jonnyGURU Forums
Home Site Search Reviews Articles Contest Links PSU FAQs  


Go Back   jonnyGURU Forums > Site and Forum Topics > Testing Methodology Discussion

Testing Methodology Discussion Questions and comments regarding the testing methodologies used on jonnyguru.com

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 1 Day Ago
quest for silence quest for silence is offline
Silencer
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Italy
Posts: 208
Thanks: 17
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Default Transient load test (explained to novices) in contemporary PSUs?

I would like to learn from you, how much and when transient load test response matters in contemporary PSUs: using the forum search feature I didn't find any "crash course for novices", set aside some extremely specific threads, which clearly cannot explain any basics of those responses, even if somehow related.

As a novice it's difficult to me to extrapolate some real meaning (what a "pass" mean, why & when a good pass matter) from those tests, either they are made by HardOCP, or by TechPowerUp!, or eventually by any other reputable tester.

First of all, I'm not aware of any reviewer who may offer a relevant global chart about, in order to have sort of "the whole picture" or "the big picture". Then because very often recent results look like worse than previous one, at least to an unexperienced observer.
I think there are several reasons for that, and I often read on HardOCP that different wattage units are not comparable in those tests, but ignorance can easily foolish me about.
Just for instance, if we look at HardOCP data, something like the 2008 Antec NeoEco 650 (Seasonic-based) seems better than about any 650W contemporary unit, regardless of the price. How could this happen?
But above all, I would like to understand how much a good pass in those tests matter: which are the penalties in real life when a unit exhibit a drop of 300-350mV on the 12V rail, with reference to a better 200-250mV drop? And what about even greater drops? And given that the 5V rail now should matter mostly memory, how the relevant transient load response may concretely affect a typical home computer? And a small server would be a different scenario?

I hope my questions are not too naive or ill-formed, or that some of you would be so kind to equally try to answer me: thanks in advance for your understandings.

Last edited by quest for silence; 1 Day Ago at 10:26 AM. Reason: added question mark in title
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 1 Day Ago
McSteel's Avatar
McSteel McSteel is offline
Naughty
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: North Disturbia
Posts: 1,420
Thanks: 17
Thanked 87 Times in 67 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quest for silence View Post
First of all, I'm not aware of any reviewer who may offer a relevant global chart about, in order to have sort of "the whole picture" or "the big picture". Then because very often recent results look like worse than previous one, at least to an unexperienced observer.
I think there are several reasons for that, and I often read on HardOCP that different wattage units are not comparable in those tests, but ignorance can easily foolish me about.
An inexperienced observer would stick to the final score, and perhaps the judgement of the reviewer pertaining to a particular testing stage, such as transient load testing. A more experienced reader, or someone who wishes to delve deeper, would ask about the finer points of testing on a relevant forum (or better yet, multiple forums and other communities). Both stances are correct and natural.

Either way, transient load testing (or advanced transient testing as it's sometimes called) is possibly the most important one in terms of system stability and overclocking potential/resilience.

Though you may have already read about the methodology behind these tests, I feel it bears repeating. Intel's ATX specification and the associated testing guide call for two stages of this test. The benchmark for such testing is the PSU's ability to hold onto it's regulation. A pass means that the PSU has stayed within the basic boundaries for regulation (meaning +/- 5% from the nominal values) at all times. Falling out of specs is, naturally, a failure. PSU's reaction to the testing scenario is tracked via an oscilloscope (with the required bias capacitance present on the probes -> 0.1uF ceramic disk and 10uF wet electrolytic capacitor in parallel with the probes)

The first stage requires the PSU under test to be statically loaded to 20% of it's declared maximum power, while the second calls for a 50% load. In both stages, a certain load is abruptly added (at a maximum slew rate of 1 A/μs), as a max-load percentage.

The prescribed maximum value is 40% for 12V rails (60% for any 12V rails assigned to CPU exclusively), 30% for 5V and 3.3V rails, and as an exception, 0.5A for 5VSB and 0.1A for -12V.

Take into consideration a hypothetical PSU capable of a declared maximum 25A for 12V1 (ATX, PCI-E, Peripheral) and 20A for 12V2 (CPU) combined 35A, 25A for 5V and 20A for 3.3V. Such a PSU would be subjected to no more than 14A of dynamic loading on +12V (of which 8.4A would be assigned to 12V2 and 5.6A to 12V1), no more than 10A on 5V and no more than 8A on 3.3V.

In order to be able to better track the changes in voltage regulation, the dynamic load may be applied and removed from 50 to 10000 times per second (while respecting the slew rate).

Quote:
Originally Posted by quest for silence View Post
Just for instance, if we look at HardOCP data, something like the 2008 Antec NeoEco 650 (Seasonic-based) seems better than about any 650W contemporary unit, regardless of the price. How could this happen?
In general, different PSU topologies (internal "architecture") yield different strengths and weaknesses. Since the NeoEco's primary is a traditional two-transistor forward (or double-forward), it's range of usable PWM frequencies is fairly broad, and the frequency variance is quite liberal. With a good controller (ChampionMicro's CM680x series are pretty good, actually) the PSU is able to respond to rapid and dramatic changes in load patterns relatively easily and efficiently.

With constrained control methods such as LLC resonant half-bridge, the range of frequencies and the maximum frequency delta is pretty narrow, so the PSU is relatively slow and imprecise when it needs to adjust to a significant load change. Of course, the regulation at secondary will offset this, but watt-for-watt, a double-forward PSU will in most (if not all) cases convincingly outperform a modern LLC resonant one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quest for silence View Post
But above all, I would like to understand how much a good pass in those tests matter: which are the penalties in real life when a unit exhibit a drop of 300-350mV on the 12V rail, with reference to a better 200-250mV drop? And what about even greater drops? And given that the 5V rail now should matter mostly memory, how the relevant transient load response may concretely affect a typical home computer? And a small server would be a different scenario?
The final impact of any voltage drop is specific to each individual PC. Depending on the motherboard's and VGA's VRM quality, and the amount of stress they're put under; a transient drop may not affect stability at all - or it may knock the system down completely. If the PC is running at the edge of the highest attainable OC, it's bound to be more sensitive to transient V-droop.

These transients usually happen during transitions from idle to load (and back), e.g. when going from idle desktop or forum browsing to a demanding game or a 4k movie reproduction with heavy post-processing (like heavily tweaked madVR). Or perhaps to starting prime95/IBT and FurMark/Unigine simultaneously (to check for OC stability and thermals).

No exact benchmark is officially given, but a rule of thumb is that below 100 mV is awesome, up to 300 mV is fine, below 500 mV is tolerable, and above that is mostly crap.

A bit long-winded, but hopefully I managed to shed some light on the matter.
__________________
Careful what you wish for... You just might get it.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to McSteel For This Useful Post:
-The_Mask- (1 Day Ago), quest for silence (1 Day Ago)
  #3  
Old 1 Day Ago
quest for silence quest for silence is offline
Silencer
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Italy
Posts: 208
Thanks: 17
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McSteel View Post
An inexperienced observer
Point taken, and I really appreciate very much, thank you.


Quote:
Originally Posted by McSteel View Post
These transients usually happen during transitions from idle to load (and back)
I guess that in a properly designed power supply there may be some form of "cushioning", something to somehow "isolate" the load from the power supply topology actual response, sort of "reservoir capacitors" to somehow smooth those transients and do not push back them down to the converter/input level (even if, in case the measured transients response should already take into account such a "filter", so that a better response could probably reflect a better "cushion"): whether I thought so, would I be really far from understanding how the PSU actually works with reference to transients? I'm sorry for the inevitable inaccuracy.


Quote:
Originally Posted by McSteel View Post
A bit long-winded, but hopefully I managed to shed some light on the matter.
For sure, so that I'm reading something more about right now.
Thanks a lot for your thoughtfulness.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 13 Hours Ago
quest for silence quest for silence is offline
Silencer
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Italy
Posts: 208
Thanks: 17
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by quest for silence View Post
I guess that in a properly designed power supply ...snipped out... I'm sorry for the inevitable inaccuracy.
Well, my thought was rather naive, but after some reading now I'm better understanding your explanation (or so I think: I've found lots of paper on how to design a resonant LLC converter, but few information about performance analysis and transient loads.)

However, one of my big mistake was thinking that the larger capacitors of the more powerful units was one of the primary reasons of their usually better behaviour: as probably you already said, McSteel, the answer actually was more straight and simple, a more powerful unit starts those tests at a higher power level, when the converter was already working "better".

So, summarizing, if I'm not wrong again: that transient response is sort of checking the unit voltage regulation but with dealing with big spikes and not at constant loads. Some units seem to hold on similar values in both scenarios, some other else slip in transient loads testing, the first ones are the better.
Loosing regulation dynamically should interfere on how CPU/MB/GPU VRM works, so resulting somehow in a loss of their efficiency/effectiveness, and probably in some more heat wasted on those circuitries (if not in overall instability).

Still I'm not able to directly compare HardOCP and TPU findings because those look like very different (TPU values in mV seem always way lower, often falling under the above described "awesome" category), but that's something I can live with (at least, while I'm still trying to better my knowledge).
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.