Buyer Beware: Misleading LED Fixture Output

[TheHarold]

I have purchased several LED fixtures across the years, including buying fixtures in bulk, and this has come up repeatedly. It is clearly an attempt by mainly foreign manufacturers to mislead reefing consumers, so thought I would make a small public announcement.

You need to check the actual power usage of a LED fixture you are interested in. Manufacturers are decreasing heatsink size for aesthetics & cost, and to compensate for the lack of heat dissipation decrease the output of their fixtures. They also tend to remove fans to be "silent", at the expense of output once again.

For example, many ebay "black box" LEDs that advertise to be 165 watts are using the 3w LED x 55 calculation. However, their actual power used is 60-70W, as they are only drive each LED at 1.1W.

Earlier this week, I was in the market for a LED bar to add to my T5 fixture, and almost bought a pair of fixtures from a certain company based on the "108 watts, as powerful as 2 bulb" advertising. However, after 16 emails, the wattage output kept dropping. First "just about 108", then "within a few percent", then within 25%, etc. And still, after all that time, I was unable to ever get a definitive answer; they were unable/unwilling to provide a wattage @120v (or any voltage, for that matter) to answer to my question. (In the end I said that unless they could provide a real number of power drawn from the wall, I was not interested). A member here reported 70 watts- meaning the output is only 65% of what is advertised. Clearly a third of your LEDs did not just go out, nor did the fixture shrink from 48 to 32 inches. Misleading advertising. A 8 bulb 48" t5 fixture is not 4 of their fixtures, it is 6.

By comparison, a Radion xr30W Pro Gen 4, which has 46 LEDs, pulls an actual 190 watts from the wall at 120v, using a 219w power supply. The LEDs are being driven at 4 watts each, because POWER. So to have the equivalent output of one Radion, you would need 3+"165w" fixtures.

A hydra HD pulls 55 watts from the wall, with only 13 LEDs. So also 4+ watts per LED. These are quality units, that have been engineered for maximum output rather than to cut costs and please consumers with slim heatsink and being fanless. Good brands give you the actual power drawn from the wall, because they aren't hiding anything or covering up shoddy engineering.



TL;DR: Low quality/deceptive fixtures advertise wattage based on total number of 3w LEDs, not on what the fixture will actually output. Junk is junk, quality is quality. You get what you pay for.

 

[chipmunkofdoom2]

Raw wattage is a terrible way to measure the actual light output of LED fixtures. Optics, LEDs, and many other factors affect how much light an LED fixture puts out.

 

[TheHarold]

Raw wattage is a terrible way to measure the actual light output of LED fixtures. Optics, LEDs, and many other factors affect how much light an LED fixture puts out.

Thats not how I learned about power and led output: ignoring optics (given those can be changed or different based on fixtures) , the power used by LEDs are directly related to its output- no? Running 3w LEDs at 1w is different from running them at 2.5-3w. Yes, different spectrums may appear brighter or dimmer to the eye, but output is output.

 

[fredk]

Buyer beware. I'm just trying to sort through who uses what LEDs and what that means before buying lights for my tank. When things are cheaper, there is always a reason.

 

[fredk]

Thats not how I learned about power and led output: ignoring optics (given those can be changed or different based on fixtures) , the power used by LEDs are directly related to its output- no? Running 3w LEDs at 1w is different from running them at 2.5-3w. Yes, different spectrums may appear brighter or dimmer to the eye, but output is output.

What if led A is 1/3 the efficiency of LED B? Output can be light or heat.

 

[chipmunkofdoom2]

Thats not how I learned about power and output: ignoring optics (given those can be changed or difference based on fixtures) , the power used by LEDs are directly related to its output- no?

In a brushless DC motor? Sure, increase the power in, you get more output (until you burn up the motor). With LED lights? No, this is not the case. In theory, the more power a diode uses, the more light should come out, but the real-world application is much more complicated than power in = light out. Especially when you consider that not all LED lights use the same diodes, not all light spectra are that important to corals, or that not all diodes output the same amount of light. Even the light output of a given diode will shift over its lifetime.

Also, if you want to do an honest comparison between LED lights, you absolutely can't ignore the optics. In many LED fixtures, the optics can't be changed without opening up or modifying the light, which will void your warranty. If you want to do a fair comparison of which LED light puts out more light, PAR is the only way.

 

[gcarroll]

@TheHarold stop being a dream crusher. Posts like yours robs a reefer from having a garage full of old worthless aquarium @#$% in their garage! It's kind of like a right of passage that anyone reading this post may miss out on.

 

[gcarroll]

In a brushless DC motor? Sure, increase the power in, you get more output (until you burn up the motor). With LED lights? No, this is not the case. In theory, the more power a diode uses, the more light should come out, but the real-world application is much more complicated than power in = light out. Especially when you consider that not all LED lights use the same diodes, not all light spectra are that important to corals, or that not all diodes output the same amount of light. Even the light output of a given diode will shift over its lifetime.

Also, if you want to do an honest comparison between LED lights, you absolutely can't ignore the optics. In many LED fixtures, the optics can't be changed without opening up or modifying the light, which will void your warranty. If you want to do a fair comparison of which LED light puts out more light, PAR is the only way.

Have to disagree with you there. Light output is light output. Optics only dictate how that lights is focused. So yes you can focus less light output to excel on the par meter test but those lights are giving up spread to get those par numbers. No different then your flashlight when focusing the beam. The light output remains the same, just focused in a smaller area.

 

[chipmunkofdoom2]

Have to disagree with you there. Light output is light output. Optics only dictate how that lights is focused. So yes you can focus less light output to excel on the par meter test but those lights are giving up spread to get those par numbers. No different then your flashlight when focusing the beam. The light output remains the same, just focused in a smaller area.

This is true if every fixture used the same type and number of diodes and different manufacturers just used higher or lower current. If fixture A uses 100 diodes from XYZ LEDs and consumes 100W, while fixture B uses 100 of the same diodes and consumes 200W, then it's easy to figure out which will produce more light. This is not the case though. There are at least 4 different popular types of diodes or diode arrays used in LED aquarium fixtures today. Different lights may use different generations of these diodes. The list of things that can affect a fixtures output is pretty long.

You might have missed it, but I said this in my previous post and will say it again: the more power a diode uses, the more light should come out. But this is almost worthless when trying to compare the output of LED fixtures. Almost none of them use the same diodes, optics, layout, driving currents, software, or cooling solutions. Now, if you want to discuss efficiency, that's a different story. But so far, this thread has been focused only on comparing LEDs based on the power consumed. There's no way you can make an accurate apples-to-apples comparison of the output of a fixture by only its power draw.

 

[AlexStinson]

This is true if every fixture used the same type and number of diodes and different manufacturers just used higher or lower current. If fixture A uses 100 diodes from XYZ LEDs and consumes 100W, while fixture B uses 100 of the same diodes and consumes 200W, then it's easy to figure out which will produce more light. This is not the case though. There are at least 4 different popular types of diodes or diode arrays used in LED aquarium fixtures today. Different lights may use different generations of these diodes. The list of things that can affect a fixtures output is pretty long.

You might have missed it, but I said this in my previous post and will say it again: the more power a diode uses, the more light should come out. But this is almost worthless when trying to compare the output of LED fixtures. Almost none of them use the same diodes, optics, layout, driving currents, software, or cooling solutions. Now, if you want to discuss efficiency, that's a different story. But so far, this thread has been focused only on comparing LEDs based on the power consumed. There's no way you can make an accurate apples-to-apples comparison of the output of a fixture by only its power draw.

I think the point of the original post was less of an apple/apple comparison and more of a false advertising claim. I would think if something claims having 165 watts of LED it better be pushing 165 watts. Just like if I bought a 60 watt light bulb and it only pulled 30 watts, something fishy would be up.

 

[TheHarold]

I think the point of the original post was less of an apple/apple comparison and more of a false advertising claim. I would think if something claims having 165 watts of LED it better be pushing 165 watts. Just like if I bought a 60 watt light bulb and it only pulled 30 watts, something fishy would be up.

Exactly. The inferior optics and LED efficiency just furthers the divide between quality and cheap fixtures. False wattage claims are something I see everywhere, including on sponsors of this forum.

 

[chipmunkofdoom2]

I think the point of the original post was less of an apple/apple comparison and more of a false advertising claim. I would think if something claims having 165 watts of LED it better be pushing 165 watts. Just like if I bought a 60 watt light bulb and it only pulled 30 watts, something fishy would be up.

I would agree, except the OP said this:

By comparison, a Radion xr30W Pro Gen 4, which has 46 LEDs, pulls an actual 190 watts from the wall at 120v, using a 219w power supply. The LEDs are being driven at 4 watts each, because POWER. So to have the equivalent output of one Radion, you would need 3+"165w" fixtures.

This is attempting to do a direct apples-to-apples comparison, based on power consumed, of two very different lights, with different diodes, optics, drivers and form factors.

 

[TheHarold]

I would agree, except the OP said this:


This is attempting to do a direct apples-to-apples comparison of two very different lights, with different diodes, optics, drivers and form factors.

Not really, or at least not my attempt. It was just comparing the ratio of "advertised vs actual" wattage. Radion advertises 190 watts and uses 190 watts. The cheap fixtures advertise their 3w LEDs x quantity totaling 165 watts of power, when it is really a third of that given they are run at 1 watt.

More of a comment on false advertising of the cheap units.

 

[chipmunkofdoom2]

Not really, or at least not my attempt. It was just comparing the ratio of "advertised vs actual" wattage. Radion advertises 190 watts from the wall and pulls 190 watts. The cheap fixtures advertise their 3w LEDs x quantity totaling 165 watts of power, when it is really a third of that given they are run at 1 watt.

But why does that matter? Our corals don't care how much wattage the light uses or if you under-drive the diodes, they care about the actual light output. Do you have PAR maps for these lights? Have you compared the actual area covered? Have you compared how the PAR varies at different depths? What about a 6' long tank? Are you honestly saying that one Radeon smack dab in the middle will light the tank just the same as 3 black boxes spaced evenly over the tank?

If your point was that black boxes don't use the full 165W, that's a valid point. It's not valid to attempt to equate LED lights based on their power draw alone.

 

[Pmj]

The black boxes put out a ton of light, more than enough to fry things. They are not as good as Radions but they also are dirt cheap and work well, and actually have some benefits over a puck style fixture.

Agreed wattage alone doesn't mean much, otherwise why would Cree have many generations of LEDs, each putting out more light for the same or less power than the last. Black boxes exist b/c LED technology got good enough that cheap "3w" diodes ran at 2.2w are good enough for lots of things and you can buy new diodes for pennies if they go bad.

 

[Reef Bazaar]

I know which thread @TheHarold is talking about -- while I agree the light should never have been advertised as 108w if it draws less (I never saw that it was, but I'll take your word for it), the fact remains that 54w of T5's is not equivalent to 54w of Leds. I have no way to take the actual output in terms of PAR, because most meters do not measure PAR properly from blue/violet leds, so there "might" be a possibility that the company might have done their testing before saying 1 bar = 2 T5s (again, I haven't read that part, but it might be there somewhere .. I'm more of a cliffnotes kind of person so usually skip all that jargon).

Having said all that, having used LED's over tanks since 2010, I can tell you proper spread is far more important than putting 1000w in a tight cluster. Regardless of what sort of optics you use, you'll get hot spots. I have used them all -- light bars, radions, hydras, chinese black boxes, and now, this company you are mentioning about. I have their flagship fixture over one of my tanks, and I'm using their light bars as the primary light source for my frag tanks. I can not tell you how well stuff grows under these light bars in-case these are going to be your only source of light, as I have just started using them; however I can tell you that they are VERY bright to be used as supplemental lighting if that is your intention.

I really do not think you need to drive these LEDs at any higher power than they are set at based on what I see in my tanks -- I understand you're upset about the "less than advertised" power draw, but I'm under the impression that they took it down once they realized their mistake; so maybe give them the benefit of doubt considering the success everyone is having with their fixtures ..

 

[savoyard]

I bought one of those 108 watt Blue LED fixtures and it's very bright. They might not be far off on their claim that it's as bright as 2 t5s. I have a kilowatt meter at home, but haven't tested it.

 

[TheHarold]

But why does that matter? Our corals don't care how much wattage the light uses or if you under-drive the diodes, they care about the actual light output. Do you have PAR maps for these lights? Have you compared the actual area covered? Have you compared how the PAR varies at different depths? What about a 6' long tank? Are you honestly saying that one Radeon smack dab in the middle will light the tank just the same as 3 black boxes spaced evenly over the tank?

If your point was that black boxes don't use the full 165W, that's a valid point. It's not valid to attempt to equate LED lights based on their power draw alone.

Clearly it is not as simple as comparing wattage to wattage between units. I am not doing that. If you would like to make an excel spreadsheet of the LED layout of several fixtures, find out the forward voltage and total wattage and compare that to the actual par or PPF at a specific distance, go for it.

What my point may be more similar to yours than you might think- manufacturers are using the rating of the LED fixtures to falsely equate themselves with more light output than they actually put out.

Here, random post of a 165w black box vs 170w XR30w G3. About 2-3x the par. Hmm. Same advertised wattage, but the black box uses significantly less power and has significantly less par : http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2650167

@Pmj

I am not trying to compare a $80 fixture to a $700 fixture, "apples to apples". I am saying that they are very different, and that a good way of comparing the output of LED fixtures is comparing their actual power consumption. Sure, the LEDs have different efficiencies- but lets be honest, improvements of efficiency are by a few percentage points a year.

 

[oreo54]

Not really, or at least not my attempt. It was just comparing the ratio of "advertised vs actual" wattage. Radion advertises 190 watts and uses 190 watts. The cheap fixtures advertise their 3w LEDs x quantity totaling 165 watts of power, when it is really a third of that given they are run at 1 watt.

More of a comment on false advertising of the cheap units.

Why do you think 1W? Most constant current drivers in black boxes are 500mA-ish. Now since most of the diodes run that current at about 3.2V =1.75W..
1 is too low 2 is prob too high.

Now that is 1/2 of the story.. Next is watt efficiency..
Again goes against the black boxes since most probably run @ 70-ish Lumens/watt..
Best diodes exceed 100L/w and please I know "PAR matters" but just for comparison w/ a very common metric.

That said, technically lower actual wattage fixtures could be better than higher actual wattage fixture.. but not in this case obviously..

Good to remind people though..

 

[TheHarold]

Why do you think 1W? Most constant current drivers in black boxes are 500mA-ish. Now since most of the diodes run that current at about 3.2V =1.75W..
1 is too low 2 is prob too high.

Now that is 1/2 of the story.. Next is watt efficiency..
Again goes against the black boxes since most probably run @ 70-ish Lumens/watt..
Best diodes exceed 100L/w and please I know "PAR matters" but just for comparison w/ a very common metric.

That said, technically lower actual wattage fixtures could be better than higher actual wattage fixture.. but not in this case obviously..

Good to remind people though..

Right- potentially, if these cheap fixtures were using the newest and greatest of LED technology, their wattage could be less and yet they output equivalent par. But we are talking about the cheap fixtures that even use that meager 60w at an even worse par/watt efficiency.

People are picking at tiny details, when in the end, my point still stands and manufacturers are trying to fool people into thinking that their fixtures are as powerful as others using “theoretical l wattage” or whatever else you want to call it.

[edited, spelling+ clarity]