What would be the potential savings in a typical 350-400W enthusiast gaming system compared to a Platinum old Gold PSU? Given this price for a 600W, I have a feeling there is very stiff competition when you compare the bottom line (cost of running a machine.) And that's completely ignoring the filtering issues, which alone for this price would drive me to the Seasonic 660 Platinum.
It would take years of 24/7 use at full 600W load to see any monetary savings by going up one or even two 80 PLUS certification tiers. The only reason to get a Gold/Platinum/Titanium is because they tend to be higher quality and the PSU is the most important part of your computer, so high quality is a good thing. Though this thing's Ripple kinda sucks, I definitely wouldn't buy this unit.
It's hard to go wrong with Seasonic! I have a 750W Gold Seasonic myself.
To further expand. When I'm shopping for a power supply, the order of things I look at is: 1) Rated Wattage 2) Ripple 3) How it behaves in a hot environment 4) Cross-load test results 5) How modular (if it all) the unit is 6) The quality (cable gauge), length, and how many cables it comes with (I like to use Full Tower cases, so short cables wont work, and I tend to have a lot of drives) 7) Price and 8) Literally the last thing I look at is the 80 PLUS rating because there is no way in hell I am going to run a power supply at 100% load (I aim for 60%) and 1%-2% efficiency will make virtually no difference in my power bill. The $30 I save from getting Gold instead of Platinum is more than I am going to realistically save on my power bill.
FYI, with new PSU designs crossload should be irrelevant. Instead of coupled 12 and 5.3/3v supplies modern designs are pure 12V first, and then use DC-DC converters to step down power to the lower voltages as needed.
I'm with you here, I try to keep my intended load in the 50% range as well. Good for noise, good for the PSU's longevity too.
Have had motherboards and video cards die in the past because of a poor PSU. A very good quality PSU is a sure thing investment, as they last a very long time anyways.
So was it faulty or just cables too short and stiff? Seasonic units are among the best. I buy mainly Seasonic or FSP. And stiff cables, well if the cables are very high quality (heavier gauge) they're going to be stiffer. Cheaper, thinner cables are more flexible. There is a limit though, and sometimes in a tight case you have to give up some wire thickness. But that doesn't mean stiff cables are a "bad" thing, they just have limitations, pros and cons.
1% Efficiency difference between Platinum and Titanium 400 W (your load) 12 cents average price per kWh electricity in the USA
.01(1%) x 400(w) = 4(w) 4(w) x 24 (hrs/day) = 96 (w/day) 96(w/day) x 365.25(days/year) = 35,064(w/year) 35,064(w/year) ÷ 1,000 (kWh) = 35.064 (kWh/year) 35.064 (kWh/year) x .12 ($/kWr) = $4.2 savings per year
So you save $4.2 per year if you run it at 400W 24/7 a day, all year long which I doubt you're going to do. There is a 3% efficiency difference between Gold and Titanium so you'd save $12.6 a year if you ran it at 400W 24/7 all year long. Efficiency ratings really aren't worth it.
At release max efficiency items of any type never pay for themselves in reasonable timeframes in areas of average cost; a situation that's been true all the way back to the original 80+ standard.
You're missing two things, the first is that not everyone pays average rates. Move to Hawaii or Germany and you're paying 35-40c/kwh and the max efficiency models will quickly pay for themselves in 24/7 high load situations and generally break even over system lifespans. Move to somewhere in the developing world where the grid isn't reliable and you frequently need to run a generator to keep the lights on and even light usage will make high efficiency units pay for themselves (gas/diesel generators produce stupidly expensive power). Live somewhere hot enough that you run the AC most of the year and rarely need a heater and the fact that every kWH of power your PC consumes is matched by a second for the AC to dissipate it and your real energy costs can be well above the headline numbers. (Live far enough to the north and using it as a space heater reduces the effective cost of energy.)
The other factor you're forgetting is that they all become cheaper over time. When they first came out even the baseline 80+ models had a major price premium attached. Today for conventional use the lifetime breakeven point for an enthusiast system is with a Silver/Gold PSU, or Gold/Platinum under near 24/7 use.
PS A PSU that passes the titanium spec is 2% better than one that passes platinum. This one only got 1% above because it was oversold by Silverstone and didn't meet the spec.
I just want to say while it is only slightly better than platinum, Titanium is the only spec that requires 10% load levels to count for the efficiency. There are plenty of platinum units that have no issue at 10% load, but there are a few that go a decent way below 90% efficiency at 10% load. But since that isn't part of the platinum spec it doesn't get touched on often.
True; but the savings from increased efficiency there are much smaller. Going from 70 to 80 to 90% at 50W changes from 21 to 12 to 6W of losses. The 6W improvement from 80 to 90% is the equivalent of going from 94% to 96% at 300W. There's some value in it (especially in weeding out the worst of the worst); but there're probably bigger gains to be had improving the idle power characteristics of the rest of the system.
Why aren't you testing all the compliance percents on titanium units? Theyou should have high efficiency at 10% load as well. Other sites are doing much more detailed reviews of PSUsnew and it's a shame you guys aren't being as thorough. I generally expect more from you guys.
Interesting review, falls in line with what others have said about Silverstone's Titanium line.
As an FYI, you used the very same box shot three times in this article, twice in a row on the first page, and again in the conclusion. That was either an error or an editing oversight. And frankly, box shots just aren't a very good way to represent the product you're reviewing. How about a photo of the power supply on the first and last pages instead?
The Ripple on this unit is really horrible for such a high efficiency power supply. That alone would instantly disqualify it if I was searching for a new PSU.
I have two of the 700 watt models. I mine Eth coin with the builds.
So I run 24/7/365 at 500 watts. Same build using the cosair ax760 plat pulls 510 watts. So 10 watts is 7.2 kwatts per month or $1.30 per month. (18 cent power) that is $15.60 per year. The silverstone is 155 the corsair is 150. But this only works if you are mining 24/7/365
Also no power switch is simply wrong and warranty is 3 years. vs the corsair 7 year.
So for most users the corsair ax 760 plat is the better choice
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
21 Comments
Back to Article
Zoeff - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
I've got this exact PSU for my secondary PC, which is a mini-ITX build. Definitely very quiet and very nice power efficiency!hansmuff - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
What would be the potential savings in a typical 350-400W enthusiast gaming system compared to a Platinum old Gold PSU? Given this price for a 600W, I have a feeling there is very stiff competition when you compare the bottom line (cost of running a machine.)And that's completely ignoring the filtering issues, which alone for this price would drive me to the Seasonic 660 Platinum.
Freakie - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
It would take years of 24/7 use at full 600W load to see any monetary savings by going up one or even two 80 PLUS certification tiers. The only reason to get a Gold/Platinum/Titanium is because they tend to be higher quality and the PSU is the most important part of your computer, so high quality is a good thing. Though this thing's Ripple kinda sucks, I definitely wouldn't buy this unit.It's hard to go wrong with Seasonic! I have a 750W Gold Seasonic myself.
Freakie - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
To further expand. When I'm shopping for a power supply, the order of things I look at is: 1) Rated Wattage 2) Ripple 3) How it behaves in a hot environment 4) Cross-load test results 5) How modular (if it all) the unit is 6) The quality (cable gauge), length, and how many cables it comes with (I like to use Full Tower cases, so short cables wont work, and I tend to have a lot of drives) 7) Price and 8) Literally the last thing I look at is the 80 PLUS rating because there is no way in hell I am going to run a power supply at 100% load (I aim for 60%) and 1%-2% efficiency will make virtually no difference in my power bill. The $30 I save from getting Gold instead of Platinum is more than I am going to realistically save on my power bill.DanNeely - Saturday, July 30, 2016 - link
FYI, with new PSU designs crossload should be irrelevant. Instead of coupled 12 and 5.3/3v supplies modern designs are pure 12V first, and then use DC-DC converters to step down power to the lower voltages as needed.LordanSS - Saturday, July 30, 2016 - link
I'm with you here, I try to keep my intended load in the 50% range as well. Good for noise, good for the PSU's longevity too.Have had motherboards and video cards die in the past because of a poor PSU. A very good quality PSU is a sure thing investment, as they last a very long time anyways.
GeneralTom - Saturday, July 30, 2016 - link
I had a bad Seasonic PSU, Seasonic G-Series G-750.Cables are too short and very stiff.
Alexvrb - Sunday, July 31, 2016 - link
So was it faulty or just cables too short and stiff? Seasonic units are among the best. I buy mainly Seasonic or FSP. And stiff cables, well if the cables are very high quality (heavier gauge) they're going to be stiffer. Cheaper, thinner cables are more flexible. There is a limit though, and sometimes in a tight case you have to give up some wire thickness. But that doesn't mean stiff cables are a "bad" thing, they just have limitations, pros and cons.Freakie - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
You know what, just for shits and giggles:1% Efficiency difference between Platinum and Titanium
400 W (your load)
12 cents average price per kWh electricity in the USA
.01(1%) x 400(w) = 4(w)
4(w) x 24 (hrs/day) = 96 (w/day)
96(w/day) x 365.25(days/year) = 35,064(w/year)
35,064(w/year) ÷ 1,000 (kWh) = 35.064 (kWh/year)
35.064 (kWh/year) x .12 ($/kWr) = $4.2 savings per year
So you save $4.2 per year if you run it at 400W 24/7 a day, all year long which I doubt you're going to do. There is a 3% efficiency difference between Gold and Titanium so you'd save $12.6 a year if you ran it at 400W 24/7 all year long. Efficiency ratings really aren't worth it.
DanNeely - Saturday, July 30, 2016 - link
At release max efficiency items of any type never pay for themselves in reasonable timeframes in areas of average cost; a situation that's been true all the way back to the original 80+ standard.You're missing two things, the first is that not everyone pays average rates. Move to Hawaii or Germany and you're paying 35-40c/kwh and the max efficiency models will quickly pay for themselves in 24/7 high load situations and generally break even over system lifespans. Move to somewhere in the developing world where the grid isn't reliable and you frequently need to run a generator to keep the lights on and even light usage will make high efficiency units pay for themselves (gas/diesel generators produce stupidly expensive power). Live somewhere hot enough that you run the AC most of the year and rarely need a heater and the fact that every kWH of power your PC consumes is matched by a second for the AC to dissipate it and your real energy costs can be well above the headline numbers. (Live far enough to the north and using it as a space heater reduces the effective cost of energy.)
The other factor you're forgetting is that they all become cheaper over time. When they first came out even the baseline 80+ models had a major price premium attached. Today for conventional use the lifetime breakeven point for an enthusiast system is with a Silver/Gold PSU, or Gold/Platinum under near 24/7 use.
PS A PSU that passes the titanium spec is 2% better than one that passes platinum. This one only got 1% above because it was oversold by Silverstone and didn't meet the spec.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/80_Plus
Kaboose - Tuesday, August 2, 2016 - link
I just want to say while it is only slightly better than platinum, Titanium is the only spec that requires 10% load levels to count for the efficiency. There are plenty of platinum units that have no issue at 10% load, but there are a few that go a decent way below 90% efficiency at 10% load. But since that isn't part of the platinum spec it doesn't get touched on often.DanNeely - Wednesday, August 3, 2016 - link
True; but the savings from increased efficiency there are much smaller. Going from 70 to 80 to 90% at 50W changes from 21 to 12 to 6W of losses. The 6W improvement from 80 to 90% is the equivalent of going from 94% to 96% at 300W. There's some value in it (especially in weeding out the worst of the worst); but there're probably bigger gains to be had improving the idle power characteristics of the rest of the system.ipkh - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
Why aren't you testing all the compliance percents on titanium units? Theyou should have high efficiency at 10% load as well. Other sites are doing much more detailed reviews of PSUsnew and it's a shame you guys aren't being as thorough. I generally expect more from you guys.DanNeely - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
Look at the graph. They do test that low; nut putting all points in a table's unwieldy.Termie - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
Interesting review, falls in line with what others have said about Silverstone's Titanium line.As an FYI, you used the very same box shot three times in this article, twice in a row on the first page, and again in the conclusion. That was either an error or an editing oversight. And frankly, box shots just aren't a very good way to represent the product you're reviewing. How about a photo of the power supply on the first and last pages instead?
Freakie - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
The Ripple on this unit is really horrible for such a high efficiency power supply. That alone would instantly disqualify it if I was searching for a new PSU.Synomenon - Friday, July 29, 2016 - link
Been using this PSU in an ITX gaming PC since April. It's the only ATX PSU I've owned that does not have any coil whine. It's very quiet.philipma1957 - Saturday, July 30, 2016 - link
I have two of the 700 watt models.I mine Eth coin with the builds.
So I run 24/7/365 at 500 watts. Same build using the cosair ax760 plat pulls 510 watts. So 10 watts is 7.2 kwatts per month or $1.30 per month. (18 cent power) that is $15.60 per year.
The silverstone is 155 the corsair is 150. But this only works if you are mining 24/7/365
Also no power switch is simply wrong and warranty is 3 years. vs the corsair 7 year.
So for most users the corsair ax 760 plat is the better choice
tonyou - Monday, August 1, 2016 - link
SilverStone has already updated their Strider Titanium and Platinum series PSUs to 5 years earlier this year.http://www.silverstonetek.com/warranty.php
GeneralTom - Saturday, July 30, 2016 - link
Which ATX 12V Standard does it support?powerarmour - Sunday, July 31, 2016 - link
Nice review, though if you own a GTX 1060 or an RX 480 you'll have to wait, peasant.