PDA

View Full Version : Intrebare rail-uri de +12V



dios
07-10-2004, 16:34
Sunt curios, la sursele Enermax cu doua railuri de +12V, cum s-o face "consumul"?
Sunt impreuna, mai intai suge dintr-un rail si daca nu ajunge trece la al doilea? Ia din ambele in acelasi timp? Care e suportul real al gaselnitei asteia? In afara de cifra efectiva de A, ofc.

Gogu
07-10-2004, 17:51
Nu stiu la Enermax cum este, dar la Antec NeoPower o linie are 18A si cealalta 15A, dar curentul maxim pe ambele nu poate depasi 32A.

PS. Vad ca asa e si la Enermax, cine citeste specs-urile de pe site afla.
15+18 max 32, 18+18 max 35.

QD
07-10-2004, 18:26
Am intrebat, va spun cand primesc raspuns.

dios
07-10-2004, 19:36
Da, asta ar fi una, dar cu ce e mai bine sa fie 2 railuri decat una singura de 25A, de exemplu. Ca oricum nu ajungi sa-ti consume atata...

Varzmaster
07-10-2004, 19:46
Tensiune mai curata, caldura degajata mai mica, eficienta mai mare. All-in-all nu este "o treaba" chiar atat de importanta. Dar pentru maniaci... :rolleyes:

Iar din cate am vazut cum sunt astea pe interior, nu mi se pare ca se poate "o compensare" reciproca a rail-urilor... dar trebuie sa studiez mai atent.

mimed
23-10-2004, 15:13
Mda, si eu stiam ca nu se pot compensa reciproc. Adica daca vrei sa stresezi unul in exces te lovesti repede de pragul superior chiar daca celalalt someaza. Teoretic, insa, doua railuri ar trebui sa fie mai stabile atita vreme cit nu depasesti capacitatea niciunuia.

Dar vezi aici despre Noisetaker 370W: http://www.materiel.be/alims/psu351_430w/page7.php

Au vu de ces tableaux, nous pourrions commenter que ces tensions sont excellentes, ce qui est absolument vrai. Cependant, nous devons ajouter qu'avec notre configuration overclockée, nous n'avons pas pu terminer une session de 3DMark03 et CPUBurn plantait le PC. Dans les deux cas, nous avions droit à un gel de l'écran comme lorsqu'un overclocking important n'est pas stable. Ce n'est qu'en réduisant progressivement notre overclocking à 1.9V et 200x11 au lieu de 2.15V et 200x12 que nous sommes parvenus à exécuter CPUBurn et 3DMark03 sans plantage.

Alors que l'Enermax 353 watts n'a posé aucun problème, on peut s'étonner que la 370 watts ne suive pas. Selon nous, cela est à imputer à la séparation du +12V en deux lignes de 13 et 14 ampères là où la 353 watts propose une ligne unique de 26 ampères. Etant donné les 2.15 V de vcore infligés à notre Barton 2500+, la ligne +12V dédiée à la carte mère et au processeur semble insuffisante pour stabiliser la configuration.

Culmea e ca 353W-ul pare fix aceeasi constructie minus dual rail-ul de pe +12.

Gogu
23-10-2004, 21:13
Nu am inteles nimic, nu stiu franceza.

dios
23-10-2004, 21:16
Altavista (http://world.altavista.com/tr) translate :D

Within sight of these tables, we could comment that these tensions are excellent, which is absolutely true. However, we must add qu'avec our configuration overclockée, we n'avons not been able to finish a session of 3DMark03 and CPUBurn planted the PC. In both cases, we had right to an important gel of l'écran like lorsqu'un overclocking n'est not stable. This n'est qu'en gradually reducing our overclocking to 1.9V and 200x11 instead of 2.15V and 200x12 that we managed to carry out CPUBurn and 3DMark03 without planting.

Whereas l'Enermax 353 Watts n'a posed any problem, one can s'étonner that 370 Watts does not follow. According to us, that is to be charged to the separation of the +12V in two lines of 13 and 14 amps where 353 Watts proposes a single line of 26 amps. Being given 2.15 V of vcore inflicted to our Barton 2500+, the line +12V dedicated to the mother chart and the processor seems insufficient to stabilize the configuration.

Worldlingo (http://www.worldlingo.com/wl/translate)

Within sight of these tables, we could comment on that these tensions are excellent, what is absolutely true. However, we must add that with our overclockée configuration, we could not finish a session of 3DMark03 and CPUBurn planted the PC. In both cases, we had right to a gel of the screen as when an important overclockingis not stable. It is only by gradually reducing our overclocking to 1.9V and 200x11 instead of 2.15V and 200x12 that we managed to carry out CPUBurn and3DMark03 without planting.

Whereas Enermax 353 Watts did not pose any problem, one can be astonished that 370 Watts does not follow. According to us, that is to be charged to the separation of the +12V in two lines of 13and 14 amps where 353 Watts proposes a single line of 26 amps. Being given 2.15 V of vcore inflicted to our Barton 2500+, the line +12V dedicated to the mother chart and the processor seems insufficient to stabilize the configuration.

Worldlingo rulz.
aaa... google? :)

zap
01-11-2004, 23:15
Sa inteleg ca sursa de 370W e mai proasta decat aia de 353W? Dual rail sux?

QD
02-11-2004, 00:53
Eu n-as zice...Din 15 surse vandute nimeni nu s-a plans pana acum.

Am facut un sistem intreg bazat pe acea sursa: A64 3000+, Leadtek 6800, 1GB ram. Omu isi tine sistemu 230x10 si totul ii merge f bine.

Am mai vazut eu reviews in care Sp94 iese in fata lui Xp120, iar eu le-am testat pe amadoua si imi da tocmai invers.

Acu ce sa zic....din cate surse Enermax s-au dat pana acum n-am avut absolut nici o reclamatie. Si s-au dat ceva....

Valentin
02-11-2004, 03:09
Eu am sursa asta de 370W Noisetaker, si nu am de raportat decat de bine pana acuma :) Very silent .. :)

dios
02-11-2004, 05:25
Depinde la ce le folosesti. Uite de exemplu cineva cu Vapochill a avut probleme cu NeoPower, care are 2 rail-uri, nu-i pleca, in schimb cu TruePower 430W mergea bine mersi. Ala la startup suge 10-12A si pesemne in contextul unui sistem destul de OC-at (A64 2600+MHz, BH-5 etc) deja depasea un rail d-ala.

Gogu
02-11-2004, 14:04
E mai ciudat cu NeoPower si cu TruePower, nu e vina sursei e o chestie de incompatibilitate.
Am testat mai serios NeoPower-ul, eventual vin si cu poze soon, dar ideea e ca e o sursa excelenta.

tomsky
26-03-2005, 15:07
QD, intrebare intrebatoare: care e diferenta intre seriile coolergiant si fma? in afara de carcasa si ventilatoare? ca io ma kiorasc pe specificatiile lor si mi se par identice...

PesteImputit
26-03-2005, 18:46
@qd mai io nu cred ca tinea 3000+ in 10*230 (provided ca ala e pe 939) poate 9*230

QD
27-03-2005, 21:42
Peste, era pe socket 754.

tomsky: seria coolergiant are carcasa din aluminiu si pana la 530W 3 fanuri in loc de 2.
Apoi mai sunt 4 sata fata de 2 (cel putin EG465 are doar doi conectori sata).
FMA nu are facilitatea "smart fan" - adica nu se invart fanurile dupa ce sursa se opreste.
EG465 are o singura linie de 12V....
Si in general seria FMA e mai ieftina.

tomsky
27-03-2005, 22:28
got it. adica pt un a64 o/c si eventual 2 6800gt in sli un coolergiant de 600 conteaza.