About a year ago I needed to upgrade my PSU to 1600 Watt. I had a Corsair AX1200 that had served me perfectly for 10 years so it was time for a new one besides needing the extra capacity.
At the time 1600 Watt PSU's were not easy to find for me. I live in canada, the closest thing to a computer store where I live is best buy.
The first 1600W that was available was an EVGA G+ 1600W directly from EVGA. I bought it immediately. Soon after the online store got the rest of the 1600W's in stock.

So now with some deals to be had, does anyone think it would be any benefit for me to upgrade from the G+ to the T2 1600W? I have 10900KF, ASUS Apex Z490, 3090 KPE, 3090 FTW3 (CPU & GPU'S Optimus Water blocks), 2 x HDD, 4 x SSD, 7 x Lian Li SL140 RGB fans, Corsair XD7 distro plate w/D5, Lian Li Strimer Plus 24P & Triple 8P. The rest of my water cooling is external and on separate power supply.
I will definitely be upgrading to new Intel CPU, maybe 12900K w/ASUS Apex maybe wait for workstation or HEDT platform with more PCIE lanes.

I'm not asking if it is worth the money, I'm asking if anyone thinks, especially for Overclocking, that I would actually experience benefit from the T2 over G+.

My initial thought is that I probably would not but maybe there is more to the performance difference between the T2 and G+ than just efficiency rating?

Thank you for any advice, help or information anyone can share with about PSU performance.

pmclean

I'm not asking if it is worth the money, I'm asking if anyone thinks, especially for Overclocking, that I would actually experience benefit from the T2 over G+.

My initial thought is that I probably would not but maybe there is more to the performance difference between the T2 and G+ than just efficiency rating?

Thank you for any advice, help or information anyone can share with about PSU performance.

No performance advantage that I am aware of, just efficiency
 
When evaluating PSUs - Ripple suppression - is a good spec to focus on, when trying to see quality of OC ability

The above reply = True

austin86
1600w=1600w. The only thing that will make a difference is the ripple and wire gauge. 80+ has nothing to do with overclocking. That being said in the log run going from 80+ gold to 80+ titanium will save you money with the power bill f the system is used a lot.

Even Johny Guru has stated that the amount of power draw going from Gold to Titanium is a couple of percent, and with the extreme cost difference from a gold PSU to a Titanium PSU, it would take years of constant use to have the power bill level out the cost difference.

If you have a Gold rated PSU, it does not make sense to purchase a titanium. If you have no PSU and buy a Titanium and find one for a good deal, you could make a very small impact to power usage compared to buying a gold, but the wallet is still taking the same hit in the end.


$589 for a 1600T2
$429 for a 1600G+ (without instant rebate)

$160 difference currently, you save maybe $10 a month total, so now you have around 16 months of usage to balance out the cost. Titanium is a 4% more efficient on average compared to the efficiency rating over gold, which isn’t much. It is something, but not much.

Gold @20% load 87% efficient
Titanium @20% load 92% efficient

Gold @50% load 90% efficient
Titanium @50% load 94% efficient

Gold @100% load 87% efficient
Titanium at 100% load 90% efficient

Running folding at 100% for months, my total bill would be around $350 a month, sometimes $400+ during the summer… and that is a savings of $16-18 dollar a month, if the only thing being charged is my computer… turning the computer off resulted in lowered cooling costs and lowered my total bill by almost $100, so in reality, I would be saving $5 a month maximum by switching to a Titanium PSU from a gold…


32 months to make that cost back, isn’t efficient. Then you lose money from upgrading and getting rid of the old PSU.. meaning even longer return on investment.

the_Scarlet_one
Titanium is a 4% more efficient on average compared to the efficiency rating over gold, which isn’t much. It is something, but not much.

Gold @20% load 87% efficient
Titanium @20% load 92% efficient

Gold @50% load 90% efficient
Titanium @50% load 94% efficient

Gold @100% load 87% efficient
Titanium at 100% load 90% efficient

Not to go off on too big of a tangent, but Titanium has a benefit at low loads too. If you are like me, and have gravitated away from high loads to low loads, you might reconsider your hardware priorities. Titanium is required to have high efficiency over a broad range, but Gold is not required to have high efficiency at low loads.

With a Kill-a-watt meter at the wall outlet, I realized that my computer spent most of its time browsing the internet at only 50-ish watts, and I realized that my Gold power supply's efficiency rating was only around 70% efficient at that low of a load. I decided to upgrade to a Titanium power supply so that my typical low load would be around 90 efficient, thus saving electricity usage and reducing heat output slightly.

Efficiency and heat waste, that's the primary difference. Titanium has slightly better efficiency at high load, but significantly better efficiency at low load.

the_Scarlet_one

ty_ger07

the_Scarlet_one
Titanium is a 4% more efficient on average compared to the efficiency rating over gold, which isn’t much. It is something, but not much.

Gold @20% load 87% efficient
Titanium @20% load 92% efficient

Gold @50% load 90% efficient
Titanium @50% load 94% efficient

Gold @100% load 87% efficient
Titanium at 100% load 90% efficient

Not to go off on too big of a tangent, but Titanium has a benefit at low loads too. If you are like me, and have gravitated away from high loads to low loads, you might reconsider your hardware priorities. Titanium is required to have high efficiency over a broad range, but Gold is not required to have high efficiency at low loads.

With a Kill-a-watt meter at the wall outlet, I realized that my computer spent most of its time browsing the internet at only 50-ish watts, and I realized that my Gold power supply's efficiency rating was only around 70% efficient at that low of a load. I decided to upgrade to a Titanium power supply so that my typical low load would be around 90 efficient, thus saving electricity usage and reducing heat output slightly.

Efficiency and heat waste, that's the primary difference. Titanium has slightly better efficiency at high load, but significantly better efficiency at low load.

5% at low load. That’s still not significant, but it is slightly better.

In my case, 20% at low load. It depends on the power supply and what you consider a "low load". The gold chart only goes so low, but real-world goes lower. Since I "upgraded" to a lower total wattage PSU (which better matched my actual max wattage), I was able to get out of having a gold 1200 watt PSU idling at 50 watts with miserable efficiency. 20% load is not always a very "low load" which matches actual usage. Another benefit is that a higher-efficiency PSU may be fanless (like mine) and that often also improves efficiency over a broad range of usage.
I get it that low-load wattage is (as stated) a low number, so it seems that percentage of efficiency doesn't make much difference, but when the percentage of efficiency difference is in the order of 20%, it can still add up to a meaningful amount. Basically, I am saying that 20% savings at low load could be just as meaningful as a 2% savings at high load.