# List of most outdated PSU 2022 regarding Intel ATX compliance



## kiriakost (Feb 25, 2022)

Generally speaking at the current calendar and day, INTEL ATX 2.4 this is now old standard, and any PSU still based to it, this is ancient electronic design.

I did spot so far:
ZALMAN branded PSU all ATX 2.4  ( Korea this buying from China)
SilverStone branded PSU all ATX 2.4 (Taiwan this buying from China)
Seasonic (2020~2022) ATX 2.4 ? (ODM)


If you have similar finds ? Then help the list to grow


----------



## Mats (Feb 25, 2022)

Here are 1487 models, of which 161 are ATX 2.5 or newer.

89 % of all models are ATX 2.4 or older (models with unknown standard included).

4 Corsair models are ATX 2.5, the rest (71) are older.
You can add Seasonic to the list, they're all ATX 2.4 or older.

I haven't checked any of their sites.






						Netzteile & USV Netzteile mit SFX Version: SFX 2.5 Preisvergleich Geizhals EU
					

Preisvergleich und Bewertungen für Netzteile & USV Netzteile mit SFX Version: SFX 2.5




					geizhals.eu


----------



## kiriakost (Feb 25, 2022)

Mats said:


> 4 Corsair models are ATX 2.5, the rest (71) are older.
> You can add Seasonic to the list, they're all ATX 2.4 or older.



I have personally checked Seasonic, they seem to be gently unclear about it,  I did direct question at Facebook, they have ignore it so far.
In the past 10 days I am trying to connect with their marketing manager, unsuccessfully so far, but the team called as Media (web site and Facebook management) this is alive.


----------



## ExcuseMeWtf (Feb 25, 2022)

It's not a big deal though, as it applies to sleep modes mostly. And older PSUs might still work in practice as long as DC-DC based.


----------



## kiriakost (Feb 25, 2022)

ExcuseMeWtf said:


> It's not a big deal though, as it applies to sleep modes mostly. And older PSUs might still work in practice as long as DC-DC based.


I am fighting here old workarounds posted at 2014 = disable all your C ( Intel) power states from Bios, so to solve the problem.
Well, I prefer instead to ditch the dead standard and go with the new = 2.53 and fresher.


----------



## BSim500 (Feb 25, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> I am fighting here old workarounds posted at 2014 = disable all your C ( Intel) power states from Bios, so to solve the problem.


Exactly what's this issue all about? I have a couple of ATX v2.4 PSU's (Corsair and Seasonic) and neither have had any problems at all with Intel sleep states on both old and newer CPU's and under both W7, W10 and Linux Mint. They sleep and resume just fine without disabling any C-states / Speedstep.

Edit: Reading this, the only 2.4 vs 2.5 difference appears to be "Alternative Sleep Mode" (aka what Microsoft call "Modern /Connected Standby" under W10) and that's the first thing I always disable purely because I don't want my PC to be "always online, always connected" when it's supposed to be powered off. That's not a "feature" to be "upgraded" to, it's yet another security threat vector on the back of Microsoft's deluded belief that my desktop PC is some phone-less Windows Phone with a 32" screen...


----------



## kiriakost (Feb 25, 2022)

If some one likes to go deeper, he should read these.


----------



## BSim500 (Feb 25, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> If some one likes to go deeper, he should read these.


I don't think anyone has the time to go searching for the links for, then downloading and reading a +100 page spec design document vs simply explaining what problems you are experiencing with standby vs 99% of PSU's on the market. Have you tried disabling "Connected Standby" and just using the normal S3? There's even a pre-made .reg file here (merge, then reboot):-


```
Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Power]

"CsEnabled"=dword:00000000
```

Has that solved whatever issue you are having?


----------



## kiriakost (Feb 25, 2022)

BSim500 said:


> I don't think anyone has the time


Nice, you are free to move on.

Top tear brands at 650 ~ 850W these are very few.
I did succeed opening the door of Seasonic for getting further explanations. 
Seasonic Marketing manager responded, but clarifications will come from the headquarters, and there is some sort of Asian holiday.


----------



## BSim500 (Feb 25, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> Nice, you are free to move on.


As has everyone else because after 5 posts of you refusing to explain what the actual problem is, literally no-one's going to spend hours studying +100 page PSU design documentation then playing random guessing games on a Friday night. I genuinely hope you do fix whatever problem you are having, because my v2.4 ATX PSU's sleep & resume just fine on multiple OS's without needing to disable any C states in the BIOS.


----------



## kiriakost (Feb 26, 2022)

BSim500 said:


> As has everyone else because after 5 posts of you refusing to explain what the actual problem is.


There is not any problem that software level solutions could solve, when a hardware level device (as is the PSU), this is a programmable device due the factory which make it.
Now,  Read five times the Post No1,  it might help you to understand of how to spot by your self, newborn electronic designs = future proof compatibility with most INTEL platforms.


----------



## BSim500 (Feb 26, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> Now,  Read five times the Post No1


I'm responding more to your 3rd post (post #5):-



kiriakost said:


> I am fighting here old workarounds posted at 2014 = disable all your C ( Intel) power states from Bios, so to solve the problem.


The only problem I've ever had with C-states vs suspend / resume was on an old Ivy Bridge motherboard (Intel 3xxx series) which resumed locked in to the highest C-state (ie, SpeedStep stopped working after a suspend-resume cycle). And that problem was due to the motherboard not the PSU, changing PSU didn't fix it, but the problem magically vanished when I changed motherboard but kept the same PSU. So PSU version numbers by themselves don't mean a single thing as far as being a magical fix for troubleshooting ongoing problems you were complaining about. Now if many people's ATX v2.4 PSU's work perfectly well but it's only yours that doesn't, then perhaps you should consider that everyone else's ATX PSU's aren't broken at all, and perhaps at least try testing your PSU on more than one motherboard?

If you want to compile a list of ATX v2.5 PSU's for "future proofing" fine, but the point is you could buy a new ATX v2.5 PSU tomorrow and still experience the same glitchy C-states you were complaining about if that problem is caused by your motherboard (which is what actually controls the C-States)...


----------



## kiriakost (Feb 26, 2022)

BSim500 said:


> I'm responding more to your 3rd post (post #5):-


This called as change of subject in my village. 
Now I will give you a Golden tip,  never ever try to start a conversation with me in public, by criticizing posted facts, or by using your own imagination.  
It will never work. 

Consumers should learn to deliver their hard earned money, only at the brands (with specific product models) them able to deliver today innovation at reasonable pricing.
End of the story.


----------



## ExcuseMeWtf (Feb 26, 2022)

^Cool story bro.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 21, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> This called as change of subject in my village.
> Now I will give you a Golden tip,  never ever try to start a conversation with me in public, by criticizing posted facts, or by using your own imagination.
> It will never work.
> 
> ...



Never had a Problem from Seasonic, idgaf about what atx *.* version they are.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Mar 21, 2022)

eidairaman1 said:


> Never had a Problem from Seasonic, idgaf about what atx *.* version they are.



It honestly doesn't matter much, or, at all. Maybe the low-power sleep feature for the >10 year old designs that don't have the Haswell deep-sleep compatibility (and most PSU designs starting 2014-2015 support this), but even then it's only a thing if you use that anyway.

My 5950X desktop is running on a 1300 G2 that I acquired new in box around 2019 and it only began being used around late 2020 when I bought my RTX 3090. This power supply was reviewed here on TPU in August 2013, so it is probably a few revisions of the spec behind (ATX 2.31/EPS 2.92), which given this unit's design and age, was probably around the first models to be Haswell-ready.
Paraphrasing Aris back then, it can still start a truck, and it does so beautifully


----------



## chrcoluk (Mar 21, 2022)

Well they wont throw away old stock, so in these situations sadly new products get sold which are not ideal to buy.

Probably should be discounted from a moral point of view, but from their point of view, if they sell with demand they have no reason to drop the price.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 22, 2022)

ATX 2.2 , ATX 2.31 , ATX 2.4 , all are related to electrical measurements, all are related to minimum required load so the PSU this to be able to recover when the motherboard is at sleep state. 
Most PSU comes from brands, which are the middle man, and they have no awareness about delivering proper electrical specifications.

Here is one interesting story, *personal fresh experience*, two identical PSU these sold under a different logo. 
Both well build ATX 2.2 (successful electronic design)  , the Thermaltake one it does mention minimum load conditions, actual electrical values. 
The HIPER brand, skipped to do the same. 
I did succeed to confirm, thanks to Thermaltake offered information's, that with minimum load in use,  the freshly refurbished HIPER by my own hands, this is now good as new. 






						PSU repair: Thermaltake ToughPower PSH 750W tween brother of HiPER HPU-4M780-PE
					

PSU repair: Thermaltake ToughPower PSH 750W tween brother of HiPER HPU-4M780-PE



					www.ittsb.eu


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Mar 22, 2022)

Hiper PSU's were a bit iffy weren't they?


----------



## ExcuseMeWtf (Mar 22, 2022)

Not any more iffy than that Thermaltake... or, say, older Corsair using exact same platform


----------



## R-T-B (Mar 22, 2022)

I mean there are very few PSUs that support Alternative Sleep / ATX 2.53 right now.  I believe @crmaris tests for it.  Haven't seen any pass yet but I could have missed one.  I know the common SuperFlower Leadex and Seasonic Prime platforms fail, despite being very solid platforms.  No one seriously cares.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 22, 2022)

Tigger said:


> Hiper PSU's were a bit iffy weren't they?


The one at the right it was. 
But Hiper did the unexpected, replaced any PSU which failed within warranty period, with their 780W fresh batch. 
Hiper it did when away from the market, but did not leave behind unhappy customers.


----------



## Kissamies (Mar 22, 2022)

I guess my Seasonic FX-750 is as well, but how that does even matter? Do we all need to go and get a new PSU when we upgrade our systems in few years?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Mar 22, 2022)

MaenadFIN said:


> I guess my Seasonic FX-750 is as well, but how that does even matter? Do we all need to go and get a new PSU when we upgrade our systems in few years?


Nope


----------



## ThrashZone (Mar 22, 2022)

Hi,
I've never used sleep in anyway so I sure don't care about it.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Mar 22, 2022)

How come Bright hasn't been in this thread yet?


----------



## ThrashZone (Mar 22, 2022)

Hi,
Over the mad ducks quota


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 22, 2022)

MaenadFIN said:


> Do we all need to go and get a new PSU when we upgrade our systems in few years?


The ones who own professional workstations, they do consider their time also as extremely valuable.
a) They prefer the scheduled maintenance concept = replace the PSU at the end of it warranty, even if it works.
b) If you own more than two identical PC, always keep one new PSU as unused spare.

No advice for the home users.



Mr.Scott said:


> How come Bright hasn't been in this thread yet?


Some that they are in my ignore list, even if they do post a message, I do not see them.


----------



## R-T-B (Mar 22, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> Some that they are in my ignore list, even if they do post a message, I do not see them.


I don't think he was asking who you see, but rather where he is in general.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 23, 2022)

I am up to power down and install the Hiper 780W at my Haswell (CPU and motherboard).
This will take few hours, but I will discover first hand, ATX 2.2 limitations if any.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 24, 2022)

*Conclusion: *Hiper 780W = ATX 2.2  + Haswell = No problem.
At Haswell release times, there was too many declarations made by Corsair and of others, of which PSU models they were actually hand-tested about 100% compatibility with this platform.

Hiper 780W, ATX 2.2 ( along it brother Thermaltake ToughPower 750 AP),  they belong within the compatibility list, simply because they were *Top tear* ATX 2.2
I can only assume that back in time (2006~2013), the rear issue was ... which PSU this were *real *ATX 2.4 or ATX 2.2 ?  and of how many was just labeled as be as such (false labeling).

I did also and some electrical measurements as measuring accuracy confirmations, they are at my Blog.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Mar 24, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> *Conclusion: *Hiper 780W = ATX 2.2  + Haswell = No problem.
> At Haswell release times, there was too many declarations made by Corsair and of others, of which PSU models they were actually hand-tested about 100% compatibility with this platform.
> 
> Hiper 780W, ATX 2.2 ( along it brother Thermaltake ToughPower 750 AP),  they belong within the compatibility list, simply because they were *Top tear* ATX 2.2
> ...



It's not like older spec PSUs did not work with Haswell, they always did. The difference here is the power that the PSU will consume while the system is in a sleep state, which will be higher than a compliant PSU. Since Haswell, we have had much more advanced power management features released, but the power supplies still work correctly. Like, my 2.31 PSU + a Zen 3 processor, which has pretty much state of the art power management, it works just fine.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 24, 2022)

Dr. Dro said:


> It's not like older spec PSUs did not work with Haswell, they always did. The difference here is the power that the PSU will consume while the system is in a sleep state, which will be higher than a compliant PSU. Since Haswell, we have had much more advanced power management features released, but the power supplies still work correctly. Like, my 2.31 PSU + a Zen 3 processor, which has pretty much state of the art power management, it works just fine.


Do you have access at any budget (wall socket) plug-in AC power meter?
I do not have any statistics so far, of  ATX 2.31 PSU ( I need to know minimum consumption at power off).


----------



## Solid State Soul ( SSS ) (Mar 24, 2022)

eidairaman1 said:


> Never had a Problem from Seasonic, idgaf about what atx *.* version they are.


The bigger question is, would you still buy an outdated Seasonic over a newer ATX PSU platform ?



R-T-B said:


> I mean there are very few PSUs that support Alternative Sleep / ATX 2.53 right now.  I believe @crmaris tests for it.  Haven't seen any pass yet but I could have missed one.  I know the common SuperFlower Leadex and Seasonic Prime platforms fail, despite being very solid platforms.  No one seriously cares.


I think corsair RMX 2021 and XPG Core Reactor do support all the latest standards, both are CWT platforms btw.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Mar 24, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> Do you have access at any budget (wall socket) plug-in AC power meter?
> I do not have any statistics so far, of  ATX 2.31 PSU ( I need to know minimum consumption at power off).



Unfortunately I do not, and one that would handle a power supply of mine's capacity wouldn't be very easy to get. Anyhoo, Aris has many reviews here on TPU and on other sites like Tom's which should provide median idle power, so that can be useful for comparison, I suppose.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Mar 24, 2022)

Solid State Soul ( SSS ) said:


> The bigger question is, would you still buy an outdated Seasonic over a newer ATX PSU platform ?


Depends on what the choices were, and pricing.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 25, 2022)

Dr. Dro said:


> Unfortunately I do not, and one that would handle a power supply of mine's capacity wouldn't be very easy to get.


All right then, it might this recommendation to help you too, at spending wisely 14$ USD at something cheap and usable in the future.

https://www.ittsb.eu/forum/index.php?topic=1608.0 
You will not see in your market the specific brand, but most identical ones they are acceptable to use.


----------



## Cutechri (Mar 26, 2022)

I'm sticking with my Seasonic. I'm not interested in literal hot garbage GPUs in my system. If that's the direction we're going, 0 efficiency, then I might as well abandon this hobby altogether.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 26, 2022)

Cutechri said:


> I'm not interested in literal hot garbage GPUs in my system. If that's the direction we're going, 0 efficiency, then I might as well abandon this hobby altogether.


This is a very good point.
We are not going anywhere, as far it has to do with regular people, these using their workstation for something productive, and then they simply activating their gaming talent for one ~ three hours in a day 
Even in Greece, the citizen this has access to government/state organizations due a digital profile, and this raises your responsibility at keeping your PC healthy and clean all times.

TPU as all forums, this get accessed by all sort of people.
The definition of mainstream computing, this is not in danger by reading all sort of other people thoughts.
Choices in favor of use of products them using electrical power more efficiently , this is an indication that we are become wiser and more responsible as citizens.

Old PSU regarding technology,  this wasting 7W more per hour, VS a modern one, this is not a crime scene.
In comparison to what thousands large factory with outdated machinery they waste all day long.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Mar 26, 2022)

Cutechri said:


> I'm sticking with my Seasonic. I'm not interested in literal hot garbage GPUs in my system. If that's the direction we're going, 0 efficiency, then I might as well abandon this hobby altogether.



I feel you, this pretty much sums up my sentiment on the RTX 3090 Ti - and that is considered I am relatively accepting of high-wattage parts. At 375 watts, I strongly feel that my TUF OC '90 is pretty much around the edge of what is realistically manageable on air cooling, and I still run it with the fan speed cranked for good measure. Then comes Navi 31 and Ada Lovelace GPUs, rumored to be specced for up to 600W TGP on halo SKUs, and you really have to begin wondering if it is really worth it. At this point you might as well begin shipping exclusively liquid-cooled GPUs.

As long as an up-to-400W model is released, that is pretty much where I am going to be drawing the line over concerns with long term reliability, always preferring function over form.


----------



## The red spirit (Mar 28, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> I am fighting here old workarounds posted at 2014 = disable all your C ( Intel) power states from Bios, so to solve the problem.
> Well, I prefer instead to ditch the dead standard and go with the new = 2.53 and fresher.


C states in general are a mess. I used to have FX 6300 PC and it had all S states working, it went down to C6. I upgraded to i5 10400f and as much as I tried to troubleshoot, some C states aren't functional. I won't get into split between cores and package, but overall it only goes down to C3 at best. Board I use defaults to C1e only. I tried to force it to work with lower C states, but no bueno, PC started to lock up at random moments. And from what I read, it's a common issue. Other than that, the old Fortron (FSP) PSU I used otherwise worked fine, I'm not sure if it was officially rated to support ErP, but it did. Regarding C states, I'm not sure if it's hardware or software problems, but Intel's official position is as vague as it can be. They don't state anything about C states, they just say that their obligation is to pump out chips that have C states at all, but they don't care if it ever reaches lower than C1e state. Fun. Pretty typical Intel, it's the same crap that they have with PLs, but people don't care about C states nearly as much. But then again, C states are controversial. Enabling C states does dramatically reduce SSD small file access and write speed, as well as IOPS. They can make system less responsive with HDDs. They often cause system to be less responsive to user too. Audio guys claim that C states can cause jitters, but how truthful that is is unknown to me. Minus that audio thing, I can says that other downsides apply or applied to both Intel and AMD systems. Particularly, if you run SSD benches, you can see a difference very clearly. With general system responsiveness and latency, unfortunately difference is hard to measure and is more subjective. In gaming, you would need to test for a while and look at 0.1% lows. Intel Speedstep or enhanced Speedstep is another suspect of similar effects, but at this point it is largely replaced by modern Speedshift, which is much faster and more granular. Anyway, biggest power saving gains are from just halt state, which is C1 state and cannot be found in BIOS. You can enable toggle of it in Windows power setting control panel, but there's no reason to do that. Disabling halt state, makes chip consume basically its maximum power all the time, while doing nothing, I wasn't able to find any latency gains in benchmarks. C1e starts to have minimal negative effect on latency, but it's really small and negligible, meanwhile lower states do have much bigger effect, which besides benches may or may not translate to actual practical performance differences. 

Anyway, besides this whole write-up, my point is that power supply is most likely not a main problem with C states and that anything more than basic halt state (C1) or enhanced halt state (C1e) is not guaranteed to work and Intel + motherboard vendors most likely don't give a damn about them, including laptop board makers too. Despite being an interesting technology, it's not mature at all and updating PSU for that is likely to be pointless. On AMD side I had more problems with complicated relationship between C states, APM and turbo, rather than C states themselves, but I haven't touched Ryzen chips, so what I know is likely badly outdated.



Dr. Dro said:


> I feel you, this pretty much sums up my sentiment on the RTX 3090 Ti - and that is considered I am relatively accepting of high-wattage parts. At 375 watts, I strongly feel that my TUF OC '90 is pretty much around the edge of what is realistically manageable on air cooling, and I still run it with the fan speed cranked for good measure. Then comes Navi 31 and Ada Lovelace GPUs, rumored to be specced for up to 600W TGP on halo SKUs, and you really have to begin wondering if it is really worth it. At this point you might as well begin shipping exclusively liquid-cooled GPUs.
> 
> As long as an up-to-400W model is released, that is pretty much where I am going to be drawing the line over concerns with long term reliability, always preferring function over form.


To be fair, 150-200 watts is already badly taxing on dual slot dual fan cooling solutions. Unless we tolerated triple slot, triple fan cards, 250-300 watts are hard limit on air and that is if you tolerate moderate noise output from fans. For quiet computing, 180-200 watts are a hard limit. After those limits, for a while AIOs can be a band aid solution, but we will top out at triple slot 120/140mm coolers, as well as VRM cooling and memory cooling designs. Not to mention even all terrible heat per watt ratio, which gets worse, the higher you go and some people straight up unable to afford to consume so much power for gaming or whatever else. We better start to appreciate more efficient GPUs or this is going to get really ugly (and it already is). More infuriating part is that quite a lot of power could be saved by modifying TDP of card only without changing voltage and without much reduction of performance. Last 20% of performance already generate like 40-60% of whole card's heat. So going further it's doable to just add more cores with lower frequency, but bigger chips lead to worse yield and higher costs. So the only proper solution is to have reasonable design goals and make more efficient architectures, else there is some awful downside. nV and AMD don't seem to be interested in that and OEMs seem to shove moar RGP and OveRcLoCKed or eXTrEme shit all day long and don't give a crap about that either. nV and AMD also seem to be abandoning their lower end cards, that are very power efficient. 6500 is e-waste, 3050 is good, but there's not 3050 Ti or 3030 or 3060 LE. The crazy thing is 3090 with lower TDP would be an awesome card for efficiency maniacs and wouldn't lose much speed. It could easily be 200 watt card and perform nearly the same in many loads. Even at 150 watts, it would be reasonably fast with surprisingly low performance penalty.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 28, 2022)

The red spirit said:


> Anyway, besides this whole write-up, my point is that power supply is most likely not a main problem with C states and that anything more than basic halt state (C1) or enhanced halt state (C1e) is not guaranteed to work and Intel + motherboard vendors most likely don't give a damn about them, including laptop board makers too. Despite being an interesting technology, it's not mature at all and updating PSU for that is likely to be pointless. On AMD side I had more problems with complicated relationship between C states, APM and turbo, rather than C states themselves, but I haven't touched Ryzen chips, so what I know is likely badly outdated.


Your entire post is too long, but I did read it.

I do not wish to talk extensively of how our planet was formed starting with the death of dinosaurs.
INTEL this is the plan maker, always was a pioneer in this sector, the best engineers of our planet, they work and get paid by INTEL.

Which PSU maker will follow the plan successfully? or be sincere regarding offered electrical specifications, this is work for specialized digital instruments to measure ( PSU torture test system this is excluded).

INTEL makes the CPU and their own prototype motherboard along with the made by INTEL chip-set, by doing so, there is a lot of testing prior release, and the fresh R&D *plan*, this is double (triple) tested before be released.
INTEL also as motherboard chip seller, has the responsibility to deliver at ( MSI, ASUS, Gigabyte, other) extensive documentation about its fresh products platform.

AMD this recently decided to differentiate, by taking full responsibility about their own success or failure regarding released products.
AMD this now known of *thinking first* of how fast they can make money, instead of going slow and make more research.

INTEL has the responsibility to serve as FIRST professional Servers and Workstations, and therefore there is no tolerance to failure (there is no chance them making any huge mistakes).

When motherboard BIOS settings are in AUTO (power management),  Windows are in control of them, according to power plan in use.
INTEL this is also responsible to deliver at Microsoft, all software control information, so the operating system to be able to be in control.
Does AMD do the same?  how fast they do it? how perfect is their work?

Workstation overall performance this is a shape of triangle,  more security? more performance? Less power consumption?  a pack of choices for any one to use and trim his system accordingly.

I am not answering all your questions, but I neither plan to write a book at TPU.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Mar 28, 2022)

The red spirit said:


> To be fair, 150-200 watts is already badly taxing on dual slot dual fan cooling solutions. Unless we tolerated triple slot, triple fan cards, 250-300 watts are hard limit on air and that is if you tolerate moderate noise output from fans. For quiet computing, 180-200 watts are a hard limit. After those limits, for a while AIOs can be a band aid solution, but we will top out at triple slot 120/140mm coolers, as well as VRM cooling and memory cooling designs. Not to mention even all terrible heat per watt ratio, which gets worse, the higher you go and some people straight up unable to afford to consume so much power for gaming or whatever else. We better start to appreciate more efficient GPUs or this is going to get really ugly (and it already is). More infuriating part is that quite a lot of power could be saved by modifying TDP of card only without changing voltage and without much reduction of performance. Last 20% of performance already generate like 40-60% of whole card's heat. So going further it's doable to just add more cores with lower frequency, but bigger chips lead to worse yield and higher costs. So the only proper solution is to have reasonable design goals and make more efficient architectures, else there is some awful downside. nV and AMD don't seem to be interested in that and OEMs seem to shove moar RGP and OveRcLoCKed or eXTrEme shit all day long and don't give a crap about that either. nV and AMD also seem to be abandoning their lower end cards, that are very power efficient. 6500 is e-waste, 3050 is good, but there's not 3050 Ti or 3030 or 3060 LE. The crazy thing is 3090 with lower TDP would be an awesome card for efficiency maniacs and wouldn't lose much speed. It could easily be 200 watt card and perform nearly the same in many loads. Even at 150 watts, it would be reasonably fast with surprisingly low performance penalty.



Yeah, no argument there. The thing with the RTX 3090 is that the power consumption reported by the driver is actually TGP, and this includes VRAM. The GA102 chip at typical 3090 clocks (1.75 to 1.9 GHz range) will operate at around 180-240 watts depending on the workload, the rest of the power is usually drawn by the GDDR6X memory ICs.  MVDDC readings >120W are rather common on memory intensive applications running on the 3090, the 3090 Ti would easily reduce this footprint by half while adding another extra 100W of power budget, it essentially gets faster because the internal power budget has been both optimized and considerably increased at the expense of efficiency (which the 3090 would be remarkable at... were it not for the memory system NVIDIA opted to use on it.)

Due to the removal of 12 of the 24 memory chips, an undervolted 3090 Ti will retain the same level of performance at a substantially lower wattage than the 3090, but NVIDIA has decided to push it the other way so they have a decisive performance edge over Navi 21 XTXH in raster titles, which is where the 3090 usually comes a close second to 6900 XT high end models.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 28, 2022)

Dr. Dro said:


> The thing with the RTX 3090 is that the power consumption reported by the ................


The thing with the RTX 3000 series, this is very simple, its an problematic electronics design, coming along with unsuccessful method so to be cooled, how in earth an 300W oven this can be cooled? and also that just 3% of gamers still pay and get one.  I am not getting harsh on you.

All forums are getting bombarded with nags relative to RTX 3000 series problems, and it is interesting, of how these people think that there is a way so them to solve them, because simply they are smarter than anyone else who failed to solve them. 
Only gamers worth my sympathy, the ones mislead due their passion for extreme FPS, which are useless at on-line gaming.
0.001% uses RTX 3000 series for what it was designed to be, a productivity tool for 3D applications.


----------



## The red spirit (Mar 28, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> I am not answering all your questions, but I neither plan to write a book at TPU.


There are no questions, just explained what is going on with C states and why they don't matter as Intel + OEMs fucked them up. As for PSUs, even old ones can be used with new systems and boards have backwards compatibility options for that, penalty for doing so is small. Unless you unearth a fossil from two decades ago, then unsurprisingly you will have problems, but nobody sane would do it for anything serious.



Dr. Dro said:


> Yeah, no argument there. The thing with the RTX 3090 is that the power consumption reported by the driver is actually TGP, and this includes VRAM. The GA102 chip at typical 3090 clocks (1.75 to 1.9 GHz range) will operate at around 180-240 watts depending on the workload, the rest of the power is usually drawn by the GDDR6X memory ICs.  MVDDC readings >120W are rather common on memory intensive applications running on the 3090, the 3090 Ti would easily reduce this footprint by half while adding another extra 100W of power budget, it essentially gets faster because the internal power budget has been both optimized and considerably increased at the expense of efficiency (which the 3090 would be remarkable at... were it not for the memory system NVIDIA opted to use on it.)


Yep, there are some card specific nuances, but the point of my post was that basically any chip today to achieve its last megahertzes have to dramatically be overvolted. Which in return means a ton of heat for barely anything in return



Dr. Dro said:


> Due to the removal of 12 of the 24 memory chips, an undervolted 3090 Ti will retain the same level of performance at a substantially lower wattage than the 3090, but NVIDIA has decided to push it the other way so they have a decisive performance edge over Navi 21 XTXH in raster titles, which is where the 3090 usually comes a close second to 6900 XT high end models.


If it's true that 3090 Ti has less chips than 3090, then it really failed to decisively beat 3090. Perhaps it is faster, but fewer chips at lower frequency are more efficient, while performing better. Either way, I don't really read or watch anything about 3090s as they are just simply absurd cards, made for nothing else, but maximum performance imaginable today. I really don't understand people that buy them. The portrait of one is a person, who doesn't care about price, value, power efficiency, power usage, even noise or heat, but is dead set on maximum performance and visual quality. And such buyer has no foresight either as 3090 or 3090 Ti will be beat by 4080 a year later and it will not have nearly as many negative externalities (hopefully) as 3090 or 3090 Ti. It's just so so beyond me to buy cards like this. Car guys have a term for it, which is "garage queen", that's basically what those ultra high end cards really are. Even if I was filthy rich, I just don't see much point for card beyond 3070 or Radeon equivalent. The only good thing that I can say about those cards is that they aren't as bad as dual GPU cards, which besides all those negative externalities didn't even work properly quite often.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 28, 2022)

The red spirit said:


> There are no questions, just explained what is going on with C states and why they don't matter as Intel + OEMs fucked them up.


C1 or INTEL speed-step, this is working correctly as it should. 
S1 ~ S4 these are power states for other hardware (motherboard and a pile of onboard devices).
INTEL speed-step its a tool keeping the CPU temperature lower, than saving electrical power. 

In my entire life I do buy high end motherboards, as new or used, never had a bad apple. 

At my current fresh owned setup I had an issue, the system will go to sleep but it was again instantly returning at power on state. 
Microsoft mouse driver and it power management setting was the issue, I did deactivate the option of mouse to be able to awake the PC = problem solved.

The inappropriate PSU (wrong specifications or other) it might corrupt all retained data (over RAM modules) at sleep mode. 
Not all computer systems are aloud to have a reboot per day, but they are aloud to get in and out of sleep mode countless times.
And so, all INTEL product design, it is made with much attention to detail, so to serve all computers serving critical applications along home use.


----------



## The red spirit (Mar 28, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> And so, all INTEL product design, it is made with much attention to detail, so to serve all computers serving critical applications along home use.


Then I guess I won't comment about it anymore. You seem to think that Intel is some saint or super trustworthy company or whatever, so I guess I will leave you to to have your reality check one day. Hint: things aren't as good as you think they are.


----------



## Dr. Dro (Mar 29, 2022)

The red spirit said:


> If it's true that 3090 Ti has less chips than 3090, then it really failed to decisively beat 3090. Perhaps it is faster, but fewer chips at lower frequency are more efficient, while performing better. Either way, I don't really read or watch anything about 3090s as they are just simply absurd cards, made for nothing else, but maximum performance imaginable today. I really don't understand people that buy them. The portrait of one is a person, who doesn't care about price, value, power efficiency, power usage, even noise or heat, but is dead set on maximum performance and visual quality. And such buyer has no foresight either as 3090 or 3090 Ti will be beat by 4080 a year later and it will not have nearly as many negative externalities (hopefully) as 3090 or 3090 Ti. It's just so so beyond me to buy cards like this. Car guys have a term for it, which is "garage queen", that's basically what those ultra high end cards really are. Even if I was filthy rich, I just don't see much point for card beyond 3070 or Radeon equivalent. The only good thing that I can say about those cards is that they aren't as bad as dual GPU cards, which besides all those negative externalities didn't even work properly quite often.



It does, but it retains the 24 GB capacity as it is using newly released 16 Gbit (2 GB) G6X devices that were unavailable when these cards first came out in Sep 2020. That is the key difference beyond the fully unlocked 84 SM processor (vanilla 3090 has 82 and 3080 Ti has 80 out of 84 SM units enabled), is that the memory layout was changed to that from the original 24 8 Gbit devices. Technically, NVIDIA could also clamshell these modules and release another SKU with 48 GB of GDDR6X 

The 3090 and the memory chips used on it were already specced for 21 Gbps, just like this new card, but 21-21.5 Gbps is as high as it goes, there is no headroom above this and this is also where memory subsystem power consumption is the highest, so to create an illusion they had any headroom and could overclock, NVIDIA shipped it slightly underclocked.

BTW, I'm in relative agreement, personally I would not have bought a 3090 if I couldn't have secured it at MSRP on launch day. Brother has a 3070 and his card is plenty enough for just about every vidya


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 29, 2022)

The red spirit said:


> Then I guess I won't comment about it anymore. You seem to think that Intel is some saint or super trustworthy company or whatever, so I guess I will leave you to to have your reality check one day. Hint: things aren't as good as you think they are.


I did started computing at *1994* with Intel 486DX 100MHz, I got computer training at *1988*,  while most of your thoughts (consumer related) they are at the correct path,  life it is not equal to BF5, getting your armored tank and blast every wall in the neighborhood.
Thanks for your contribution of thoughts at this topic at* 2022*.
2022 - 1995 *= 27 Years of INTEL activity *recorded by me in person.



*Topic started day Feb 25, 2022*

I did wrote several emails to Seasonic, I did ask more clarifications about INTEL ATX revisions that they use or plan to use.
They answered few emails saying ...  we are busy this period of time, then they told me to expect specific answers from headquarters.
Then nothing.

To me it is of importance one manufacturer to be also good at communicating with the customer base.
I got with communication with six brands, no one is willing to talk electronics design,  so I am now convinced that *plain accountants* instead of electrician *engineers* are in control of the unseen background.

*Too bad for them,* this negativism forced me to focus at refurbishing my older PSU, at good as NEW condition.
For another 10 years I will have nothing to worry.


----------



## ExcuseMeWtf (Mar 29, 2022)

I highly doubt they're gonna have their engineers drop everything and respond to random and ultimately not exactly most impactful inquiries like that lol.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 30, 2022)

ExcuseMeWtf said:


> I highly doubt


And you are ?   who?  someone of importance. 
In this topic you are here to learn and not to vote. 
I have no doubts that the ones hiding and not answering back emails they do that from fear. 
I am freelancer, its my obligation to answer back all potential customers emails or phone calls.


----------



## BSim500 (Mar 30, 2022)

ExcuseMeWtf said:


> I highly doubt they're gonna have their engineers drop everything and respond to random and ultimately not exactly most impactful inquiries like that lol.


^ Especially if he spoke to them in emails the same way he speaks to people here... _"And who are you? Who? What is your importance to me? Your post is too long! I did not ask for history of dinosaurs! Read my post 5x times or move on. Stop changing the subject in my village! I once bought a 486 so I know EVERYTHING about Intel! I am blocking you! Never ever try to start a conversation with me in public! "_

RIP the Seasonic guy who has to respond to that with a straight face...


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 30, 2022)

BSim500 said:


> ^ Especially if he spoke to them in emails the same way he speaks to people here...


What people ?  The totally anonymous that hiding their age, so to have a chance talking with grownups? 
Any one who expects to resemble with NORMAL people, he should start with a *decent screen name *and by adding *his face* at the profile avatar.  

I have tossed away my anonymity years ago, today as Blogger I have hundreds of haters and millions of admires, but these are smart and productive people, close to equals with me. 
And therefore I can hardly be teased by low-end comments.


----------



## The red spirit (Mar 31, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> What people ?  The totally anonymous that hiding their age, so to have a chance talking with grownups?
> Any one who expects to resemble with NORMAL people, he should start with a *decent screen name *and by adding *his face* at the profile avatar.
> 
> I have tossed away my anonymity years ago, today as Blogger I have hundreds of haters and millions of admires, but these are smart and productive people, close to equals with me.
> And therefore I can hardly be teased by low-end comments.


Dude, you are embarrassing yourself, you really shouldn't use your real name online.


----------



## looniam (Mar 31, 2022)

The red spirit said:


> Dude, you are embarrassing yourself, you really shouldn't use your real name online.


pretty sure someone walking around looking like braveheart will draw some attention anyhow . .

though fwiw i doubt people know just how tiny seasonic actually is. CWT, delta would have better communication, when it comes to manufacturing, they pump out 3x/4x  the units ~quality seasonic could ever hope to . . no ill intent.


----------



## kiriakost (Mar 31, 2022)

Seasonic has three official sales points in Greece, and no one has any stock.
Anyway I did solve my problem, I do not need any fresh PSU.

This topic stays solely as information - *read only mode* - I am not getting in any conversation with anyone.


----------



## 95Viper (Mar 31, 2022)

kiriakost said:


> This topic stays solely as information - *read only mode* - I am not getting in any conversation with anyone.


Thread closed.


----------

