boghubodaghi

They probably did the math and accept a lower (but not necessarily much lower) profit margins.

In fact, they've made SkyDigital(Korean Brand)'s PSUs in the past.
And it was recalled as a 'electric shock hazard' 😄😄😄

That's the only other explanation other than they deliberately set the scale to 2x of the maximum observed value. They set the scale to the maximum measurement window possible, regardless of what's actually displayed on the graph, but combined with the fact that they don't actually show the user what was the value on the arbitrary point of the graph by mouse-over and the fact that the scale is for some reason divided by 8 (how the hell they even came up with this value), not 10 - that's just lazy programming and bad UI/UX. Which leads to us, trying to guess for the whole 2 pages whether the top value on the scale is actually a fucking scale or the maximum value on the graph.

You're completely missing my point.
 
The reason we set the graph to 1100 rather than 1008, is not to give multiples of 10 or whatever. The reason to use 1100 is to make clear it is not a measured value and distinguish it from the actual peak value. Using a round number like this makes it more obvious that we're looking at a scale number, not at a measured value 
 
(which I know wouldn't work if the peak happened to be exactly 1100W, but that's unlikely to happen) 
 
Because my main problem with this is how the axis label serves the double purpose of both displaying the peak value and being the max value on the axis.
THAT is the confusing part.
 
The graph should be somewhat like this, with the measured data (peak, avg, etc) in a separate place:

 
The same way you'd see it on the display of an oscilloscope.
 
 
 
 

I understand, after you mentioned the 1008W is the peak value, and the graph also rescaled to that, it makes sense.
 
Yes I get that. That's why I asked: 
 
But as a user opening this up for the first time, (or me seeing this for the first time on a forum post) not getting this graph isn't a surprise. Without the extra context you provided this graph is an absolute mess to read. 
 
For instance, it says "max 1008W" because that's the actual max, but then why does it also say "min 0W"? I'm pretty sure 0W isn't the actual measured minimum, unless it somehow measured the power draw when the computer was unplugged.
 
So when I see that, combined with the fact that the graph never actually reaches 1008W in the image, I start to suspect 1008 is just the max on the scale of the graph.
 
The fact that it combines axis label numbers, with statistics (peak value) is rather confusing.
 
 
Rescaling a graph to the max value is not optimal. If that power supply uses 1008W, I'd much rather have it rescaled to 1100 or 1050. For 276W, rescale to 300. Something like that would be far better, combined with a separate spot for the peak value. I'm not saying I don't want the graph to rescale at all.
 

seem like DOA . unluckily
even when reviewers test a lot of psu(sample) . it dosen't matter. 
I got some cases  pass ATE and burn-in test from factory. but when users buy this and use some months it blow up . because bad solder join in gate pin of one APFC mosfet . it loosen day by day 
Quality control is headache . especially for small factories
   

To be completely honest you could probably get away with a PSU half that size and still run the Nvidia cards, now with that headroom, if you want to look for a older less efficient GPU that is faster like a GTX 970 or 780 or an RX480 you could get away with running those on your PSU.

System Power 9? That's better than the FSP.

Which be quiet 500W are you talking about? Pure Power 11? Pure Power L8? System Power?
 
The CX 500 (I assume this is the bronze version) and Hyper K are about the same, both are old, group regulated units. Not suitable for systems with modern GPU, so I am actually someone who (subjectively) believe that these old PSUs are not at all should be used, even temporarily. I have to admit I am very picky on PSUs though.

Which be quiet 500W are you talking about? Pure Power 11? Pure Power L8? System Power?
 
The CX 500 (I assume this is the bronze version) and Hyper K are about the same, both are old, group regulated units. Not suitable for systems with modern GPU, so I am actually someone who (subjectively) believe that these old PSUs are not at all should be used, even temporarily. I have to admit I am very picky on PSUs though.

Here. If components list is wrong, I can open an unit I have lying around. Same platform as Platimax DF 500/600w
The product pages say GP-G and eastern review models have GP-G boxes and branding, but Newegg and Amazon both have SG-G in their promotional pictures and only send units with those serial numbers. Internally, platforms are the same. But full vs non-modular besides moving in a modular cable board with some FPCAPs, I have no idea.

Here's one that is pretty recent, looks similar eh?

Is it the Fractal Newton 1000w?
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/fractal-design-newton-r3-1000w/
There's pictures on the 3rd page of the review.
 
Assuming that is the PSU you have, it should be fine.

There is just one CX450!

Please don't say this again. 

I hope Jon is incorrect and it is not a PSU issue, but that does look like the protection kicking in. Though, I'd say that it is not necessarily the multi rail configuration that caused this, it could be something else. I'm not yet convinced that there is a widespread issue on multi rail PSUs (CWT GPU in particular) tripping with high transient cards.

Dust 500w will turn the system into dust. It's a garbage PSU and with 16A at 12v it's far from 500w. Replace it.
 
A K cpu on a motherboard with crappy VRM is a bad Idea.
 
Edit: another thread with the same psu 
 

You're confusing things.  Your power supply doesn't REQUIRE a 15a wall plug to connect.
It may be delivered with a cable that has such a plug, simply because such cables are mass produced and it makes no sense to save a few cents there.
 
The power supply will produce up to 650 watts and give them to components. In order to produce 650 watts it will probably take up to around 750 watts from the mains power. 
If your AC voltage is 230v , that's around 3-4A of current, with maybe short peaks to 5-6A of current. 
 
HOWEVER, that's if you connect so many things to the power supply that you make your power supply produce 650 watts. 
 
A regular computer with just one video card will not consume more than 250-350 watts, so your power supply won't take more than around 400 watts from the wall socket.  
In terms of current, that will probably be an average of 2-3A of current.  
So in theory, a cable or wall plug rated for 6A of current would be fine. 
 
The power connector on the power supply is standardized, IEC something. There's standard cables with that connector. You can take such a cable and cut the end that plugs in the wall and change the plug to whatever you want. 
 
Keep in mind that it's quite important for power supply to have all three wires going into the wall socket : Live , Neutral and Earthing.  so you should use a wall socket with grounding/earthing  (or hack it somehow by connecting a wire from the earthing contact in the plug to anything metal going deep into the ground (like let's say metal pipes of your radiators... NOT gas pipes, never connect wires to gas pipes)
 
A power supply could work without the Earthing wire, but it's really not recommended, as the power supply uses that earthing wire to discharge some electricity and reduce the electric noise it produces. Without earthing, the exposed metal bits on your computer could zap you (for example when inserting usb devices you could get zapped if you touch the exterior of the usb header or the IO shield). It's not high enough zaps to kill you, but they're annoying.
 

I don't recommand every 500/600/650w and every Seasonic, Corsair or EVGA.
 
Looks like a list from www.alternate.fr. Some PSUs are f*ck*ing expensive in France. You're best pick there is https://www.alternate.fr/Corsair/CX550F-RGB-unité-dalimentation-dénergie-550-W-24-pin-ATX-Noir-Alimentation-PC/html/product/1668939 followed by https://www.alternate.fr/be-quiet/Straight-Power-11-450W-Alimentation-PC/html/product/1409997 , https://www.alternate.fr/Corsair/TX650M-Alimentation-PC/html/product/1334588 and https://www.alternate.fr/Enermax/Revolution-D-F-unité-dalimentation-dénergie-650-W-24-pin-ATX-ATX-Noir-Alimentation-PC/html/product/1528492

XPG is a no brainer. The cheapest is the best.

XPG Core Reactor is best choice.

XPG Core Reactor has a decent CWT platform that's better than the Seasonic Focus based NZXT C-series.

It is not in gold because P2's fan curve is bad. It is very noisy at mid to high loads and does not meet blue colour (which is a requirement for gold colour). For more details you can check the spreadsheet and check the second page called "methodology", in which there is an explanation of how P2 is not "better" than RMx.

Pretty much all brands have bad to mediocre PSUs. ASUS PSUs aren't bad exactly, just overpriced rebrands of Seasonic Focus mostly, with only Thor 1200W being Prime. MSI isn't bad either, it's just there are very few reviews to see if they indeed use DBB fan interchangeably with FDB, regardless, that only makes it noisier than most other PSUs, not exactly bad overall. Gigabyte had an explosive debut of P-GM, now it seems they've switched to better FETs on new revisions, or at the very least on higher wattages (1kW confirmed) but i'd still don't trust it for now, their other PSUs are okay, Aorus AP-GM / P-W is fine really, if it's cheap enough.

That is complete nonsense. Focus is not a design that goes above 1000W.
Using the year the PSUs are released are much easier rather than having to memorize the CP number. You do realize that these numbers are not memorize-able, right? I doubt you even memorize them 😄.

Not an easy fix, i mean, in these cases it is, but what if you guys decide to add another wattage to the series ? These codes are already long enough. I guess i'd just write [triangular grille] as a discerning feature for now, if you guys decide to make an another refresh of it, keeping the grille design i guess we'll work out something else then.