Corsair HX, TX-M and CX finally go live on 80 Plus

[Jon Gerow]

Took them long enough...

[-The_Mask-]

Why are there two different versions of the new CX series with the same SKU?
Is the 450W version somewhat different then the others? Because the overall efficiency is noticeable lower.

[crmaris]

took them long enough for a couple of measurements

TXMs are already posted on Cyben. We are waiting for the HX to arrive now and we will process them ASAP.

[Jon Gerow]

Why are there two different versions of the new CX series with the same SKU?
Is the 450W version somewhat different then the others? Because the overall efficiency is noticeable lower.

Dual source. Half of the CX's are made by Great Wall. Half are made by CWT.

[Orion]

The dual-sourced nonmodulars use the same platform and components, only built by two OEMs, correct? Or do they use two different platforms?

[quest for silence]

Dual source. Half of the CX's are made by Great Wall. Half are made by CWT.

Then one of your source puts out less efficient units, doesn't it? Worse QC or different AVL?

[Jon Gerow]

The lower efficiency ones are the CWT units. The exercise of dual sourcing was an experiment and not something we'll ever do again.

Both units are rock solid, but that's because we kept going back and forth trying to get one vendor to align better than the other. As soon as one aligned with the other, they made the problem just a little better, so we went back to the other and said, "now there's is better, you need to fix yours". This ended up dragging the project way out. Eventually, with GW coming out with the product that's slightly more efficiency, we had to say "enough's enough... we have to launch a product" and released them as they are today.

[Internet]

The lower efficiency ones are the CWT units. The exercise of dual sourcing was an experiment and not something we'll ever do again.

Both units are rock solid, but that's because we kept going back and forth trying to get one vendor to align better than the other. As soon as one aligned with the other, they made the problem just a little better, so we went back to the other and said, "now there's is better, you need to fix yours". This ended up dragging the project way out. Eventually, with GW coming out with the product that's slightly more efficiency, we had to say "enough's enough... we have to launch a product" and released them as they are today.

With all the duplicated costs of doing this type or release (since you have to certify everything two times)? That's really crazy...

[Jon Gerow]

It was expensive in safety costs, yes.

But we sell so many CX, we wanted to make sure we didn't have all of our eggs in one basket in case one factory falls behind, burns down, etc.

But, like I said, it was way to expensive, stressful, took too long... we're never doing that again.

[Internet]

Also, if you intend to send this to reviews, it's better to send samples from the two OEMs (specially if they're different platforms). Otherwise the FUD will be too big...