Comparing 300w LED lights / Chilled vs Mars Hydro

EmeraldØsiris

EmeraldØsiris

Well-Known Member
I am trying to understand the mechanics behind these two designs:

Chilled Growcraft X1: 160w
Total diodes for 2 X1's: 590 total diodes @ 320w driver
Diodes: LM301H EVO and LM301B EVO

Mars hydro SP 3000: 300w
Total diodes: 960 total diodes @ 300w driver
Diodes: LM301B

There is a difference of a whopping 370 diodes between the two, and the lights with less diodes (X1's) is running roughly 20w extra from driver.

The X1's don't run any hotter than the Mars Hydro either.

Can someone please explain the logic behind this?
 
grotbags

grotbags

Well-Known Member
EmeraldØsiris said:
I am trying to understand the mechanics behind these two designs:

Chilled Growcraft X1: 160w
Total diodes for 2 X1's: 590 total diodes @ 320w driver
Diodes: LM301H EVO and LM301B EVO

Mars hydro SP 3000: 300w
Total diodes: 960 total diodes @ 300w driver
Diodes: LM301B

There is a difference of a whopping 370 diodes between the two, and the lights with less diodes (X1's) is running roughly 20w extra from driver.

The X1's don't run any hotter than the Mars Hydro either.

Can someone please explain the logic behind this?
Click to expand...
the chilled X1 uses two of the most efficient diodes you can buy today but at full power @160w in the X1 configuration it is running them pretty hard as you can see in the specification - Full System Efficacy: 3.06 μmole/J – 2.55 μmole/J.

compare that to the chilled X3 which uses the same diodes just three times as many but only has a max power of 330w (or 110w per bar compared to the 160w per bar of the X1) the efficiency rises to - Full System Efficacy: 3.1 μmole/J – 2.76 μmole/J.

mars is probably using the cheapest bin 301b they can source but because they are cheaper they can use more diodes per watt which along with all the other corners they cut allows them to make a cheap light with compareable efficiency to others on the market.

if you look at two of the most efficient white "full spectrum" lights that i can think of of the top of my head,

chilled ultra 600w. it uses approx 8000 diodes @ 600w to hit what they claim is 3.19 μmole/J. the ultra uses normal 301b in 5000k + 660nm.

hlg scorpion diablo x 700w. it uses approx 3200 diodes @ 700w to hit what they claim is 3.06 μmol/J. the diablo x uses i think b&h evo + 660nm.

two different approaches similar end results.

if a light manufacturer claims that their white "full spectrum" 600/700watt light is hitting 2.9-3.1μmol/J full system efficiency and isnt using 3000/4000+ of the very best diodes available today they are full of shit.
 
coreywebster

coreywebster

Well-Known Member
EmeraldØsiris said:
I am trying to understand the mechanics behind these two designs:

Chilled Growcraft X1: 160w
Total diodes for 2 X1's: 590 total diodes @ 320w driver
Diodes: LM301H EVO and LM301B EVO

Mars hydro SP 3000: 300w
Total diodes: 960 total diodes @ 300w driver
Diodes: LM301B

There is a difference of a whopping 370 diodes between the two, and the lights with less diodes (X1's) is running roughly 20w extra from driver.

The X1's don't run any hotter than the Mars Hydro either.

Can someone please explain the logic behind this?
Click to expand...
What do you mean by don't run any hotter?

You mean physically at the heatsink by reading the temp with flir or similar?
 
EmeraldØsiris

EmeraldØsiris

Well-Known Member
grotbags said:
the chilled X1 uses two of the most efficient diodes you can buy today but at full power @160w in the X1 configuration it is running them pretty hard as you can see in the specification - Full System Efficacy: 3.06 μmole/J – 2.55 μmole/J.

compare that to the chilled X3 which uses the same diodes just three times as many but only has a max power of 330w (or 110w per bar compared to the 160w per bar of the X1) the efficiency rises to - Full System Efficacy: 3.1 μmole/J – 2.76 μmole/J.

mars is probably using the cheapest bin 301b they can source but because they are cheaper they can use more diodes per watt which along with all the other corners they cut allows them to make a cheap light with compareable efficiency to others on the market.

if you look at two of the most efficient white "full spectrum" lights that i can think of of the top of my head,

chilled ultra 600w. it uses approx 8000 diodes @ 600w to hit what they claim is 3.19 μmole/J. the ultra uses normal 301b in 5000k + 660nm.

hlg scorpion diablo x 700w. it uses approx 3200 diodes @ 700w to hit what they claim is 3.06 μmol/J. the diablo x uses i think b&h evo + 660nm.

two different approaches similar end results.

if a light manufacturer claims that their white "full spectrum" 600/700watt light is hitting 2.9-3.1μmol/J full system efficiency and isnt using 3000/4000+ of the very best diodes available today they are full of shit.
Click to expand...
The SP 3000 runs on a ELGC-300-H-AB which is an output voltage of 58v, whereas the X3 runs on a 48v HLG320. How does this affect the output? The mars doesn't have that many more diodes compared to the X3. 960 mars and 885 chilled.

The chilled is pulling 330w from the wall while the mars is pulling 300.
 
grotbags

grotbags

Well-Known Member
EmeraldØsiris said:
The SP 3000 runs on a ELGC-300-H-AB which is an output voltage of 58v, whereas the X3 runs on a 48v HLG320. How does this affect the output?
Click to expand...
for making comparisons between lights you can forget about voltage of the strips/pcb's, the voltage figure depends on how the manufacturer wants to lay out the diodes on pcb's.

EmeraldØsiris said:
The mars doesn't have that many more diodes compared to the X3. 960 mars and 885 chilled.
Click to expand...
all that means is if mars and chilled are being honest about thier lights efficiency and they are using a similar amount of diodes ran at a similar power then the diodes used in each light must be of a similar efficiency.

if make a light that hits 3 umol/j using 4000 301b's @ 600w, we test it ourselves in a sphere so we know the figure 3umol/j is 100% correct.
if another company makes a light that they claim hits 3umol/j @600w but is only using 2000 diodes, we know that either the diodes they are using are twice as efficient as ours or they are full of shit and just making the figures up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top