# Power supplies in-cable capacitors, why people dislike them ?



## Solid State Soul ( SSS ) (Sep 6, 2019)

When reading power supplies recommendations threads i often find people dislike PSUs with bulky cables that has capacitors in them but then they are there to further help with the ripple suppression for the power supply so clearly they have a legit function yet i often fine people dislike them, sometimes going as far to _*avoid *_ PSU's with in-cable caps   You see many manufactures highlighting in-cable caps as a helpful features that slightly increase your PSU's performance in ripple suppression yet the wise people recommend i dont get one ? 

Can someone please elaborate why that is ?


----------



## robot zombie (Sep 6, 2019)

They make routing a pain in some situations. Especially with most cases now being set-up to have the main cables bend from around the back of the board to meet the connector.

If they're hanging it's fine... but sometimes that's not the best way to go... in which case the cable and especially the connector on board may face undue strain. Or maybe not fit at all, forcing you to run it across the main compartment instead of the back of the case.


----------



## delshay (Sep 6, 2019)

Has anyone opened one up to see what type of capacitor?

EDIT: I have dual Cornell Dubilier 38000uf capacitor (total 76000uf) with custom built 8 pin that plugs direct into the back of my Seasonic 1200w PSU. It does nothing for the GPU, but CPU gain 1MHz overclock.

With a Scopemeter you can see a change, but it's so small it's hard to spot, but it is there.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Sep 6, 2019)

I have mixed feelings about them. _In theory_ they would help suppress any AC anomalies, including ripple and that's a good thing as ripple affects stability. 

But IMO, the PSU should already be doing a good job at suppressing them before the voltage leaves the PSU itself. So when I see those type of cables, it makes me wonder why they are needed. Were they included after-the-fact, because some samples of the PSU failed in-house quality control testing? ??? We don't know. 

That said, as an electronics technician and student of electronics for 45+ years, I understand parasitic capacitance (and inductance) is definitely unwanted, is unavoidable, but can be mitigated by using those in-line capacitors. And it should be noted that they also suppress such capacitance and inductance from being introduced into the cables from nearby devices and other cables. 

I note one of the best methods of preventing these unwanted anomalies is to increase the insulation wall thickness. But then users would complain their cables were too fat, less flexible, harder to hide and tuck out of the way. So the trade off is a very small bump in the cable. 

With off-brand generic PSUs, I might think in-cable capacitors are there to compensate for poor PSU ripple suppression. But for PSU makers like Seasonic or EVGA, companies known for making top quality PSUs, I have to believe in-cable capacitors are there to ensure users of their supplies get the best possible performance from those supplies. And I'm okay with that.

So I say we just must learn to live with them, and learn to appreciate their function.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 6, 2019)

robot zombie said:


> Or maybe not fit at all, forcing you to run it across the main compartment instead of the back of the case.



I had exactly this from the CPU power connector to my new Seasonic PSU, I couldn't bend it properly, not sure but the cable might have been a bit shorter than the one from my previous PSU but next year I may buy a new case, with a psu cover which my current case doesn't have now.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Sep 6, 2019)

P4-630 said:


> the cable might have been a bit shorter than the one from my previous PSU


I should note shorter cables are less susceptible to parasitic capacitance issues too.


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Sep 6, 2019)

delshay said:


> , but CPU gain 1MHz overclock.


 Because more often than not it's that extra 1 MHz bclk increase that yeld's a record?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 6, 2019)

Bill_Bright said:


> I have mixed feelings about them. _In theory_ they would help suppress any AC anomalies, including ripple and that's a good thing as ripple affects stability.
> 
> But IMO, the PSU should already be doing a good job at suppressing them before the voltage leaves the PSU itself. So when I see those type of cables, it makes me wonder why they are needed. Were they included after-the-fact, because some samples of the PSU failed in-house quality control testing? ??? We don't know.
> 
> ...


Why not put the caps inside the psu right before entering the cable?


----------



## Bill_Bright (Sep 6, 2019)

eidairaman1 said:


> Why not put the caps inside the psu right before entering the cable?


There should already be filter caps inside the PSU. I think the idea is to suppress any capacitance caused by the cables or introduced into the cables by surrounding high speed circuits - which can happen.


----------



## Assimilator (Sep 6, 2019)

Solid State Soul ( SSS ) said:


> When reading power supplies recommendations threads i often find people dislike PSUs with bulky cables that has capacitors in them but then they are there to further help with the ripple suppression for the power supply so clearly they have a legit function yet i often fine people dislike them, sometimes going as far to _*avoid *_ PSU's with in-cable caps   You see many manufactures highlighting in-cable caps as a helpful features that slightly increase your PSU's performance in ripple suppression yet the wise people recommend i dont get one ?
> 
> Can someone please elaborate why that is ?



1. In-cable caps have to be secured to their cables, which means you get the standard bundle-of-wires-with-cheap-sleeving instead of the flat Flexforce cables. 
The latter are better because they are easier to route - not just because they're thinner, but because the smooth plastic-sheathed Flexforce isn't prone to catching on things like sleeving is.
2. In-cable caps make their cables more fragile. I can't count the number of times I've popped my PC case's side off to do some work, and some cable or connector is twisted at a weird angle or stuck in a groove in a way I could never achieve even if I tried. The prospect of that happening to cables with integrated caps horrifes me.
3. In-cable caps make their cables more expensive and difficult to replace (no more swapping for cables from a different PSU but same OEM).
4. In-cable caps make cables look fugly if you decide to sleeve them (because you can't sleeve the capacitor bulge).
5. Most PSUs get by just fine without in-cable caps. To my mind, they're a gimmick that manufacturers introduced because their marketing departments wanted slightly higher review scores. Personally I have little faith that they make much difference to the overall performance of the product.


----------



## delshay (Sep 6, 2019)

Now this thread has got me thinking. Would custom solid core cable make a difference?


----------



## dont whant to set it"' (Sep 6, 2019)

The main difference would be the stifness or lack thereof.


----------



## Solid State Soul ( SSS ) (Sep 6, 2019)

delshay said:


> Now this thread has got me thinking. Would custom solid core cable make a difference?


It is always recommended to use the cables that came with your power supplies. I'v read threads of people damaging their power supplies by using third party cables, some PSU's even have a warning on them to only use the cables that came with the unit itself.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Sep 6, 2019)

dont whant to set it"' said:


> The main difference would be the stifness or lack thereof.



Thats why its not in automotive or pcs lol


----------



## robot zombie (Sep 6, 2019)

Solid State Soul ( SSS ) said:


> It is always recommended to use the cables that came with your power supplies. I'v read threads of people damaging their power supplies by using third party cables, some PSU's even have a warning on them to only use the cables that came with the unit itself.


I think this mostly has to do with different pinouts on the PSU side. It's only onthe other side they are standardized. Only the cables that come with the PSU are guaranteed to have the proper pinouts. Of course 3rd party options with the correct pinouts exist, but you have to make sure they're made specifically for the PSU they're being plugged into.


----------



## Mr.Scott (Sep 6, 2019)

delshay said:


> EDIT: I have dual Cornell Dubilier 38000uf capacitor (total 76000uf) with custom built 8 pin that plugs direct into the back of my Seasonic 1200w PSU. It does nothing for the GPU, but CPU gain 1MHz overclock.



Oh Boy!
Totally worth it.


----------



## ShrimpBrime (Sep 6, 2019)

Mr.Scott said:


> Oh Boy!
> Totally worth it.



lol. (10 char)


----------



## Grog6 (Sep 7, 2019)

You can't really add the 38000uF of capacitance directly to the PS mobo without destabilizing the power supply.

Even the 0.01ohm of resistance of the cables makes a huge difference in stability on a switching power supply, and the cables add that.
Switching power supplies are tuned for a specific maximum capacitance; they won't 'start up' with too much capacitance.
I've designed a bunch of power supplies.
Computer power supplies are really cheaply built, lol. I've worked on every one I've ever bought, before I used it.

Stranded cables are better than solid cables in every case; solid is cheaper, but there are frequency limits based on skin effect.
Solid wire works great for wall power, but would radiate like crazy used in a computer, at several frequencies.

Inside the PS, you'd need to use resistors between the output and the additional caps, and that dumps heat, and lowers voltage/power.

Adding it on the CPU motherboard would be ok, but there's another switcher there to make CPU voltage, and stability there is a concern. 
You could design it in, tho.
Also those caps are pretty big, and mobo MFR's don't like huge things sticking up; you either have to load them after SMT soldering, by hand, or use expensive smt ones.

Another soldering step is expensive, maybe a 20% cost adder.

I'd also say the usefulness is varied board to board; cheaper mobos will benefit much more than expensive ones.
And depending on the design of the mobo, it might cause issues; if it makes the input to the CPU power section ring, it may not even start up.

It's a complex thing; this goes over some of the basics:









						Foundations (Part 1.A) - Understanding Bode Plots and Stability of Power Suppliestags: bode plot, stability, crossover frequency, phase margin, gain margin
					

Most experts agree that the best way of designing power supply control loops is through the use of frequency domain design methods. Some people may have studied these techniques at university in...



					www.biricha.com


----------



## delshay (Sep 7, 2019)

Grog6 said:


> You can't really add the 38000uF of capacitance directly to the PS mobo without destabilizing the power supply.
> 
> Even the 0.01ohm of resistance of the cables makes a huge difference in stability on a switching power supply, and the cables add that.
> Switching power supplies are tuned for a specific maximum capacitance; they won't 'start up' with too much capacitance.
> ...



You are correct. If I add two many of those capacitors the PSU refused to start, but you have to take also into consideration the load as well. The Antec truecontrol 550 (very old PSU) will accept 5 (190000uf) & light load. Adding those capacitors was an experiment, but i have left two of them in on my main computer which works well.

EDIT: When you say "destabilizing the power supply" in what way. I'm seeing nothing here even on the scopemeter.


----------



## Grog6 (Sep 7, 2019)

The problem is the charging of the capacitors.

Adding an extension to the 24 pin cable may help you use more. 

If you had the datasheet for the chip that drives the switcher in the PS, you can put in a slightly larger "Soft-Start" capacitor, to extend the charging period. 

The down side is that there's a not insignificant chance of a loud bang, and some bad hardware. 
If the power supply loses it's stuff badly, there's no telling how much voltage it will put out.
Putting out 12V on the 3.3V or 5V lines will be really bad for the motherboard.  :O

I use programmable loads until I get stuff stable, then try real hardware.

You can buy cheap stuff like this to play with, and modify:








						DC Constant Current Electronic Load  Battery Tester XY-FZ35
					

Snap-in panel meter/Load for testing and conditioning batteries. Input Voltage: 5.0-30.0VDC (Polarity protected) Load Voltage: 1.5-25.0VDC (Polarity protected) Load Current: 0.00-5.00A 0.01A Resolution Load Power: 35W Max Current Regulation: ±(1%+3digits) Voltage Regulation: ±(0.5%+1digit) Over...



					www.mpja.com
				



A switcher should start correctly with a 5A load, but you'd need multiple ones for various PS outputs.

Stay away from the AC inputs, and you'll be fine. Like I said, any "oopsies!" and the mobo may be trash.


----------



## silentbogo (Sep 7, 2019)

For me it's just a gimmick which can introduce yet another point of failure. 
Most PSUs that have spare budget to add caps inside cables are usually the ones with already excellent regulation and ripple suppression, and add zero benefits comparing to "non-capacitated" equivalent.
Also, most manufacturers that do add caps usually do so only on 12V rail(s), which makes even less sense due to receiving devices(e.g. MoBo/GPU) not using 12V directly and have switching regulators of their own with a bunch of input and output capacitors to do the same thing.



eidairaman1 said:


> Why not put the caps inside the psu right before entering the cable?


All PSUs have caps right next to cables, and most modular PSUs also have caps on the PCB with modular connectors. 



delshay said:


> You are correct. If I add two many of those capacitors the PSU refused to start, but you have to take also into consideration the load as well. The Antec truecontrol 550 (very old PSU) will accept 5 (190000uf) & light load. Adding those capacitors was an experiment, but i have left two of them in on my main computer which works well.


Your old antec truecontrol has no PFC, so it does not care about what's going on with the input. For APFC-enabled PSUs this will do more harm than good.


----------



## delshay (Sep 7, 2019)

@Grog6

What type of capacitor are manufactures fitting inside the cable?

Oh & Seasonic 850w titanium also accepts max two of those 38000uf capacitors.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Sep 7, 2019)

silentbogo said:


> For me it's just a gimmick which can introduce yet another point of failure.


I disagree - at least about it being a gimmick. I don't believe highly reputable brands like EVGA and Seasonic are into "gimmicks", nor do they need gimmicks to entice users to buy their products. Companies that make inferior products need gimmicks. The reviews AND in-the-field experiences show EVGA, Seasonic and a few select others make products that truly are top quality. 

One concern of mine with these in-cap cables is it means the cables are proprietary.  I don't like anything that is proprietary as it just means it will cost me more money and will limit my options. While the component-end connectors of these cables must comply with the ATX Form Factor standards, the cables and PSU-end connectors are proprietary. This means you cannot swap these modular cables with any other PSU - including PSUs from the same maker! 

That means we must label and store unused cables for each modular PSU we own or are responsible for separately - forever! If we fail to do that, we may end up using the wrong cable on a PSU. Additionally, there is no guarantee in 4 or 5 years a replacement cable will be available, should the original cables get lost. 

I have 5 PCs here with modular PSUs - all different models. I am responsible for dozens more. I does not take long to become a logistical nightmare keeping track of that inventory - especially for small businesses that have no real IT person on staff. 

IMO, we need the ATX Form Factor standard to dictate "end to end" standards for modular cables too.


----------



## Grog6 (Sep 7, 2019)

I've never seen that, sorry.

Seems clunky to me; I'd design them in, if it were me.

I just know power supplies.


----------



## silentbogo (Sep 7, 2019)

Bill_Bright said:


> I disagree - at least about it being a gimmick. I don't believe highly reputable brands like EVGA and Seasonic are into "gimmicks", nor do they need gimmicks to entice users to buy their products. Companies that make inferior products need gimmicks. The reviews AND in-the-field experiences show EVGA, Seasonic and a few select others make products that truly are top quality.


Bill, as I mentioned before, these capped cables only appear exclusively in high-end PSUs, and effectively do nothing to improve an already perfect ripple suppression. Hard data from reviews only supports it. It's similar to RAM waterblocks for DDR4. Yes, in theory they do work and may improve things, but in practice bring very little to justify the hassle.
For example, Seasonic Prime w/ fancy cables has pretty much identical ripple and transient response to its non-capped Seasonic Prime or Focus Plus counterparts, but has a slightly higher price tag. In case of Prime Ultra, Seasonic decided not to use cable caps at all, but the PSU itself has over 2x less ripple on all rails.  So, even they understand that there is no point in upselling capped cables when your PSU design already has a sub-20mV ripple on 12V rail.


----------



## Grog6 (Sep 7, 2019)

Yeah, if they do anything at all, it would be on the bleeding edge of the ratings for the power supply, where the extra capacitance is more effective because it's not in series with the cable resistance.

So, max current, max OC.

An 18awg cable 2 feet long is 8 milli ohms; 0.008 ohms.

Do you have a part number for those caps?

The lowest ESR I see for a cap that size is ~0.016 ohms; the cable inductance must be what they are trying to reduce.

They don't want the wire to make the power supply on the motherboard have issues at heavy currents, so they are removing the effect of the inductance of the wire.

You can help this by twisting each power wire with a ground wire; the inductance is proportional to the area of the loop between the supply and return wire.
So a smaller loop is better.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Sep 7, 2019)

silentbogo said:


> Bill, as I mentioned before, these capped cables only appear exclusively in high-end PSUs, and effectively do nothing to improve an already perfect ripple suppression.


 And as I mentioned before,


Bill_Bright said:


> I think the idea is to suppress any capacitance caused by the cables or introduced into the cables by surrounding high speed circuits - which can happen.


The point being, it is not just about suppressing ripple riding the output of the PSU, but also to suppress anomalies that may be introduced once the voltage leaves the PSU.



Grog6 said:


> An 18awg cable 2 feet long is 8 milli ohms; 0.008 ohms.


Ummm, the internet is full of wire resistance calculators. As seen here, a 2 foot length of 18awg wire has .013 ohms of resistance. An even more accurate calculator here shows it is .0128 ohms. 

But of course, without knowing all the variables (copper purity, stranded or solid, bends and curves in the wire, etc.) these are just estimates.


Grog6 said:


> You can help this by twisting each power wire with a ground wire


To be most effective, there is an optimal twist count per inch too. I personally just avoid running cables parallel with other cables as much as possible.


----------



## delshay (Apr 27, 2020)

I did some checking of capacitors not in-cable but on the CPU power socket itself. The result is surprising.

100uf ceramic 16v capacitor soldered to the back of the motherboard CPU socket reduce ripple & noise. Measured with a scope meter which I should get out more often. It seems putting a 22uf or higher ceramic capacitor here shows "big changes" on the scope meter. I obtained even better results with 220uf surface mount tantalum, lowering ripple even further. This whole week as from today is focused on PSU ripple & I will be using my scope meter from now on, but I have already found some fantastic results, but this is mostly changes around motherboard & devices that have 16v capacitors on the 3.3v & 5v rail.

EDIT: Tantalum capacitor 16v "Super Low ESR" from AVX soldered on back of CPU socket & PSU from Seasonic (1200w) Platinum, but Antec Truepower 550w PSU also shows the same improvements with the same capacitor's.

Tantalum Result: 45mv to 25mv ripple rock solid. Ceramic capacitors not that far behind 26-28mv not stable. Overclocked  85w CPU @idle.

EDIT2: It was this video that made me get out my scope metre which I rarely use.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 27, 2020)

Sorry, but I don't see the value for dredging up this thread that's been dormant for nearly 8 months for this. Sure, excessive ripple is a problem. But virtually every 1/2-way decent PSU suppresses ripple and noise well below the maximum allowed thresholds of 120 mV p-p for (12VDC) and 50mV p-p (for 5 and 3.3VDC) allowed by the ATX standard. 

IMO If the motherboard needs further suppression, swap in a better PSU instead of modifying the board by adding caps to it.


----------



## xtreemchaos (Apr 27, 2020)

i must of led a shelterd life because i cannot remember seeing any or just plain blind  , are thay common ?, interesting none the less.


----------



## delshay (Apr 27, 2020)

Bill_Bright said:


> Sorry, but I don't see the value for dredging up this thread that's been dormant for nearly 8 months for this. Sure, excessive ripple is a problem. But virtually every 1/2-way decent PSU suppresses ripple and noise well below the maximum allowed thresholds of 120 mV p-p for (12VDC) and 50mV p-p (for 5 and 3.3VDC) allowed by the ATX standard.
> 
> IMO If the motherboard needs further suppression, swap in a better PSU instead of modifying the board by adding caps to it.



It's not the motherboard, it's the PSU. The reading was taken from two different PSU directly behind from the CPU socket on the soldered pins. I'm talking about the soldered contacts that hold the CPU socket in place. What are the chances of two different PSU showing almost identical results. Don't take my word for it, try it yourself on a motherboard you don't care about & post result. This is what I did, stick a 220uf surface mount tantalum on there & post the difference in ripple. The result is clear as daylight. It will show up on most settings you set the scope metre to. It's a massive difference on the scope.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 27, 2020)

delshay said:


> It's not the motherboard, it's the PSU.


 You said in your very first sentence, "_CPU power socket_". The power socket is on the motherboard. 

Regardless, my points remain. I don't see the value in dredging up this dead thread. If such ripple and noise suppression is needed, get a better PSU.


----------



## delshay (Apr 27, 2020)

Bill_Bright said:


> You said in your very first sentence, "_CPU power socket_". The power socket is on the motherboard.
> 
> Regardless, my points remain. I don't see the value in dredging up this dead thread. If such ripple and noise suppression is needed, get a better PSU.



Will do. I have Seasonic 850w & Silverstone SFX 800w PSU both Titanium class. CPU power socket can only be in one place, but work was done on soldered contact back of motherboard. What I tried to do is simulate in-cable capacitor without cutting my cables up. That was the idea behind this experiment. Does it make a difference.


----------



## xtreemchaos (Apr 27, 2020)

yoohoo im here stop bickering a mo   im waiting for some enlightenment and at my age every minute counts....
look what arrived 30min ago, isnt she lovely


----------



## EarthDog (Apr 27, 2020)

I don't believe the efficacy of such a thing is in question... but its relative worth in doing so. Ripple from high quality PSUs which are recommended are well below specification. Adding something to the back of the board or inline from PSU, while it can likely improve things.......the question is to what end? In a vast majority of cases this will not yield another 100 MHz of overclocking, or yield anything tangible for the average user and daily overclocker.

Where there is value, perhaps, is with EXTREME overclockers using Dry Ice/LN2/LHe.... not for the average enthusiast.

It is largely irrelevant, these inline caps and and improvements, is the take away. Not worth the marketing we see for us.


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 27, 2020)

Solid State Soul ( SSS ) said:


> When reading power supplies recommendations threads i often find people dislike PSUs with bulky cables that has capacitors in them but then they are there to further help with the ripple suppression for the power supply so clearly they have a legit function yet i often fine people dislike them, sometimes going as far to _*avoid *_ PSU's with in-cable caps   You see many manufactures highlighting in-cable caps as a helpful features that slightly increase your PSU's performance in ripple suppression yet the wise people recommend i dont get one ?
> 
> Can someone please elaborate why that is ?



Quite simply put, if they can't get the ripple suppression down to a good level within the PSU itself, their design is shit and its a PSU to avoid.

The extra suppression from cables to me sounds a whole lot like audio cables forged by elves in moonlight. Probably vegan approved too. I'm staying FAR away.

And yeah, that last 0,1% seeking the best results. In other words, not a market at all if it was restricted to just them. The rest just tags along for the ride, feeling special for buying hot air 



Grog6 said:


> I've never seen that, sorry.
> 
> Seems clunky to me; I'd design them in, if it were me.
> 
> I just know power supplies.



Yeah, this. The logic eludes me completely. And I don't even know power supplies, I just add 1 + 1...


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 27, 2020)

EarthDog said:


> I don't believe the efficacy of such a thing is in question... but its relative worth in doing so.


Exactly! 

I see no advantage in doing this. It will not improve performance. It will not increase efficiency. It will introduce additional points of failure, and it surely will void warranties. And that's assuming the correct capacitor value can be determined, the PSU does not balk, and the system boots.  

And let's say the optimal capacitor value can be determined. Can that same cap be used universally with every PSU/motherboard combination? 

While ED may be right about EXTREME overclockers using extraordinary cooling alternatives, it is highly unlikely those exceptions to the exceptions would be using anything but the highest quality power supplies in the first place. 

I'm not even sure it will give anyone bragging rights - other than they can say, "_I did it and it didn't break the computer"_.  

Excellent ripple and AC noise suppression is critical and certainly a worthwhile goal. But at some point there is just no returned value for the effort to squeeze an extra drop out of turnip. Its like trying to get an additional 2°C of cooling for your CPU when you are already sitting at 20°C. It will not improve performance, stability or longevity.



delshay said:


> What I tried to do is simulate in-cable capacitor without cutting my cables up. That was the idea behind this experiment. Does it make a difference.


*IF* a capacitor was needed in the first place, then "in theory", maybe because there would be slight differences in the resistance values at that point in the circuit compared to a cap on the other side of the cable connector. But in practice, that slight difference would likely be negligible - assuming quality connectors and a quality "mechanical" connection.


Vayra86 said:


> if they can't get the ripple suppression down to a good level within the PSU itself, their design is shit and its a PSU to avoid.


If that is why they put the caps there, then I agree completely. But my guess (and reviews seem to back that up) is that some PSU makers put caps there simply as "marketing fodder"  and not because the PSU needs them to meet ATX Form Factor minimum standards. 

Maybe it wasn't a mistake to dredge up this old thread as even those of us who frequently disagree on things are clearly on the same page here.   So that hopefully will dispel the myths marketing weenies are trying to impose on us.  

Conclusions:
1. "Quality" PSUs don't need in-line caps. 
2. If a PSU needs in-line caps, see #1.


----------



## Grog6 (Apr 27, 2020)

Forgive me if I've said this before, but a switching power supply is a Charge Bucket.

It uses an inductor or transformer to move charge thru a diode, where it gets stored in a set of capacitors.

The charge that comes from the inductor has a wide range of frequency content, centered at the switching frequency, but the waveform is nasty; take a look.

The more efficiently the Capacitor Bank can accept the charge in the time allotted, and absorb and store the particular frequency content, the more efficient it is.

When the capacitor bank starts to discharge, here comes another bucket of charge.

The time between buckets gives rise to the Ripple, and adding caps will help. But at some point, you will go above the level the feedback relationship of the switcher controller can handle, and it will blow transistors.

You can change some resistors in that feedback chain, add bigger mosfets, better diodes, etc. and you will always make it better, as long as you don't run over any of the datasheet limits.

As many an entry level EE has learned, if you pull the output of a 12v switcher to 13V with another power supply, one or both will blow up, due to loss of feedback.


----------



## EarthDog (Apr 28, 2020)

Just reading through the thread...I don't think the concept/result is a gimmick, but the tangible improvements and mentions in marketing do smell a lot more like a gimmick than are proven useful. People see a cleaner o'scope it and say 'that has to be better', do they not? And while on paper/technically speaking it is better (lowering ripple), but in the end, that yields nothing tangible for the end users. So, in essence, I agree with @silentbogo here that its benefit for the end user just isn't there. I'd have to imagine adding these inline costs a few more pennies for each one as well as the labor/machine time for stringing them inline which all costs us a few more dollars in the end. A pittance when talking $150+ PSUs, surely, but still. $144.99 is better than $149.99 for the exact. same. result (though the same could be said about other things RE a PSU too, but, i'll stick to the inline cap discussion). 


EDIT: How are PSU's reviewed? BThe boxed cables are used, right? If they use the cables, then the caps are already there in the testing result. It is what it is and while there is improvement in that 'leg' of the power from the wall to the component, does it really improve ANYTHING when it is already part of the whole end product and result? What do informed users think when another unit performs better without them than one with...? I suppose for ripple, it's better, lol.


----------



## xtreemchaos (Apr 28, 2020)

ok guys i guess you dont what to tell me, thats ok.


----------



## ne6togadno (Apr 28, 2020)

xtreemchaos said:


> ok guys i guess you dont what to tell me, thats ok.








both cable at the right end of the rows (pcie for gpus)
note that there is something under shrinking hose at the end where connectors to gpu are.
the cable in this area is very stiff and hard to bend. there is the capacitor.

not every psu has it but those that have it there is a portion of the cable that is very hard to bend (it is where capacitor is located).
this particular set is from corsair ax860i.

iirc your focus dont have capacitors in cables.

edit:
here is an example of cable w/o capacitors


----------



## xtreemchaos (Apr 28, 2020)

thank you so very much mate, psu"s have never been my strong point,  i said ive never come across this type before but maybe i have and not noticed.
thanks again  

thanks for that, im i right that the PCi-e are sleved if thay have capacitors ? if so i must of used that type at sometime.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 28, 2020)

Grog6 said:


> You can change some resistors in that feedback chain, add bigger mosfets, better diodes, etc. and you will always make it better, as long as you don't run over any of the datasheet limits.


Ummm, "always make it better"? I can't agree with this. 

Starting with the latter first, datasheets are just published specs "claimed" by the manufacturer that may or may not be factual. The information on those datasheets may be incorrect due to honest mistakes. Or the companies may intentionally publish false information to deceive consumers or even go so far as the modify their products to "cheat" the system. Remember the Volkswagen cheating scandal?

So in reality, datasheets are irrelevant. What is relevant is whether or not a device meets or exceeds industry standards - as verified by rigorous, unbiased testing. And in this case, for standards I mean the ATX Form Factor standards, UL, FCC, EU/CE and other standards of the country or region the product is sold in. 

As far as the ability to "always make it better", well that is just not true either for it assumes all products have poor or less than optimal designs and/or use inferior components in the first place. That is not always the case - at least not in the "practical" sense. "IN THEORY" engineers can make perfect designs. In practice, Man has yet perfected the production of 100% "pure" raw material and flawless, precision, always consistent manufacturing techniques. 

But those EEs know this so what do they do? They add additional (and often highly sophisticated) "intelligent" filtering circuits that auto-adjust to ensure the output waveforms are exceptionally clean of unwanted ripple and other anomalies. One cannot simply swap out resisters, add mosfets or "better" diodes to "always" make it better. Reality just does not work that way.


----------



## delshay (Apr 28, 2020)

"always make it better"

Of coarse you can make it better by selecting higher grade component's & do you own internal testing to insure it meets all standards. They will not always (if any) be picking the best top of the line component's.

If it's for your own personal use, then it does not need to meet any standard whatsoever if you are modifying it for yourself.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 28, 2020)

delshay said:


> Of coarse you can make it better by selecting higher grade component's & do you own internal testing to insure it meets all standards.


Nope. It does not automatically work that way. That's why "always" is just a pipe-dream. Higher grade/top of the line components mean nothing if they are not the right electrical specification for the job. Nor do those higher grade components automatically imply better ripple suppression, for example. The engineering/design plays a significant roll - and not just of the circuit in question, but of the entire device. For example, shielding and input waveform filtering can affect the waveform and regulation of the output. 

The better PSU makers like Seasonic and EVGA (or their OEM suppliers) are not hiring "entry level" EEs or "backyard technicians" to design and build their products. 


delshay said:


> If it's for your own personal use, then it does not need to meet any standard whatsoever if you are modifying it for yourself.


Ummm, also incorrect. Those standards are not just for safety. The ATX Form Factor standard also establishes standards for regulation and voltages tolerances, for example. If your modified PSU does not comply with those ATX regulation or tolerance standards, your modified PSU may no longer be "compatible" with ATX compliant motherboards, or graphics cards.


----------



## delshay (Apr 28, 2020)

Bill_Bright said:


> Nope. It does not automatically work that way. That's why "always" is just a pipe-dream. Higher grade/top of the line components mean nothing if they are not the right electrical specification for the job. Nor do those higher grade components automatically imply better ripple suppression, for example. The engineering/design plays a significant roll - and not just of the circuit in question, but of the entire device. For example, shielding and input waveform filtering can affect the waveform and regulation of the output.
> 
> The better PSU makers like Seasonic and EVGA (or their OEM suppliers) are not hiring "entry level" EEs or "backyard technicians" to design and build their products.
> 
> Ummm, also incorrect. Those standards are not just for safety. The ATX Form Factor standard also establishes standards for regulation and voltages tolerances, for example. If your modified PSU does not comply with those ATX regulation or tolerance standards, your modified PSU may no longer be "compatible" with ATX compliant motherboards, or graphics cards.



Are you saying that if I go into the Seasonic PSU, upgrade the MOSFETS part number to higher temperature MOSFETS from the same family part number invalidates everything you are posting here. 

You need a good answer for this one.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 28, 2020)

LOL 

I am saying you can cherry pick "what if" scenarios that may work. But that does not IN ANY WAY make your claim of "always" being anything more than a pipe dream. Are you suggesting you are smarter than the EEs and their CAD/CAE systems at Seasonic? As seen via the link in my sig, I've got multiple electronics degrees and certs and I would not pretend to be better ATX PSU engineers than them. 

But to your one-off anecdotal example, if the current MOSFETS are running comfortably within their normal operating temperature range, then yeah, your claim is once again invalidated. And for sure, I would expect a very reputable PSU maker like Seasonic to use MOSFETS that are already fully capable of functioning properly when exposed to the expected (plus some) temperatures those supplies are marketed for. And for sure, the better testing facilities put those supplies in 40°C or even 50°C hot-boxes to test just for that - and guess what? These better supplies do indeed meet or exceed those specs already.


----------



## delshay (Apr 28, 2020)

Bill_Bright said:


> LOL
> 
> I am saying you can cherry pick "what if" scenarios that may work. But that does not IN ANY WAY make your claim of "always" being anything more than a pipe dream. Are you suggesting you are smarter than the EEs and their CAD/CAE systems at Seasonic? As seen via the link in my sig, I've got multiple electronics degrees and certs and I would not pretend to be better ATX PSU engineers than them.
> 
> But to your one-off anecdotal example, if the current MOSFETS are running comfortably within their normal operating temperature range, then yeah, your claim is once again invalidated. And for sure, I would expect a very reputable PSU maker like Seasonic to use MOSFETS that are already fully capable of functioning properly when exposed to the expected (plus some) temperatures those supplies are marketed for. And for sure, the better testing facilities put those supplies in 40°C or even 50°C hot-boxes to test just for that - and guess what? These better supplies do indeed meet or exceed those specs already.



I'm not talking about that. What I am saying is, if I change the MOSFETS to higher temperature ones from the same family MOSFETS assuming no electrical, timings have change, just the working temperature range, invalidate what you said. You said yes.

You don't want me to post what I think of that.

Just for the record I can change the MOSFETS if I choose to do so.


----------



## jsfitz54 (Apr 28, 2020)

Is there some reason the cable caps cannot be placed on the end closest to the power supply?


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 28, 2020)

delshay said:


> I'm not talking about that. What I am saying is, if I change the MOSFETS to higher temperature ones from the same family MOSFETS assuming no electrical, timings have change, just the working temperature range, invalidate what you said. You said yes.


No it doesn't! The initial claim was, you can change resistors, add bigger mosfets, better diodes, etc. and "always" make it better". It is simply inaccurate to claim it will "always" make it better. You presenting one possible example does not prove it will "always" happen. 

And again, when the existing MOSFETS are already fully capable of dealing with the current temperature characteristics of the circuit and environment (as they would be with a quality PSU), you adding higher temperature MOSFETS does NOT make it better - regardless how many times you say it, or how strongly you think it does. 


delshay said:


> You don't want me to post what I think of that.


I don't care what you think of that. The Laws of Physics don't change based on what you think might happen. 



delshay said:


> Just for the record I can change the MOSFETS if I choose to do so.


Nobody said you couldn't. 


jsfitz54 said:


> Is there some reason the cable caps cannot be placed on the end closest to the power supply?


Resistance plays a role in how capacitance and inductance affects a circuit. And cable length affects resistance. So the location of the caps on a quality cable may not matter significantly, but it could affect the value of the caps needed. I note some PSU makers put the caps in the middle of the cables because they simply look better there. The caps don't get in the way of the connectors and can be hidden away more easily.


----------



## basco (Apr 28, 2020)

don't talk bad about my Powercache in antec tpq 1200 quattro


----------



## delshay (Apr 28, 2020)

basco said:


> don't talk bad about my Powercache in antec tpq 1200 quattro
> View attachment 153117 View attachment 153118



I love the part where it say's "believe it".



Bill_Bright said:


> No it doesn't! The initial claim was, you can change resistors, add bigger mosfets, better diodes, etc. and "always" make it better". It is simply inaccurate to claim it will "always" make it better. You presenting one possible example does not prove it will "always" happen.
> 
> And again, when the existing MOSFETS are already fully capable of dealing with the current temperature characteristics of the circuit and environment (as they would be with a quality PSU), you adding higher temperature MOSFETS does NOT make it better - regardless how many times you say it, or how strongly you think it does.
> 
> ...



Now you have got it all wrong. If I were you I would go back thought the thread & look at who said what.

Adding higher Temperature MOSFETS is not the point I was trying to put across. Work this one out for yourself.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 28, 2020)

delshay said:


> If I were you I would go back thought the thread & look at who said what.


Follow your advice there. 

YOU claimed in post #44 you can "always make it better" by using higher grade components. Then YOU changed it to "higher temperature" in post #46 and YOU again talked about higher temperature MOSFETS. So it sure would seem adding higher temperature MOSFETS as a way to "ALWAYS make it better" was indeed your point. 

To be clear, MY point has been from the start that simply upgrading the components does not automatically or "always make it better". 

Please go back and read through what was said so you understand what it is you are disagreeing with.


----------



## delshay (Apr 30, 2020)

Bill_Bright said:


> Follow your advice there.
> 
> YOU claimed in post #44 you can "always make it better" by using higher grade components. Then YOU changed it to "higher temperature" in post #46 and YOU again talked about higher temperature MOSFETS. So it sure would seem adding higher temperature MOSFETS as a way to "ALWAYS make it better" was indeed your point.
> 
> ...



You have still not caught on what my point is. It's your very own words posting in this thread. Trust me, you do not want me to point it out.


----------



## Bill_Bright (Apr 30, 2020)

Solid State Soul ( SSS ) said:


> It is always recommended to use the cables that came with your power supplies. I'v read threads of people damaging their power supplies by using third party cables, some PSU's even have a warning on them to only use the cables that came with the unit itself.


Sorry for my part in the nonsense, SSS.

In reading back through this thread, I noticed no one replied to your comments about swapping cables. 

Part of the problem with using 3rd party cables, or cables that came with different PSUs (even from the same manufacturer) is there are no industry standards for the PSU end of modular cables. Of course, there are ATX standards for the motherboard, drive and other device connectors, but PSU makers can do anything they want for the connector that plugs into the PSU. Rather than retype everything, you can see my concerns about modular cables in a 2016 post I made here. Note #8.


----------

