SilverStone Nightjar NJ700 700W Fanless Power Supply Review

Paul_Johnson

Paul_Johnson

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 23, 2019
Messages
575
Points
93
SilverStone NJ700



SilverStone is a company best known for its high-quality cases but their product lines extend into other components such as cooling, power supplies (of various model lines that range from 300W to 1350W in DC output), fans, and storage solutions. Silverstone has built up this impressive product repertoire since its founding in 2003. For this review, we are looking at the SilverStone Nightjar NJ700 700W Fanless PSU model with product number SST-NJ700 in the Nightjar series, which is produced in conjunction with Seasonic.



Seasonic is one of the older companies producing consumer power supplies having been founded in 1975 and entering the PC power supply production market in 1980. During that more than 40 years as a company, Seasonic has cultivated lines of power supplies that are...
Click to expand...

Continue reading...
 
Good review. I think for me, once you mention Seasonic the rest is pretty well known. I hope they keep it up and other OEMs take note.
 
THUMPer said:
WHATS OPP ON THIS? :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Batman-Slapping-Robin-Meme-Explained.jpg


I don't want to have to get the load tester repaired any more than neccesary.
 
THUMPer said:
haha I'm just busting chops.
Click to expand...

I gotcha. But, destructive testing of a power supply results in unexpected events. Each time I have to get the load tester repaired and recalibrated and certified it starts a $2k. So, not something I like to do.
 
Paul_Johnson said:
I gotcha. But, destructive testing of a power supply results in unexpected events. Each time I have to get the load tester repaired and recalibrated and certified it starts a $2k. So, not something I like to do.
Click to expand...
Well, in my opinion, OPP testing should not be destructive. Unless the PSU is malfunctioning or you just really wanted it to be and juiced it hard (like 480V 3p).

Hitting a PSU with some overload, 125-150%, shouldn't cause it to explode and should gracefully trigger OPP. Most of our industrial tests are to 150% of rated.
 
Last edited:
Brian_B said:
Well, in my opinion, OPP testing should not be destructive. Unless the PSU is malfunctioning or you just really wanted it to be and juiced it hard (like 480V 3p).

Hitting a PSU with some overload, 125-150%, shouldn't cause it to explode and should gracefully trigger OPP. Most of our industrial tests are to 150% of rated.
Click to expand...

But, like I said before, there is not a spec. And without some sort of definition we have no idea where it is and where a catastrophic load will happen. So, until it is defined somewhere we can't do a legitimate test for it.
 
Paul_Johnson said:
But, like I said before, there is not a spec. And without some sort of definition we have no idea where it is and where a catastrophic load will happen. So, until it is defined somewhere we can't do a legitimate test for it.
Click to expand...
Ask the manufacturer, if they advertise the feature, it has a setpoint.

That, or treat it like overclocking and just step it up slowly.
 
Brian_B said:
Ask the manufacturer, if they advertise the feature, it has a setpoint.

That, or treat it like overclocking and just step it up slowly.
Click to expand...
This is on the list of expensive things I'd like to see.

Just note that they're expensive, and as @Paul_Johnson notes above, prohibitively so.

I'll also say for the sake of perspective - while you want to know how a PSU behaves close to its limit, that's your 'reserve'. You'd usually want to leave say a 20% or more bit of 'on paper' headroom. Base your estimates on how hard you want to push the system and what components you expect, and add up the power draw, then leave some headroom above that.

If you're pushing a PSU close to its limit, you've made a.. miscalculation somewhere along the line :).
 
Brian_B said:
Ask the manufacturer, if they advertise the feature, it has a setpoint.

That, or treat it like overclocking and just step it up slowly.
Click to expand...

Well see, that is the problem. Most of the "manufacturers" are not manufacturers and don't know (though SilverStone is not one of those that does not know). Also, I would have to have not just what they set it to but how they designed the protection. Then write a specific test for each and every unit that caters to their exact design. That means there would be no standardization to be able to compare units to. And without some sort of standardized definition we have no idea where a catastrophic load will happen. So, until it is defined somewhere we can't do a legitimate test for it.
 
Paul_Johnson said:
What? You don't like ground dwelling birds for your power supplies?
Click to expand...

Birds wouldn't have been my first choice, but knowing that it is a bird name makes a lot more sense than some sort of jar one uses at night.

My mind was drawn in the direction of chamber pots!
 
Zarathustra said:
My mind was drawn in the direction of chamber pots!
Click to expand...
Somehow - I blame Hunger Games - the name pattern sounded like a bird name. But like so many other names that are nominally English coming from countries where it isn't a first language, I pretty much just accept stuff as it comes. I read plenty a pre-2000 motherboard manual too.

So 'chamber pot' is fair game, IMO!


On the other hand, with Gigabyte's fiery ordeal still shaking out and questions on how such occurrences might be prevented, the 'fanless' nature of this Silverstone unit just now caught my eye.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Become a Patron!
Back
Top