Specifications
| Output | DC Voltage | 12.0 V |
| Rated Current (200 - 240 V input) | 150 A | |
| Rated Power (200 - 240 V input) | 1800 W | |
| Rated Current (100 - 140 V input) | 67 A | |
| Rated Power (100-140 V input) | 800 W | |
| Ripple & Noise | < 1% | |
| Voltage Regulation | < 2% | |
| Source Regulation | < 1% | |
| Load Regulation | < 1% | |
| Setup, Rise Time | < 2 S | |
| Power off Protection Trip Time | > 10 mS | |
| Input | Voltage Range | 100-140 V A/C200-240 V A/C |
| Frequency Range | 50 - 60 Hz | |
| Power Factor | > 0.99 (full load) | |
| Leakage Current | < 1.5 mA 220 V 50 Hz) | |
| Protection | Low-voltage Input | 80 - 89 V A/C |
| Output Short Circuit | Yes | |
| Output Overcurrent | 100 - 200 A | |
| Overheat Protection | Yes | |
| Environment | Operating Temperature | -20°C - 50°C |
| Operating Humidity | 20% - 90% relative humidity (non-condensing) | |
| Altitude | < 2000 m | |
| Structure | Dimensions | 220 x 108 x 62 mm |
| Weight | 2.0 KG | |
| Cooling | Fan | Forced-air cooling |
| Noise | 43 dB |
Compared to APW3++, the rated power of APW7 has increased by 200 W. And we can understand from the below APW7 Efficiency Curve diagram that its efficiency is 95% which increased 1.5%.
Evaluation
We are using APW7 to run the X3 Antminer (which its rated Power is 500 W). We see that the power consumption of 490.8 W (on the left picture), so the load percentage is 490.8/1800 = 27.27%
Whereas using APW3++ to run X3 miner has a power consumption of 498.2 W (on the right picture), so the load percentage 498.2/1600=31.14%
We can conclude that APW7 could save around 4% of power used. This would reduce the cost of mining.
Temperature
Temperature measured at the placement area
Temperature measured on its metal casing:
APW7 has a better heat dissipation, which means APW7 can work in higher temperature environment.
