical for a PSU to protect against), Over Power Protection and so on.
There are safety standards for PC power supplies that have to be meant. Short circuit protection, temperature (max allowed), over current and many others. Testing will vary on design, for example a current limiting circuit may not need a over current protection mechanism to shut it down but may incorporate that as a backup on another design. The new standard now being used in the US is IEC 62368-1 for PCs. I can see some power supplies OPP could just be a fuse that burns out and not a switching circuit. Unfortunately IEC 62368-1 cost $350 for a pdf file, now I am a super geek nerd when it comes to these types of manuals on standards and regulations (scary to be honest, abnormally so
). Maybe I will hit a library to take a gander if the library has it.
To be fair, yes I think GN mentioned they tested about 10 units of the GB PSU and not all of them exploded, so I'll give Spectre credit there. I think 3 or 4 of them did explode, not 100%, but also not a great ratio either.
