Chinese -Leds

az2000 · Dec 30, 2014

alesh said:
You can have cheap lights as a single source. You can have cheap lights evenly spread.
On the other hand...
You can have expensive lights as a single source. You can have expensive lights evenly spread.

For example, with COBs I've read that to get them down to near-proximity strength you have to run *a lot* of them at 10w or so. The initial costs are higher, therefore people tend not to do this. They use stronger COBs, fewer of them, therefore sacrificing "efficiency" (as lurch is describing it) for cost.

If I understand correctly, I believe he's saying a similar efficiency could be had with less initial cost using less efficient LEDs placed closer to the plant and distributed around the plant as more sources.

I understand your point that the same can be done with energy efficient diodes. It just doesn't seem anyone's making lower wattage fixtures using high efficiency diodes. They tend to be 5w mounted in reflectors which require a fair amount of distance, and limit the divisibility of the light source.

Maybe I'm completely wrong about the point he's making.

alesh · Dec 30, 2014

az2000 said:
For example, with COBs I've read that to get them down to near-proximity strength you have to run *a lot* of them at 10w or so. The initial costs are higher, therefore people tend not to do this. They use stronger COBs, fewer of them, therefore sacrificing "efficiency" (as lurch is describing it) for cost.

If I understand correctly, I believe he's saying a similar efficiency could be had with less initial cost using less efficient LEDs placed closer to the plant and distributed around the plant as more sources.

I understand your point that the same can be done with energy efficient diodes. It just doesn't seem anyone's making lower wattage fixtures using high efficiency diodes. They tend to be 5w mounted in reflectors which require a fair amount of distance, and limit the divisibility of the light source.

Maybe I'm completely wrong about the point he's making.

Vero10.

LurchLurkin said:
I know what you're saying..

If the lights produce light more efficiently, the plants used it just as effectively, and distribution was just as good then the better diodes would be a win.

But when you are looking at costs of the unit compared to the actual performance you're all getting, they don't look more appealing. Especially with the cost difference they'd have to be wayyyy better.

Well, I'm of opinion that they are actually wayyy better. Add another y for reliability and that's it.

Greengenes707 · Dec 30, 2014

I love that the guy that doesn't grow or smoke is here...I totally trust you.

Someone other than supra please do the test or stop tying to be an expert.
Supra you do too much for these people. You are an amazing person clearly with great patients.

The biggest unit in the game only has to cover 8" outside its self and is 4 smaller units in one. You point about multiple vs one is moot...and also the best can be had as smaller units like at200 and a51's. And no one is over 1000umols at any normal uses distance.
My diy is spread very well across the canopy a well and shits on the efficacy of ANY premade panels.

I don't see any panels constantly hittin 1.2+g/w and as high as 1.5. And doing it with many different growers, strains, and styles...like CXA's are.

nomofatum · Dec 30, 2014

Greengenes707 said:
I love that the guy that doesn't grow or smoke is here...I totally trust you.

Someone other than supra please do the test or stop tying to be an expert.
Supra you do too much for these people. You are an amazing person clearly with great patients.

The biggest unit in the game only has to cover 8" outside its self and is 4 smaller units in one. You point about multiple vs one is moot...and also the best can be had as smaller units like at200 and a51's. And no one is over 1000umols at any normal uses distance.
My diy is spread very well across the canopy a well and shits on the efficacy of ANY premade panels.

I don't see any panels constantly hittin 1.2+g/w and as high as 1.5. And doing it with many different growers, strains, and styles...like CXA's are.

I don't think you will get an argument on g/w. Epistars will be defeated without issue by the Crees on g/w. That measure is really just another electrical efficiency analog. However the epistar or any lighting option can compete on total grams output. Many of us are more concerned with monetary efficiency than electrical efficiency. In many cases the epistars are more monetarily efficient that then Crees. Meaning they will output the same number of grams for less total money spent (upfront + operating/electrical.) I guess I'm more concerned with g/$ or g/sqft than I am with g/w. I have limited sqft and limited $, but nearly unlimited watts.

I would recommend you look at the efficiency difference, determine a system of each that will output the same quantity of light, then compare the electrical costs, how long does it take for the more efficient system to pay for it's more expensive upfront cost via electrical savings. That is what this debate is all about. Getting the most light you can for the least amount of money, aka monetary efficiency.

Electrical efficiency pays off over time, so the question is will it pay off before it's time to upgrade. I wouldn't want to try to run 2014 LEDs in 2019, it would be very funny to see what you would be up against. I think with LEDs you want to plan on upgrading in 2-3 years, so your selection now should pay off within that timeframe or you made a bad choice.

Each of us has to run our own numbers. Electricity costs different amounts in different locations and heat can be a good thing or your worst enemy, it all depends on your location and setup.

Yodaweed · Dec 30, 2014

nomofatum said:
I don't think you will get an argument on g/w. Epistars will be defeated without issue by the Crees on g/w. That measure is really just another electrical efficiency analog. However the epistar or any lighting option can compete on total grams output. Many of us are more concerned with monetary efficiency than electrical efficiency. In many cases the epistars are more monetarily efficient that then Crees. Meaning they will output the same number of grams for less total money spent (upfront + operating/electrical.) I guess I'm more concerned with g/$ or g/sqft than I am with g/w. I have limited sqft and limited $, but nearly unlimited watts.

I would recommend you look at the efficiency difference, determine a system of each that will output the same quantity of light, then compare the electrical costs, how long does it take for the more efficient system to pay for it's more expensive upfront cost via electrical savings. That is what this debate is all about. Getting the most light you can for the least amount of money, aka monetary efficiency.

Electrical efficiency pays off over time, so the question is will it pay off before it's time to upgrade. I wouldn't want to try to run 2014 LEDs in 2019, it would be very funny to see what you would be up against. I think with LEDs you want to plan on upgrading in 2-3 years, so your selection now should pay off within that timeframe or you made a bad choice.

Each of us has to run our own numbers. Electricity costs different amounts in different locations and heat can be a good thing or your worst enemy, it all depends on your location and setup.

Prove it. Grow with both lights and show end product is the same and weights and we might believe you.

LurchLurkin · Dec 30, 2014

But at what cost? Most of you are doing small grows from what I can see and if you can spend $300 on 3 lights vs 1200 on one light and hit 1gpw vs 1.2gpw how long will your investment take to pay you back? Will the rewards keep up with technology? Are they that much more inefficient? Are you able to hit 55-60 watts per sqft to utilize space efficiently?

Even on a larger scale.. And this is only if the larger light does provide that much more efficiency, if gpw is what you're judging by, which is a good measure imo, you also should be doing hydro. It's proven to increase yield on other plants. All the bacteria do is nitrogen fixation so if it tastes different you should stop switching to bloom formulas and keep higher N I'd imagine.

Also, if you grow at home and heat is an issue and you have the space install a heat pump water heater in your grow lol

Greengenes707 · Dec 30, 2014

Option#1: 700w cob build $1250 for top bin and well source parts, a few quantity discounts in there. All based off my own builds from
Option#2: 700w of chinese/epi/bridg/unknow bin panels @100$/100w...so 700???? Mar21600 for $600...probably 550 after discount. so lets even say 500$ for 700 real watts.

1250-500=$750
$750 to make up for in say 1.5 years...reasonable use but yet still short term by even hps users standards(talking ballast and hood, not bulb)

Opt#1 pulls 1.2g/w so 840g@6$/g...$5040

Opt#2 pulls .8g/w(being generous) so 560g@6$/g...$3360

That is $1680 difference in just the first run.

Even if opt#2 pulls 1g/w thats 4200...still $840 short, and $140 ahead after making up the initial cost difference. ON JUST THE FIRST RUN!!!

Rinse and repeat...this time just retaining the 1680 perpetually @ say 4 runs a year for 1.3 years(remaining from 1.5yr timeline after 1st harvest)...so $8736+the 140 from run#1 equaling up to and very possibly more than... $8876 gained over 1.5 years from a 700w grow by a .2g/w increase from higher electrically efficient lights

So why is it that is not significant or important to people...even if it's a just for personal situation...what ever you produce can be looked at as buds you didn't spend on...and probably would be costing you more than $6/g too.

nomofatum · Dec 30, 2014

Greengenes707 said:
Option#1: 700w cob build $1250 for top bin and well source parts, a few quantity discounts in there. All based off my own builds from
Option#2: 700w of chinese/epi/bridg/unknow bin panels @100$/100w...so 700???? Mar21600 for $600...probably 550 after discount. so lets even say 500$ for 700 real watts.

1250-500=$750
$750 to make up for in say 1.5 years...reasonable use but yet still short term by even hps users standards(talking ballast and hood, not bulb)

Opt#1 pulls 1.2g/w so 840g@6$/g...$5040

Opt#2 pulls .8g/w(being generous) so 560g@6$/g...$3360

That is $1680 difference in just the first run.

Even if opt#2 pulls 1g/w thats 4200...still $840 short, and $140 ahead after making up the initial cost difference. ON JUST THE FIRST RUN!!!

Rinse and repeat...this time just retaining the 1680 perpetually @ say 4 runs a year for 1.3 years(remaining from 1.5yr timeline after 1st harvest)...so $8736+the 140 from run#1 equaling up to and very possibly more than... $8876 gained over 1.5 years from a 700w grow by a .2g/w increase from higher electrically efficient lights

So why is it that is not significant or important to people...even if it's a just for personal situation...what ever you produce can be looked at as buds you didn't spend on...and probably would be costing you more than $6/g too.

Stupid unfair comparison again.
Reason 1: DIY vs Non-DIY
Reason 2: You have to use more watts on the less efficient system. So you are comparing efficiency, not comparing the difference in light quantity available.

Try a fair version without the silly spin now.

LurchLurkin · Dec 30, 2014

Except how long is veg? How many watts per sqft? And I've seen the diy cobs doing only 0.8-1gpw too in some grows. I don't agree with nomo on reason 2 but I do agree that diy vs purchasing isn't a good comparison as building 60 cobs would such.

nomofatum · Dec 30, 2014

LurchLurkin said:
Except how long is veg? How many watts per sqft? And I've seen the diy cobs doing only 0.8-1gpw too in some grows. I don't agree with nomo on reason 2 but I do agree that diy vs purchasing isn't a good comparison as building 60 cobs would such.

So would you also do a watts to watts comparison between a T5HO system and a HPS/MH? It doesn't make much sense, you would run a higher watt system if using T5HO than you will if running MH. If you don't you get less output/grams. The highest electrical efficiency will win in a watt to watt comparison.

LurchLurkin · Dec 30, 2014

Nomo,

That's half the point. Highest electric efficiency for best price.

It won't always win. If you put a 1000watt actual draw high end light vs 5 190watt actual draw Chinese panels I bet they'd win because they could be kept closer and spread more evenly over the canopy.

nomofatum · Dec 30, 2014

LurchLurkin said:
Nomo,

That's half the point. Highest electric efficiency for best price.

It won't always win. If you put a 1000watt actual draw high end light vs 5 190watt actual draw Chinese panels I bet they'd win because they could be kept closer and spread more evenly over the canopy.

If you look at DIY they will win because you design them to fit the shape of your room, if you are smart in a grid formation for perfect distribution. That said, either LED can be placed in that formation. The difference is the initial cost and the electrical efficiency. It's all about how long the electrical savings take to exceed the greater initial costs. If it's longer than when you plan to upgrade, go with the cheaper option, if it's before you plan to upgrade go with the more efficient option.

Positivity · Dec 30, 2014

nitpicker
[nit-pik-er] Spell Syllables

noun
1.
a person who nitpicks, especially habitually.
nitpick
[nit-pik] Spell Syllables

verb (used without object)
1.
to be excessively concerned with or criticalof inconsequential details.
verb (used with object)
2.
to criticize by focusing on inconsequential details.

$400 for a 400w budget led....oh shit it broke

$500 for a nice 315w sunsystem cmh....damn those bulbs add up

$500 for a 200w high end led....shit theres a new one out

$900 for a 450w diy light...is it on? Wheres the heat? Leds last 100,000 hrs +? Easy g/w? Unscrew the led and pop a new one in if a better one comes along?

^^^^^^^^^ = PRICELESS

Greengenes707 · Dec 30, 2014

nomofatum said:
Stupid unfair comparison again.
Reason 1: DIY vs Non-DIY
Reason 2: You have to use more watts on the less efficient system. So you are comparing efficiency, not comparing the difference in light quantity available.

Try a fair version without the silly spin now.

There is no spin there bud...but you can keep tying to yourself

Your R1: you have epi's...what I am talkin about. But I'm sure I'm not too far off...feel free to supply a productive or informative post any time now...not just saying I'm off...show the info I'm gettin wrong.

Your R2: when did your electric meter start carin about effciency...it spins no matter effcieny what bro. 700w out te wall from any light all cost the same.
If we take it to dissipation your shitty Chinese drivers will loose some more to my HLG's.

So tell me agian who is trying to spin things.

LurchLurkin said:
Except how long is veg? How many watts per sqft? And I've seen the diy cobs doing only 0.8-1gpw too in some grows. I don't agree with nomo on reason 2 but I do agree that diy vs purchasing isn't a good comparison as building 60 cobs would such.

Again fell free to supply a counter response with some correct info about how far off I would be on diy cost.

Veg doesnt apply...that would more than likely be done separately, specially in perpetual systems. And could do clone s&f with no veg time to truly take it out.

To your response on good cobs g/w...I have see cheap lights get .5-.7 very commonly.
I gave it fair... 1g/w vs. 1.2g/w.
You can go .8 to 1 if you want. It will always be ahead in a side by side.

nomofatum · Dec 30, 2014

Greengenes707 said:
There is no spin there bud...but you can keep tying to yourself

Your R1: you have epi's...what I am talkin about. But I'm sure I'm not too far off...feel free to supply a productive or informative post any time now...not just saying I'm off...show the info I'm gettin wrong.

Your R2: when did your electric meter start carin about effciency...it spins no matter effcieny what bro. 700w out te wall from any light all cost the same.
If we take it to dissipation your shitty Chinese drivers will loose some more to my HLG's.

So tell me agian who is trying to spin things.

Again fell free to supply a counter response with some correct info about how far off I would be on diy cost.

Veg doesnt apply...that would more than likely be done separately, specially in perpetual systems. And could do clone s&f with no veg time to truly take it out.

To your response on good cobs g/w...I have see cheap lights get .5-.7 very commonly.
I gave it fair... 1g/w vs. 1.2g/w.
You can go .8 to 1 if you want. It will always be ahead in a side by side.

You ignore one set of costs and only focus on the other. Try giving both the same weight. Inital and running, either way they are costs. Take 3 years, run two systems that will output the same levels of light. Compare the costs, it's that easy. Same output, what costs more, total. That is how you compare what the most money wise system is. You can't size the most efficient system to ideal and under-power the others in your comparison. You size them all to ideal then compare.

sethimus · Dec 30, 2014

nomofatum said:
Stupid unfair comparison again.
Reason 1: DIY vs Non-DIY
Reason 2: You have to use more watts on the less efficient system. So you are comparing efficiency, not comparing the difference in light quantity available.

Try a fair version without the silly spin now.

you can calc the same way with 3onyx/4 area 51 rw 150/1 at 600, then you have your non-diy lights that still perform much better than your chinese light. you just earn less on the first run but you are still in the lead. or is this still an "unfair comparison"?

nomofatum · Dec 30, 2014

sethimus said:
you can calc the same way with 3onyx/4 area 51 rw 150/1 at 600, then you have your non-diy lights that still perform much better than your chinese light. you just earn less on the first run but you are still in the lead. or is this still an "unfair comparison"?

They are both chinese lights, lol. Even the HPS/MH would most likely be from china.

I don't think any non-DIY led options are worth a damn for the money except in the case of vertically short grow spaces. If you are stuck on non-DIY I recommend running from LED. So I don't really care what non-DIY panel performs best or best for the cost as they are all trounced by their competition HPS/MH when it come to most cost effective/money wise lighting available for purchase at a store.

IMHO it's a choice of DIY Cree vs DIY Epistar. The Cree is the better product, but it costs about 8x to 10x the cost of Epistar. Eventually that cost difference will pay off, but the question is will you still be using it at that point. In my case, it would take over 5 years for the Crees to pay off, and I most certainly will not be using the same system in 5 years, especially with how much better they are getting so quickly.

sethimus · Dec 30, 2014

nomofatum said:
You ignore one set of costs and only focus on the other. Try giving both the same weight. Inital and running, either way they are costs. Take 3 years, run two systems that will output the same levels of light. Compare the costs, it's that easy. Same output, what costs more, total. That is how you compare what the most money wise system is. You can't size the most efficient system to ideal and under-power the others in your comparison. You size them all to ideal then compare.

one has higher inital costs but lower running costs, the other cheap inital costs but higher running costs + risk of early failure. at some point your cheap chinese light will be more expensive to run, and you would be better off with the more expensive light that uses the power more efficiently.

lets calc (with easy numbers):

light 1 costs 1000eur, uses 600w to produce a pound
light 2 costs 200eur, uses 800w to produce a pound

power costs you 0.25eur per kwh (ur in germany baby, somebody needs to pay for the energiewende!)

light 1 costs you 0.15eur (0.6 x 0.25eur) per hour to run
light 2 costs you 0.2eur per hour to run

break even:

1000 + 0.15x = 200 + 0.2x l -200 +0.15x
800 = 0.05x
x = 16000

if you only flower with you light and run it 24/7 365days a year you would break even after 3,65 years in this model calculation.

i highly doubt you could run your typical chinese light that long without any failures.

what i left out: 200w more heat in your room that you need to deal with (more eur!), different quality due to different light spectrum.

you are free to calc again with real numbers (i'm too lazy right now)

sethimus · Dec 30, 2014

nomofatum said:
They are both chinese lights, lol. Even the HPS/MH would most likely be from china.

I don't think any non-DIY led options are worth a damn for the money except in the case of vertically short grow spaces. If you are stuck on non-DIY I recommend running from LED. So I don't really care what non-DIY panel performs best or best for the cost as they are all trounced by their competition HPS/MH when it come to most cost effective/money wise lighting available for purchase at a store.

IMHO it's a choice of DIY Cree vs DIY Epistar. The Cree is the better product, but it costs about 8x to 10x the cost of Epistar. Eventually that cost difference will pay off, but the question is will you still be using it at that point. In my case, it would take over 5 years for the Crees to pay off, and I most certainly will not be using the same system in 5 years, especially with how much better they are getting so quickly.

you seem to have a problem with the term "chinese light", call it cheap light then? or shit light? less efficient light?

nomofatum · Dec 30, 2014

sethimus said:
one has higher inital costs but lower running costs, the other cheap inital costs but higher running costs + risk of early failure. at some point your cheap chinese light will be more expensive to run, and you would be better off with the more expensive light that uses the power more efficiently.

lets calc (with easy numbers):

light 1 costs 1000eur, uses 600w to produce a pound
light 2 costs 200eur, uses 800w to produce a pound

power costs you 0.25eur per kwh (ur in germany baby, somebody needs to pay for the energiewende!)

light 1 costs you 0.15eur (0.6 x 0.25eur) per hour to run
light 2 costs you 0.2eur per hour to run

break even:

1000 + 0.15x = 200 + 0.2x l -200 +0.15x
800 = 0.05x
x = 16000

if you only flower with you light and run it 24/7 365days a year you would break even after 3,65 years in this model calculation.

i highly doubt you could run your typical chinese light that long without any failures.

what i left out: 200w more heat in your room that you need to deal with (more eur!), different quality due to different light spectrum.

you are free to calc again with real numbers (i'm too lazy right now)

That is some high electrical costs you have there. But even with your calcs I would pick the epistars, 3.65 years, I will be upgrading to better LEDs by then. And the heat isn't an issue if it's cold outside. If you are running in summer and high heat conditions the efficiency is a much bigger deal to you. If you get into having to spend money getting rid of the heat, you have your winner in the most efficient lighting available (assuming it's not astronomically priced.)

If that is your case, please look into CMH. It's again the 2nd best option (at less than half the price) with plasma being the highest efficiency for growing. (a very top of the line Cree system with very expensive cooling may be able to compete with these two options, but will be the most expensive option.)

Chinese -Leds

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member