New PSU, system won't boot (continued)

Mellon Head said:

Feel free to plug your $1500 to $2000 computer right into the wall with no protection.

Responsible is to read what was stated. Protection was strongly recommended. But only protection that works. Effective protection at a computer is already inside a computer. In some cases, an adjacent protector can even make damage easier. Why would anyone recommend spending so much money on near zero protectors? Advertising? Hearsay? Speculation? Or to intentionally misrepresent what was posted.

Informed consumers protect from destructive anomalies by earthing something effective. Lightning is one example. Other destructive anomalies are created by stray cars, utility switching, tree rodents, linemen errors, et al. Lightning is typical of what does hardware damage. Hardware only needs protection from potentially destructive transients - that plug-in 'magic boxes' will not even discuss let alone protect from.

The informed spend tens of times less money on hardware protection also found in telco COs, atop the Empire State Building and WTC, in munitions dumps, at all airports, in rocket launch pads, in nuclear hardened facilities, cell phone towers, and every home - so that direct lightning strikes and other anomalies cause no damage. Some fabricate a denial by inventing things that do not exist. Damage means lightning directly strikes wires. Existing robust and internal protection means 'indirect' surges do no damage. Strongly recommended was protection that has worked even 100 years ago. That is clearly not near zero protectors from Belkin, APC, Tripplite, Panamax, or Monster.

Hardware protection means learning how it was done even 100 years ago so that anomalies (including and not limited to direct lightning strikes) need not cause hardware damage. Protection was that well proven that long ago.

UPS is irrelevant to the OP's problem both before and after damage happened. A UPS does nothing for hardware protection. OP solved his defects by replacing many internal component until something worked. Without a UPS, that computer works just fine. Why would anyone spend so much for virtually zero hardware protection?

Destructive transients are rare. Require what has always meant direct lightning strikes - or other anomalies - without damage. That is a properly earthed 'whole house' solution. It would not fix the OP's damage. But it does what that UPS is only suppose to (and does not) do.

Layback Bear said:

I have yet to understand how that much power (lighting) went through a little bitty phone line without melting it like a fuse before it ever got to the surge protector.

A protector was so grossly undersized as to be destroyed by a surge that could not even melt a phone line. That protector should not have melted. Melting suggests a protector was so unsafe as to be a potential house fire. These protectors must contain a thermal fuse that disconnects from a surge as fast as possible. So that protector parts do not fail catastrophically; do not create a fire. And so that a surge remains connected to an attached computer.

Nothing strange about this. Plug-in protectors do not claim to protect from typically destructive surges. See its specification numbers. A surge too tiny to melt phone wires may easily destroy a plug-in protector - with spec numbers that define undersized. Distressing is its thermal fuse that did not blow fast enough to avert a potential house fire.

BTW, a typical surge can be 20,000 amps. You have described a surge that would be significantly less - maybe 2000 amps. A surge that tiny is averted by any minimally sufficient protection. A minimally sufficient protector also would remain functional.

Nothing strange about this. Grossly undersizing not only increases profits. Its failure gets many to recommend that undersized protector and buy more. A properly sized protector does not fail; means nobody even knew a surge existed. Then nobody would recommend an effective solution.

BTW, if lightning struck inside of the 60 degree 'cone of protection' (beneath a lightning rod), then that lightning rod's earth ground may be defective.

Guys, so sorry for not updating this thread sooner.

As it turned out, the new motherboard got damaged within an hr of installation. I took it to the shop I bought it from and they checked and said its a dud. They replaced the motherboard promptly.

I also bought a new PSU (Cooler Master B500 Ver 2.0) along with the motherboard. The last PSU I bought was from Zebronics and as per reviews from members here and JonnyGuru (including Jonny himself) it's a pretty crappy make. Though I ended up wasting $50 but I couldn't risk my PC with that PSU, so I bought the new one.

Thanks a lot everyone for all your help so far. I am marking this thread as Solved

Layback Bear said:

My understanding was/is the insurance company inspectors checked the proper grounding of the lighting rods. Keep in mind the insurance was trying to find a way not to pay the claim.

Lightning repeatedly struck one wall. So they installed lightning rods. Lightning struck that wall again. If lightning strikes inside a rod's "cone of protection", then lightning is saying a human mistake exists.

That wall contained plumbing connected to more conductive and deeper earth. Lightning rods were properly installed according to code. But were in less conductive sand. Longer electrodes were driven into deeper and better conductive soil. Then lightning never again struck that wall and plumbing. Humans discovered and corrected a human mistake. Code was irrelevant.

Irrelevant is what someone inspected. Did they pull earth ground rods to inspect them? Of course not. Inspectors would only see an earthing electrode and say that is code. What defines protection cannot be inspected - quality of the earthing. If lightning struck inside a "cone of protection", then a connection to or quality of the earth ground is defective - no matter how many times it is inspected for code.

Quality of interior wiring was also irrelevant. Old wiring is problematic as a human safety issue. Even 1930 technology wiring is sufficient for today's appliances if it still meets that 1930 code. 1930 technology wiring is only problematic to human safety - ie connecting a three prong appliance to a two prong circuit.

Appliance protection is never defined by interior wiring. Appliance protection is defined by what connects transients on a low impedance path (ie less than 10 feet) to earth - outside. Code does not define appliance protection. Code only defines human protection. Best appliance protection must exist BEFORE a surge can enter. Even a three wire computer on a two wire circuit does nothing to harm that computer. That is only a human safety issue; not an appliance safety issue.

If a surge protector was damaged, then it was grossly undersized. Two completely unrelated issues apply - appliance safety and human safety. Melting does not say a protector was at fault for appliance safety. That protector was so grossly undersized as to be a threat to human safety. Protector was damaged by a surge so tiny as to not melt tiny phone wires. That is not strange. That is a glaringly obvious human safety issue.

Grounding (bonding) pipes is for human safety. That safety ground is not an earth ground. Appliance safety is defined by quality of an earth ground - including an essential low impedance (ie less than 10 foot) connection. Codes for human protection ignores impedance. Impedance is essential to appliance protection.

They suffered repeated strikes to a bathroom wall. Protection only existed when they upgraded what defines protection - earth ground. That applies to structure protection (lightning rods) and to appliances protection (a 'whole house' solution).

Lightning rod is effective because it still exists? A conclusion based upon observation. Lightning rods must be defined by what cannot be observed - its earth ground. If lightning strikes something inside that cone of protection (the point of that previous cautionary sentence), then that lightning rod's earth ground is likely defective. Meets code and is still defective.

Protection is always defined by the only item that does protection - for a structure or appliances. Earth ground. Many humans mistakenly believe protection is provided by a lightning rod or a protector. Many ignore the only item that defines structure and appliance protection - earth ground.

If lightning struck something inside a lightning rod's cone of protection, then a human mistake exists; structure protection is defective. If lightning did damage to any interior appliances, then a human mistake exists; appliance protection is defective.

Irrelevant if lightning constructs a plasma path from 'cloud to ground' or from 'ground up to a cloud'. How that electrical conductor is constructed is completely irrelevant. Relevant are microseconds AFTER that plasma path is constructed. Nobody and no high speed camera can observe what is relevant. Damage is about a 'current' that occurs in microseconds; after a 'voltage' takes milliseconds to convert gas to plasma. What is observed (ground to cloud or cloud to ground) is completely irrelevant to how or why damage happens.

Lightning is not capricious. An informed human sometimes says, "Oh. I did not realize that mistake existed." Damage from lightning means a human made a mistake. For example, not learning of deeper and more conductive soil. Or ignoring a grossly undersized protector that was a potential house fire. Ignoring lightning strikes that occur inside that lightning rod's cone of protection. Or assuming older (ie 1930) wiring makes appliance damage easier. All are example of human mistakes that can result in appliance damage.

Both appliance and structure protection is only as effective as its earth ground. Never changed since Franklin first demonstrated it in 1752. Code also does not define that protection.

RoasterMen said:

Like seriously guys just use a voltage regulator if you don't feel like killing your hardware.

What is a power supply? The best voltage regulator. Why would anyone need a 'magic box' on a power cord? They would spend $hundreds to fix a problem created by saving $tens on a PSU. Just another reason why any honest recommendation discusses specification numbers - and not magic boxes.

Westom - this is the same BS you've been spewing for years at many sites. You must constantly google the internet for surge protection to find places to post your same BS, only to be told once again it is BS. Then you constantly blame others as being naïve and not informed, but it is you who refuses to accept the correct information. No one in any of these BS rants you post ever agree with you but you insist you are right and everybody else is wrong.

This is not about a TELCO DCO. This is not about direct lightning strikes. Whole house protection does not protect from internally sourced anomalies - like a faulty 1600W $15 toaster made in some back woods factory in China. No surge and spike protector is designed to save and protect your data - something many value more than the hardware it sits on.

Lightning striking the lightning rods on top of the Empire State Building do no damage because the lightning is shunted, by design, directly to Earth ground. That is not the same thing as lightning that strikes the transformer on the pole feeding the drop into our homes, or the power distribution grids - as you have been told many times before but refuse to accept. Talk about the naïve!

Also contrary to your unmovable belief, while preferred, surges and spikes do NOT have to be shunted to "Earth" ground. Airborne aircraft are stuck by lightning 1000s a time every day with no ill-results at all. MOVs, for just one example, are perfectly capable of absorbing excess voltage and then converting it heat without shunting it Earth ground.

Electronics from a 100 years ago did not jam 100s of billions of transistor gates into the space of a small postage stamp. Electronics from a 100 years ago did not run on mV or even µV DC and insulation barriers/gaps were not just a few scant nanometers wide. Those microscopic insulation barriers/gaps should tell you, westom, since you know all about electronics, that the voltage potentials needed to jump ("arc" across) those gaps are much much lower than needed a 100, 50, or even 10 years ago.

westom said:

Effective protection at a computer is already inside a computer.
A UPS does nothing for hardware protection.

Yeah right!

Note here from 6 years ago where westom claimed,

westom said:

because all electronics already contain serious surge protection.
Anything that UPS might do to block surges - a better (more robust) power supply is required to already be inside all computer.
Informed homeowners worry about rare surges (ie once every seven years)

Or in this thread from 5 years ago,

westom said:

Ethernet already has robust protection typically for up to 2000 volts.
Surge protection means that surge is not inside the house.
Robust protection has always existed in appliances.

Or in this thread where he says,

How often do incandescent bulbs dim to 50% intensity? And even when bulbs are at 50% intensity, that is ideal power to every electronic appliance. It is called AVR. It already exists inside electronic appliances.

Intel ATX specs say a computer must work - and even startup up with a full load - when an incandescent bulb is at 40% intensity.

Here's the ATX Form Factor specs. See for yourself if westom is making stuff up, or telling the truth.

Note in this engineering forum thread where VE1BLL replies to westom with,

"Typical" does not imply "all". You are confusing one aspect of lightning protection (AC) for the complete solution in all cases as is your long standing habit. You do your readers a disservice with your single-minded focus on "Whole House" protection devices.

Or at anandtech where bud-- replies to westom,

Since westom has a reading deficit
Complete nonsense.
Many people have posted specs. They are always ignored by westom .
Only in westom's fantasies.

The list is endless:
Steam Users' Forums - View Single Post - Best surge protectors for the money?
Recommended Surge Protectors/UPS? Maybe I'm over complicating it. - Ars Technica OpenForum
I could go on and on but everyone (except you, westom, ) get the point.

I am truly sorry, westom. I really am. I really don't mean to make this so personal but this has been going on for years! And it is clear you are stuck in the past from decades past. You may very well have been, at one time, a top notch "inside plant" telephone tech. But contrary to what you clearly believe, that obsolete knowledge does not apply to today's residential homes, modern electronics, computers or computer networks. And it is clear you don't want to accept otherwise. I learned long ago as a tech, when it comes to electronics everything is subject to change. Sorry you have not.

I apologize to readers and staff too. But a quick google will further show a widespread pattern of him spreading inaccurate information while accusing everyone else of naivety and being mis-informed. There's been enough said so I will step out of this topic now.