Unfortunately I don’t have that many flashlights especially from majors brands like Acebeam, Olight, Fenix, Thrunite… etc to compare them.
Zebralight gets often parroted as ”very efficient” but that depends on the model, the SC64 (XHP35) is not that good, and the H/SC53 is very bad (it’s an AA light though, it’s bound to be less efficient), the SC700 is excellent.
I have a H600II and a H600 IV opened so I’ll try to measure those too.
The Skilhunt H04/H03 is often recommended as a higher value headlamp compared to stuff from Sofirn for example, thanks to it’s buck driver, but while it’s better than FET direct drive and to a lesser extent linear driver, its efficiency is not good for a buck driver.
The Convoy XHP35 driver has been measured here : Convoy XHP35 Driver Analysis / Testing / Schematic
(Modified to 6V and RPP FET bypassed so slightly better numbers than stock). And it’s very good, most of their switching driver looks to be using good synchronous converters and good components (low RDson RPP FET, decently sized inductor) so it looks to me that their offering are pretty good.
Only synchronous buck or boost drivers have highest efficiency. But its technical data and ordinary potato user dont care about it, so manufacturers advertising lumens only.
EK4 uses a buck driver (edit : or boost maybe if the LEDs are wired in 4S), given the high power I think we would expect good efficiency at sustained output level, but ultimately we can’t really know without measuring or at least seeing what the driver looks like.
D4V2 uses a linear driver (not sure if they still use the older FET+7135 at all), sustained output driver efficiency is going to be around 75% in average.
It’s hard to measure efficiency with a single metric, but from a driver standpoint, boost/buck are most efficient with everything else (FET, 7135, or equivalent) less so. It also depends on the emitter. High CRI low CCT are less efficient, and also depends on how it’s driven (direct vs. refulated). So far, lights with xhp70.2 behind boost or buck drivers have been most efficient in my experience. I’ve had good results with XPG3, and XP-L2 as well. Cyansky, Skilhunt, Thrunite, Acebeam, and Convoys newer ully regulated boost/buck drivers are all very very good. I haven’t tested it personally but the Lume1 driver in the fireflies E07x is superb (but spendy)
You can have a 6000lb SUV with a V8 thats efficient.
Most high MPG cars are small. If I have to give up size to gain in MPG , that does not make it efficient. I paid for greater mpg by giving up size.
With electronics, efficency has to do with how much energy is lost to heat. So if you have a 1000lm light that gives 1hr run time compared to a 1000lm light that gives 45 min runtime but runs much hotter, that light would be less efficient.
If you compare a 1000lm light that runs for an hour vs a 2000lm light that runs for 2 hrs, you really dont kbow which one if more or less efficient.
I like topics threads that have high knowledge shared efficiency. Like this one. This is a very high knowledge sharing efficiency thread. But there is room for other types of topic threads, for example, the recurrent topic that reminds me to wash my dirty laundry.
Well, anyway, I have seen the names of many various manufacturers mentioned for good, efficient drivers. I certainly don't know of any makers that are known for horrible drivers.
Efficiency has a ton of variables. A driver might be efficient at high outputs but not low - or vice versa. Also, you can have efficient drivers with inefficient LEDs, or the other way around, etc…
A FET driver at full blast is the most efficient driver there is! Too bad the led is far from its efficient operating zone, though.
A post was listed recently asking why Candlepowerforums is not as active as it used to be. I have to say it’s because of rude responses like the last three on this post.
Technology like any electronics is changing and sometimes improving year to year. For example the driver from the Emisar DT8 is just now starting to be used in Emisar D4V2 and Noctigon models. There are tons of variables yes, but that’s a more efficient driver than what was previously used on both D4V2 and KR4 models from any previous year.
Not only will new folks always be moving into a hobby, but technology advances , so “use the search” or “this always gets brought up” is not very welcoming. List some personal advantages you’ve experienced or just save your energy for something positive. If you think you’re done learning, you might just be the fool yourself.
It’s the same driver (the one that was introduced with the KR4), just with different current settings (5 7.5 and 9A), this has a negligible inpact on efficiency and in the end it’s still a linear driver with subpar efficiency.
im weird im not a lumen lover i mean max lumens is not what i look for. my fav feature are small size compared to the battery it uses and lot of runtime for the cell comapred. i guess you call it lumens per watt
The SBT90.2 seems to have relatively low efficiency at high outputs but at 1000lm efficiency appears to be 164lm/W for the emitter itself according to djozz’s thread . If the Fireflies T9R driver is >90% efficient as claimed, then at 1000lm output it should be capable of at least 148lm/W with this emitter. That is of course not considering losses in springs, battery resistance, etc. which may be significant. Using 1lumen’s measurements , it looks like it manages 137lm/W @ 1012lm assuming this was tested with battery at 4.1V.
The combination of throw, large hotspot, decent spill, moderate sustained output, FET turbo capability, high efficiency, balance in the hand, and Anduril 2 means this checks off a lot of boxes both as a practical and enthusiast light. Makes me excited for the T1R if they can deliver something like this in a pocketable form factor.