Originally posted by: RussianSensation
I'd have to S T R O N G L Y disagree with that ordering.
All you really did is list them in order of eye-candy. The OCZ and Enermax aren't even capable of sustaining their labeled wattage. Some call that "fraud", others are more forgiving and call it a "peak rating". Did you know that on PC Power & Cooling's website, when they compare their psu to the "inferior" one, that inferior one is an Enermax?
The world records for 3dmark03 and 05 were set on systems using OCZ 520 watt power supplies. And 6+ghz p4 and 3.6ghz FX overclocks were set on OCZ power supplies not long ago either. And countless websites gave them editor choice awards. Sure PC Power and Cooling is the best there is. But it costs $200+ a piece. His ranking is justified if he just added the words, "reasonably priced," next to it.
I would agree that PC P&C is the best quality overall, but OCZ, Enermax Forton and Antec will give you all the juice you need to set records and have an amazing system without having to spend the cost of a cpu or a videcard on a PSU.[/quote]
This is exactly the kind of illogical thinking that causes false impressions.
OCZ has won editors awards because the editors thought they looked good. Frankly I'm sick of arguing about it, over and over clueless people review them and don't bother to do accurate testing of full load capacity. When a PSU labeled as 500W can't sustain that, it's fraud. No CPU or video card overclock requires remotely near 500W, and yet THEY chose to label them as 500W, which is not some kind of "guideline", it is a precise scientific measurement of power that is not variable based on personal interpretations or marketing gimmicks. Nor is it basked on chrome, cable sheaths, LEDS or clear fans, etc, etc, etc.
Winning a 3Dmark contest has nothing to do with which PSU is better. All that's necessary there is for the PSU to output ENOUGH, with ripple in moderation only enough that the system it's powering, survived until that point, nothing more. The sad part is that such systems driven by marginal PSU, will probably fail. Where do reviewers test PSU output for more than a few hours, days at most? Even the nastiest piece of trash PSU will run for a few days before failing, probably even months. I'm not arguing that the OCZ Ultra is utter trash, but it IS only $30 worth of PSU, very well-dressed. You might be able to find some Ultra 500W for $30 still, though no chrome or modular connectors.
If you want to nitpick, somewhere here I have an nVidia FX5900, which has been proven by online tests to consume the most power of any video card (well, excluding FX5950). Mine is volt-modded, it uses significantly MORE power than the average FX5900... it may be the most power hungry card ever to exist (along with anyone else who has a volt-modded FX5900). What PSU is in the system it's running in? A mere Thermaltake 420W. I have better PSU here sitting new in boxes but I didn't change the PSU. Why? Because it didn't need to be changed, all that's needed is a PSU capable of the load, and typical safety, filtering, etc.
So let's suppose someone thinks the Ultra is really good. Do they know that Ultra doesn't make, just relabels it? Do they know the same PSU minus the chrome and modular connectors/other frills sells for less, sometimes MUCH less? Can they name at least two of the other relabeled names (there are more than two)? Would their impresssion of it be changed after they saw how much markup there is after a dozen dollars worth of cosmetic deviations?
Facebook
Twitter