Transient Response
20% Load – 20ms
| Voltage | Before | After | Change | Pass/Fail |
| 12V | 12.088V | 11.962V | 1.04% | Pass |
| 5V | 5.023V | 4.905V | 2.35% | Pass |
| 3.3V | 3.332V | 3.150V | 5.47% | Pass |
| 5VSB | 5.064V | 5.026V | 0.75% | Pass |
50% Load -20ms
| Voltage | Before | After | Change | Pass/Fail |
| 12V | 12.081V | 11.949V | 1.09% | Pass |
| 5V | 5.019V | 4.873V | 2.92% | Pass |
| 3.3V | 3.325V | 3.136V | 5.69% | Pass |
| 5VSB | 5.035V | 4.990V | 0.90% | Pass |
The transient response is good at 12V since it is close to 1% average deviation. The minor rails don’t perform so well, especially 3.3V.
Transient Response ATX v3.0 Tests
The PSU successfully passed all ATX v3.0 transient response tests.
The 12V rail’s voltage drops low during the 200% transient response test.
Pages:
It could be, because initially all manufacturers provided 600W-set cables, till they realized that this was not inline with the ATX spec.
I’m finding more and more sources confirming that the 12VHPWR connector is actually 450W
This is a very vile deception :C
Be careful with this cable.
Ive installed it today and it sucks ass, just sitting in browser it overheats and turns fan on with like 1500rpm to my hearing every 3-5min, also ive looked more closely and this review is so off, on box it says 30% fan start, its 300w, and u show us its 500w, it just cant be true
I would return it back, RMA.
Maybe I was a little pushy or tactless. I had no bad intentions. Don’t be offended.
Hello. This is not the first time I have noticed errors in your article.
1. Page 1. First write about the depth of 140mm, then as 160mm.
2. Page 3. APFC MOSFETs and Main Switchers. The text has one name, but a hyperlink to another.
3. Page 4. Fan Speed (RPM) and PSU Noise (dB[A]) columns. Fan speed and noise do not match page 9.
I did not read the entire article, but only walked through what interests me.
We have a saying in my country, who works a lot, also makes many mistakes. That…
1) you were correct I wrote 160mm instead of 140mm. Feel free to shoot me!
2) the link is correct in APFC, not correct in main switchers. fixed
3) The page 9 IS NOT THE SAME DATA as page 4. If you had read a bit of the text or noticed the temperatures on the corresponding graphs, you would have seen that.
You understand that in a review where a full week’s work is needed and around 20K readings have to be obtained (yes thousands) there can be mistakes!
So I would appreciate a bit tact and understanding from my readers.