|
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
The Lone Gunman
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 26, 2007 9:37 pm Post subject: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinion ei |
 |
|
I'm posting to both NG's as there seems to be an awful lot of smart hardware
people here. I was reading one of my PC-related magazines on an airplane
the other day when I came across an "infomercial-article" from Gigabyte
touting their newest and greatest mobo's using all solid capacitors. I'll
include a link to the Gigabyte site below, but I'm just wondering what the
consensus is of you folks that are "in the know." Reading up on Gigabyte's
'Ultra Durable' article you would think this is the best invention since
sliced bread.
My motive of course for posting this is that I am close to making a decision
on upgrading my current 5-year old Athlon XP system to something dual-core
etc., and simply don't know at this point to go the Intel or AMD route. I'm
pretty agnostic along these lines, just want the best bang for my buck.
Anyway, here's the link:
http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/FileList/NewTech/2006_motherboard_newtech/article_02_all_solid.htm
Thanks to you all in advance.
TLG |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
daytripper
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:09 am Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 18:37:12 +0200, "The Lone Gunman" <lone@invalid.net>
wrote:
| Quote: | I'm posting to both NG's as there seems to be an awful lot of smart hardware
people here. I was reading one of my PC-related magazines on an airplane
the other day when I came across an "infomercial-article" from Gigabyte
touting their newest and greatest mobo's using all solid capacitors. I'll
include a link to the Gigabyte site below, but I'm just wondering what the
consensus is of you folks that are "in the know." Reading up on Gigabyte's
'Ultra Durable' article you would think this is the best invention since
sliced bread.
My motive of course for posting this is that I am close to making a decision
on upgrading my current 5-year old Athlon XP system to something dual-core
etc., and simply don't know at this point to go the Intel or AMD route. I'm
pretty agnostic along these lines, just want the best bang for my buck.
Anyway, here's the link:
http://www.gigabyte.com.tw/FileList/NewTech/2006_motherboard_newtech/article_02_all_solid.htm
Thanks to you all in advance.
TLG
|
This is essentially a high-availability server design practice trickling down
to the desktop. Every five-nines+ server motherboard I've designed from late
1999 on used aluminum capacitors sporting solid polymer material (see Sanyo
OS-CON, for example) wherever high capacitance/low ESR devices were required -
which was mostly on the processor and chipset VRD rails.
These aren't cheap, so I was restrained from using more than theory required
(though I always put a few extra, strategically located footprints down and
left them off the assembly boms). The generally reflects a trade-off between
load-lines and how complex (which pretty much means how many phases) a
switching regulator one wants to construct. 6-phase switchers have been fairly
standard in the Xeon space, but 8-phasers are gaining, trading fets for fat
caps. With fewer caps comes less resistance to putting down premium devices
and burying the life-span issue.
Does it make any difference to a typical desktop user? Plainly, the likelihood
of failure of electrolytic caps as the desktop ages is going to be a major
factor, with those who stick with a system for 5 years more likely to succumb
to sudden system death, and those who keep on the cutting edge (if not the
bleeding edge) most likely to beat the reaper...
Cheers
/daytripper |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lone Gunman
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 1:50 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
daytripper <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> wrote:
: On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 18:37:12 +0200, "The Lone Gunman"
: <lone@invalid.net> wrote:
:
<snip for brevity>
: This is essentially a high-availability server design practice
: trickling down to the desktop. Every five-nines+ server
: motherboard I've designed from late 1999 on used aluminum
: capacitors sporting solid polymer material (see Sanyo OS-CON,
: for example) wherever high capacitance/low ESR devices were
: required - which was mostly on the processor and chipset VRD
: rails.
:
: These aren't cheap, so I was restrained from using more than
: theory required (though I always put a few extra,
: strategically located footprints down and left them off the
: assembly boms). The generally reflects a trade-off between
: load-lines and how complex (which pretty much means how many
: phases) a switching regulator one wants to construct. 6-phase
: switchers have been fairly standard in the Xeon space, but
: 8-phasers are gaining, trading fets for fat caps. With fewer
: caps comes less resistance to putting down premium devices and
: burying the life-span issue.
:
: Does it make any difference to a typical desktop user?
: Plainly, the likelihood of failure of electrolytic caps as the
: desktop ages is going to be a major factor, with those who
: stick with a system for 5 years more likely to succumb to
: sudden system death, and those who keep on the cutting edge
: (if not the bleeding edge) most likely to beat the reaper...
:
: Cheers
:
: /daytripper
Thanks for the great post, Daytripper. I **think** I understand most of
what you said. Yeah, my mobo is approaching five years now and I'm starting
to see problems that I'm almost sure are h/w related. Won't go into that
here, just wanted some feedback on the OP. You're the MAN, Daytripper.
Glad to see you're still alive! :-)
/TLG (still wondering why there are so many MIA's from the .chips NG) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anton Ertl
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 2:08 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
daytripper <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> writes:
| Quote: | Does it make any difference to a typical desktop user? Plainly, the likelihood
of failure of electrolytic caps as the desktop ages is going to be a major
factor, with those who stick with a system for 5 years more likely to succumb
to sudden system death,
|
Sure it is more likely that a sudden system death will occur in 5
years than in 3 years, as long as the probability of sudden system
death in the latter two years is non-zero.
What is more interesting is whether the rate of system death increases
with age, and by how much.
We have two consumer-type boards running all the time since seven
years, so I think that any fear that the reaper is coming soon to
visit desktops as soon as they reach five years is exaggerated,
especially since many desktops are turned off much of the time.
Sudden deaths that we see occur more in power supplies, RAM, fans, and
disks.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daytripper
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 8:09 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 12:05:55 GMT, anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton
Ertl) wrote:
| Quote: | daytripper <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> writes:
Does it make any difference to a typical desktop user? Plainly, the likelihood
of failure of electrolytic caps as the desktop ages is going to be a major
factor, with those who stick with a system for 5 years more likely to succumb
to sudden system death,
Sure it is more likely that a sudden system death will occur in 5
years than in 3 years, as long as the probability of sudden system
death in the latter two years is non-zero.
What is more interesting is whether the rate of system death increases
with age, and by how much.
We have two consumer-type boards running all the time since seven
years, so I think that any fear that the reaper is coming soon to
visit desktops as soon as they reach five years is exaggerated,
especially since many desktops are turned off much of the time.
Sudden deaths that we see occur more in power supplies, RAM, fans, and
disks.
- anton
|
Your methodology is intrinsically unsound. Two measurements using boards of
unknown construction does not support your conclusion.
Liquid electrolyte caps have a very low mtbf.
That's the beginning and end of the question...
Cheers
/daytripper |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Tim Bradshaw
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:05 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
On 2007-03-30 16:09:46 +0100, daytripper <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> said:
| Quote: | Liquid electrolyte caps have a very low mtbf.
That's the beginning and end of the question...
|
Actually, no it's not. The issue is whether, empirically, electrolytic
failure *on motherborads* (not in power supplies) is a significant
cause of motherboard death, and in turn whether motherboard death is a
significant contributor to the death of desktops. My guess is the
answers to these are "yes" and "no" respectively.
The kinds of design adopted for high-reliability machines are
interesting here, but not for the reason you might think: every machine
which has any pretension to high-reliability I've ever seen has
redundant hot-swappable PSUs and fans (as well as disks, obviously).
Assuming the designers were competent that tells you what tends to
fail: power supplies and fans (and disks). Further, since those things
can now be swapped without taking the machine down, the reliability of
other components becomes the thing that controls the reliability of the
whole system. For machines where the system board can't be swapped
with the machine up, which is most of them, that means you might need
to pay serious attention to that (for machines where system boards
*can* be swapped with the machine up you're probably paying so much for
the machine that you expect serious attention to be paid anyway).
It would be interesting to see statistics as to what kills desktops.
My guess (which should be taken for what it's worth, namely nothing
is):
1. most of them are thrown away, working;
2. disk failure
3. PSU failure
4. fan failure
5. everything else, trailing a long way behind.
--tim |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tim Bradshaw
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:55 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
On 2007-03-30 23:34:00 +0100, daytripper <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> said:
Do these machines (or any other HA systems) have much to do with
desktops (which was the original question, remember)? No.
| Quote: | Because you don't get to 6 nines on the cheap, son.
No matter what is replaceable once the system's been fired up...
|
Indeed you do not. And again: what exactly does this have to do with
the reliability of desktop motherboards? I suggest: nothing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
daytripper
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:55 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 19:05:47 +0100, Tim Bradshaw <tfb@tfeb.org> wrote:
| Quote: | On 2007-03-30 16:09:46 +0100, daytripper <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> said:
Liquid electrolyte caps have a very low mtbf.
That's the beginning and end of the question...
Actually, no it's not. The issue is whether, empirically, electrolytic
failure *on motherborads* (not in power supplies) is a significant
cause of motherboard death, and in turn whether motherboard death is a
significant contributor to the death of desktops. My guess is the
answers to these are "yes" and "no" respectively.
The kinds of design adopted for high-reliability machines are
interesting here, but not for the reason you might think: every machine
which has any pretension to high-reliability I've ever seen has
redundant hot-swappable PSUs and fans (as well as disks, obviously).
Assuming the designers were competent that tells you what tends to
fail: power supplies and fans (and disks). Further, since those things
can now be swapped without taking the machine down, the reliability of
other components becomes the thing that controls the reliability of the
whole system. For machines where the system board can't be swapped
with the machine up, which is most of them, that means you might need
to pay serious attention to that (for machines where system boards
*can* be swapped with the machine up you're probably paying so much for
the machine that you expect serious attention to be paid anyway).
It would be interesting to see statistics as to what kills desktops.
My guess (which should be taken for what it's worth, namely nothing
is):
1. most of them are thrown away, working;
2. disk failure
3. PSU failure
4. fan failure
5. everything else, trailing a long way behind.
--tim
|
No pretensions here: http://www.stratus.com/products/index.htm
An entire "side" - power, cooling, logic - is field replaceable without any
user or process ever realizing it's happening - from fault, through automagic
call-home-to-mama, through FRU replacement, through re synchronization.
Yet, and, as I said earlier, the motherboards use capacitors that have an mtbf
an order of magnitude higher than that found on desktops (until recently).
Because you don't get to 6 nines on the cheap, son.
No matter what is replaceable once the system's been fired up...
Cheers
/daytripper |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bill Todd
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 5:12 am Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
Tim Bradshaw wrote:
....
| Quote: | 1. most of them are thrown away, working;
2. disk failure
3. PSU failure
4. fan failure
5. everything else, trailing a long way behind.
|
That (with the exception of the top point) was indeed the approximate
ordering I read recently in a paper by credible people (may have been
one of the recent ones discussing real-world vs. specced disk MTBFs - or
not). But it's not clear what the service life of motherboards was
considered to be, so it's possible that inclusion of 5+ year old MBs
would have changed the conclusions.
- bill |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tim Bradshaw
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:26 am Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
On 2007-03-31 02:31:56 +0100, daytripper <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> said:
| Quote: | Ok, so you got confused along the way. Mostly your own doing, as the point has
always been: use cheap, low-mtbf caps and you run a higher risk of a system
failure, compared to the use of high-mtbf components.
|
Perhaps I was not clear enough for you: the issue is whether the lower
reliability of electrolytics on the system boards of desktops (go and
read the ortiginal article if you have forgotten) is a significant
factor in desktop reliability. Don't bring up Stratus or other HA
systems in your answer.
Or to put it another way: if I wanted to spend a given amount of money
to make a desktop more reliable would I do it by buying a motherboard
with no electrolytics or (say) buying a system with redundant power or
mirrored disks. Don't bring up Stratus or other HA systems in your
answer.
| Quote: |
For what ever misguided reason, you got caught up in the phrase "sudden system
death",
|
I at no point used the word "sudden". I did use the word "death" to
mean "failure".
Never mind, I'm not going to waste more of comp.arch's time on this idiocy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
daytripper
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:26 am Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
On Fri, 30 Mar 2007 23:12:14 +0100, Tim Bradshaw <tfb@tfeb.org> wrote:
| Quote: | On 2007-03-30 23:34:00 +0100, daytripper <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> said:
No pretensions here: http://www.stratus.com/products/index.htm
Do these machines (or any other HA systems) have much to do with
desktops (which was the original question, remember)? No.
|
Yes, it has to do with the thread, specifically the migration of components
used in highly-available systems down to the desktop.
Also, it refutes your concept that something easily replaceable in the field
without disruption could afford to use cheaper, lower-mtbf components.
| Quote: | Because you don't get to 6 nines on the cheap, son.
No matter what is replaceable once the system's been fired up...
Indeed you do not. And again: what exactly does this have to do with
the reliability of desktop motherboards? I suggest: nothing.
|
Ok, so you got confused along the way. Mostly your own doing, as the point has
always been: use cheap, low-mtbf caps and you run a higher risk of a system
failure, compared to the use of high-mtbf components.
For what ever misguided reason, you got caught up in the phrase "sudden system
death", and tried to make some kind of point countering it. I can't imagine
why, a failure that takes down the system is usually sudden, and the passage
of time is no friend to a low-mtbf component used in fairly high quantity...
Cheers
/daytripper |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lone Gunman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 2:05 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
Tim Bradshaw <tfb@tfeb.org> wrote:
: On 2007-03-31 02:31:56 +0100, daytripper
: <day_trippr@REMOVEyahoo.com> said:
:
:: Ok, so you got confused along the way. Mostly your own doing,
:: as the point has always been: use cheap, low-mtbf caps and
:: you run a higher risk of a system failure, compared to the
:: use of high-mtbf components.
:
: Perhaps I was not clear enough for you: the issue is whether
: the lower reliability of electrolytics on the system boards of
: desktops (go and
: read the ortiginal article if you have forgotten) is a
: significant
: factor in desktop reliability. Don't bring up Stratus or other
: HA
: systems in your answer.
:
: Or to put it another way: if I wanted to spend a given amount
: of money
: to make a desktop more reliable would I do it by buying a
: motherboard
: with no electrolytics or (say) buying a system with redundant
: power or mirrored disks. Don't bring up Stratus or other HA
: systems in your
: answer.
:
::
:: For what ever misguided reason, you got caught up in the
:: phrase "sudden system death",
:
: I at no point used the word "sudden". I did use the word
: "death" to
: mean "failure".
:
: Never mind, I'm not going to waste more of comp.arch's time on
: this idiocy.
Okay then: [Moe to the boys: "Settle down".....'SLAP']
Hey everyone, I didn't post this question as a troll or to start an
argument. It was just an honest question about whether or not this hardware
(ie, solid caps) can make a significant difference in the overall "lifespan"
of a consumer-grade, desktop machine. As I originally posted, my homebuilt
machine (motherboard) is about five years old now, and is starting to
misbehave a bit. I finally found the time to pull the guts out of my
machine the other day only to find that yes, one of the capacitors is indeed
showing signs of leaking and I guess imminent failure. The machine still
works, but I'm definitely now on borrowed time.
I just simply wanted to know if the new solid-cap technology from Gigabyte
was worth the few extra euros (oops, I mean dollars) that I'm sure they will
ask. I find this thread so far quite interesting but I simply don't
understand all the "mala leche." ;-) Thanks to everyone that's offered
their thoughts.
/TLG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Robert Redelmeier
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 6:32 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips The Lone Gunman <lone@invalid.net> wrote in part:
| Quote: | It was just an honest question about whether or not this hardware
(ie, solid caps) can make a significant difference in the overall
"lifespan" of a consumer-grade, desktop machine.
|
I don't disagree with any of the previous posters, but wish to
point out this depends entirely on what you mean by "lifespan",
and what the solid caps are replacing -- there have been
several epidemics of bad caps (often unstable isolation oil).
When the choice is between bad caps and solid, then yes, solid
will give longer desktop life. When the choice is between
good electrolytics (not always an oxymoron!), then the life
extention is probably in the out-years beyond normal lifespan.
| Quote: | As I originally posted, my homebuilt machine (motherboard)
is about five years old now, and is starting to misbehave a bit.
|
Five years is above the historical "lifespan" of most
MS-Windows machines (3-4 usually considered max). OTOH,
I've used the same mobo continuously powered for 8 years.
You may be seeing abnormally bad caps. Try
http://www.badcaps.net
-- Robert |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anton Ertl
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:37 pm Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
"The Lone Gunman" <lone@invalid.net> writes:
| Quote: | As I originally posted, my homebuilt
machine (motherboard) is about five years old now, and is starting to
misbehave a bit.
|
What often helps in such cases is to push all socketed stuff a little
bit (or alternatively, pull it out, and reseat it).
| Quote: | I just simply wanted to know if the new solid-cap technology from Gigabyte
was worth the few extra euros (oops, I mean dollars) that I'm sure they will
ask.
|
If you are using liquid cooling or some other exotic cooler that does
not provide airflow to the CPU capacitors, electrolytic capacitors get
hotter and age faster than with normal air cooling (especially if you
also overclock); in these circumstances the solid capacitors may have
a significant advantage.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl Some things have to be seen to be believed
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at Most things have to be believed to be seen
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lone Gunman
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 12:06 am Post subject: Re: Solid capacitors vs electrolytic...anyone with an opinio |
|
|
Robert Redelmeier <redelm@ev1.net.invalid> wrote:
: In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips The Lone Gunman
: <lone@invalid.net> wrote in part:
:: It was just an honest question about whether or not this
:: hardware (ie, solid caps) can make a significant difference
:: in the overall "lifespan" of a consumer-grade, desktop
:: machine.
:
: I don't disagree with any of the previous posters, but wish to
: point out this depends entirely on what you mean by "lifespan",
: and what the solid caps are replacing -- there have been
: several epidemics of bad caps (often unstable isolation oil).
To be honest, I don't know what I mean by "lifespan." For me personally, I
would think it would mean a mobo that can last at least five years before
going belly up. <shrug>
:
: When the choice is between bad caps and solid, then yes, solid
: will give longer desktop life. When the choice is between
: good electrolytics (not always an oxymoron!), then the life
: extention is probably in the out-years beyond normal lifespan.
Uh, ok. Not entirely sure what you mean here, but I think I get the idea.
:: As I originally posted, my homebuilt machine (motherboard)
:: is about five years old now, and is starting to misbehave a
:: bit.
:
: Five years is above the historical "lifespan" of most
: MS-Windows machines (3-4 usually considered max). OTOH,
: I've used the same mobo continuously powered for 8 years.
That's where I differ. My machine is almost never powered on 24/7. To the
contrary, it get's powered up/off sometimes three or four times a day. I
fully realize that repeated cold starts (vs running continuously at constant
state) is **much** harder on electronics, especially HD's and PS's.
: You may be seeing abnormally bad caps. Try
: http://www.badcaps.net
I KNOW I'm seeing a (singular) bad cap. Didn't you read the final paragraph
of my last post? <snigger> ;-)
/TLG |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fix your Windows Problems - FAST.
FREE Safe Scan Registry Check. Locate & Fix Errors in Minutes!
|
|
|
|
| |
Watched Topics
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Profile
Log in
Memberlist
Usergroups