"Asus anti-surge was triggered to protect system from unstable power supply" - Hardware & Software

So last week just after a run through Project Reality, I was actually about to turn my system off when the power cut out, then a few seconds later it came back on with the standard "Asus anti-surge was triggered to protect system from unstable power supply" message. I was a little concerned so I checked my cables in the back of my case, made everything was plugged in properly, everything seemed fine so I thought I'd check later on. Went away for the weekend and came back to find it running fine with no issues all week. However, a week later it happened to me again - twice, actually - first after being left to idle whilst I handled some cooking and later whilst web browsing. I've got no clue what's causing it and I'm not subjecting any of my components to strain via overclock or anything of the sort, so I'm a little stumped. Ideas? I checked the plug at the wall socket end this time (it's on an extension brick so I can run my monitor off the same socket) and noticed there was a slight gap between it and the socket so I've pushed it in further, but otherwise that's all I can think. Mobo: ASUS P8Z77-V LX CPU: i5 3570k currently at stock speed GPU: ASUS GTX 770 RAM: 8GB 2x4 Corsair 1600Mhz PSU: Corsair RM750

Your PSU may actually be going bad. Its age is no object here. Do you have another compatible one you can try for a bit? It would confirm that it's the PSU. Even if you just buy one and return it if it turns out that the Mobo is overreacting.

Asus anti-surge is also finicky as fuck. I went through this with Rusty last year and we ended up just turning the feature off and everything was fine.

[QUOTE=Adelle Zhu;51965103]Your PSU may actually be going bad. Its age is no object here. Do you have another compatible one you can try for a bit? It would confirm that it's the PSU. Even if you just buy one and return it if it turns out that the Mobo is overreacting.[/QUOTE] Unfortunately I don't have a spare, it's still under warranty for another year though so yeah.

might also be worth to get a surge protector in case it's your power connection (though shouldn't a good psu handle this?)

[QUOTE=Levelog;51965115]Asus anti-surge is also finicky as fuck. I went through this with Rusty last year and we ended up just turning the feature off and everything was fine.[/QUOTE] Same here, it kept on turning off my computer when I was playing battlefield 4. You're better off disabling the feature in BIOS

I've been tempted to turn off the feature if it occurs a fourth time but I find it strange that it's only the last couple weeks that it's cropped up.

[QUOTE=GordonZombie;51965447]I've been tempted to turn off the feature if it occurs a fourth time but I find it strange that it's only the last couple weeks that it's cropped up.[/QUOTE] Symptoms are classic of hardware that was always defective. Word 'surge' has no relationship to what exists on AC mains. One component of a computer's power system is apparently defective. PSU is only one of those components. Identify a defective part using minutes of labor, a digital meter, and requested instructions. Or just spend many times more than the cost of a meter hoping to cure it with a new PSU. Second option is called shotgunning. Keep replacing good parts until a symptom is cured. Former teaches how a computer works, costs less money, and often says why that defect existed or was created. Nothing is learned using shotgunning. Or kill the messenger. Turn off Asus messages and pretend no defect every existed.

I would be wary of disabling it. It may be finicky but disabling it makes it harder to rule out a dying power supply.

Eh I wouldn't worry. It's happened to me a couple times and my computer is just fine.

[QUOTE=mark6789;51972920]Eh I wouldn't worry. It's happened to me a couple times and my computer is just fine.[/QUOTE] I mean it's definitely worth investigating just it's a known issue with ASUS anti-surge

I would not trust it, there is very little information of how it's implemented, most likely just checking to see if the voltage on the motherboard goes outside a set range then instantly shutting it down, which doesn't necessarily mean your PSU is dying, the voltage normally fluctuates a fair amount and can go outside the normal range, the only way to check for sure if your PSU is dying is using a multimeter while it's running, grab a cheap one off ebay.

[QUOTE=Levelog;51973901]I mean it's definitely worth investigating just it's a known issue with ASUS anti-surge[/QUOTE] Asus message is correct. Unfortunately too many assume defects always create failures. And no failures means no defects. Both are false. Normal is for a defective component in a power system (PSU is only one of many components) to still boot and run a computer. Many (using observation) did not observe that defect causing a failure. So they blame the messenger - proclaim Asus message erroneous. Defined clearly is what must be done long before any such conclusion is justified. Minutes of labor, a digital meter, and requested instructions. Otherwise no hard fact exists to justify a conclusion. Ignore any post that is subjective. DC voltages must not vary by more than 0.1 volts. Voltage never goes outside normal range when hardware is not defective. Digital meters are so ubiquitous and inexpensive as to even be sold in stores that also sell hammers and even in Walmart. Even for less than something that is ineffective - a PSU tester.

[QUOTE=Levelog;51965115]Asus anti-surge is also finicky as fuck. I went through this with Rusty last year and we ended up just turning the feature off and everything was fine.[/QUOTE] here to report that my psu still hasn't exploded

[QUOTE=westom;51985454]Ignore any post that is subjective. DC voltages must not vary by more than 0.1 volts.[/QUOTE] That's one expensive power supply if it can regulate to within 0.1v at all times. The ATX power spec is 5% tolerance on all positive rails and 10% tolerance on all negative rails. +/- 0.165v (3.3), +/- 0.25v (5), +/- 0.6v (12), +/- 1.20v (-12v). [QUOTE=westom;51985454]Digital meters are so ubiquitous and inexpensive as to even be sold in stores that also sell hammers and even in Walmart. Even for less than something that is ineffective - a PSU tester.[/QUOTE] I'd trust a Walmart multimeter over ASUS "anti-surge" in all cases. The ASUS forum is rife with people with anti-surge issues, and almost all of them are erroneous. The anti-surge functionality is no more accurate than reading out the voltages from motherboard sensors, which are known to be wildly inaccurate.

[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;51985902] I'd trust a Walmart multimeter over ASUS "anti-surge" in all cases. The ASUS forum is rife with people with anti-surge issues, and almost all of them are erroneous. [/QUOTE] Just because a problem is reported and others (using junk science) make subjective recommendations does not mean your conclusion has merit. Even your ATX spec numbers are insufficient information. First, a power supply voltage must lie in that 5% range. Where voltage lies must not vary by more than 0.1 volts. (Actually 0.2 volts for a lesser designed but still sufficient supply). Many see an error message reported by Asus, then make conclusions to justify that conclusion. The error message remains completely unknown until numbers are provided. Defined was how that is done - in minutes. Do not do as you have done. Instead, first learn why that error message exists. Power 'system' is not just the PSU - as so many also assume. 'System' has many parts. Another part is a meter that Asus reads. Another are filter components (even on a motherboard) that are also part of that power 'system'. If an Asus surge message occurs, an informed person does not automatically blame a PSU or assume a "don't worry, be happy" attitude. One who remembers what was taught in school science would then get a digital meter, do minutes of labor, a digital meter, and requested instructions. To discover what that Asus message is reporting - and why. It is reporting a defect. One cannot say (conclude) anything more with getting numbers. A defective computer can work fine for months or even a year. Then get unstable. Until one has numbers, then one cannot possibly know what causes that reported defect. Do you measure a voltage, compare that number to one provided in ATX specs, then assume it is OK because a measured number lies within 5%? Then you did not learn how power systems work. A volt number can lie in that 5% and still be reporting defective hardware. A useful reply from the fewer who really know this stuff is impossible without providing numbers (ie from a digital meter). Without numbers (so many recommendations are only subjective), then useful reply is impossible. We know an Asus surge message is reporting a defect. Nobody can say what that defect is (anything useful) until a meter, minutes of labor, and requested instructions are done. Nobody.

[QUOTE=westom;51986893]Just because a problem is reported and others (using junk science) make subjective recommendations does not mean your conclusion has merit.[/QUOTE] When the manufacturer (ASUS) has verified the user claims that anti-surge is buggy, and has reaffirmed the user fix of disabling anti-surge, it cannot be called "subjective" and "junk science". [QUOTE=westom;51986893]Even your ATX spec numbers are insufficient information. First, a power supply voltage must lie in that 5% range. Where voltage lies must not vary by more than 0.1 volts. (Actually 0.2 volts for a lesser designed but still sufficient supply).[/QUOTE] Those numbers come straight from section 3.2.1 of the ATX12V specification version 2.01. There is no additional specification for allowed variance within the specified margins, as long as the voltages are within those margins in the specified operating environment of the supply. [QUOTE=westom;51986893]Do not do as you have done. Instead, first learn why that error message exists. Power 'system' is not just the PSU - as so many also assume. 'System' has many parts. Another part is a meter that Asus reads. Another are filter components (even on a motherboard) that are also part of that power 'system'.[/QUOTE] More like don't listen to westom, because you don't have a clue what you're talking about. ASUS' anti-surge is flawed from a design perspective because it's expecting precision results from a source that is not precise nor calibrated. Voltage sensing data historically has come from the Super I/O chip, which relies on tiny traces run clear across the motherboard to get power. So not only is the voltage subject to large losses, it's also subject to EMI from other bus lines. Some Super I/O chips can't even natively read raw voltages and must rely on resistor networks to reduce the voltage to an acceptable level before reading them, which results in yet another layer of error if 0.1% resistors are not used (and rarely are they.) Voltage sensing by the motherboard is meant to be a convenience feature to give you a ballpark estimate of what the rails are, it's not meant to be taken as a precise or accurate measurement. [URL]http://www.nuvoton.com/resource-files/DA00-WW83627DHG-P.pdf[/URL] (figure 8.3.1) Sources of review and users complaining voltage sensing is off by up to 10%: [URL]http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php/670130-Voltage-readings-way-off-in-bios-compared-to-volt-meter[/URL] [URL]http://www.neoseeker.com/Articles/Hardware/Reports/motherboardvoltages/3.html[/URL] [QUOTE=westom;51986893]Do you measure a voltage, compare that number to one provided in ATX specs, then assume it is OK because a measured number lies within 5%? Then you did not learn how power systems work. A volt number can lie in that 5% and still be reporting defective hardware. A useful reply from the fewer who really know this stuff is impossible without providing numbers (ie from a digital meter).[/QUOTE] I've trusted DMMs to give me accurate readings coupled with visual inspections for nearly 25 years, and have yet to have an electronics device verified in this way explode into flames or die because incorrect voltage, and I'm pretty sure every other person with a knowledge of electronics would agree. In the end, you're just trying to perpetuate FUD and argue with the manufacturer themselves against their provided fix which has been verified by the community.

[QUOTE=westom;51986893]Just because a problem is reported and others (using junk science) make subjective recommendations does not mean your conclusion has merit. Even your ATX spec numbers are insufficient information. First, a power supply voltage must lie in that 5% range. Where voltage lies must not vary by more than 0.1 volts. (Actually 0.2 volts for a lesser designed but still sufficient supply). Many see an error message reported by Asus, then make conclusions to justify that conclusion. The error message remains completely unknown until numbers are provided. Defined was how that is done - in minutes. Do not do as you have done. Instead, first learn why that error message exists. Power 'system' is not just the PSU - as so many also assume. 'System' has many parts. Another part is a meter that Asus reads. Another are filter components (even on a motherboard) that are also part of that power 'system'. If an Asus surge message occurs, an informed person does not automatically blame a PSU or assume a "don't worry, be happy" attitude. One who remembers what was taught in school science would then get a digital meter, do minutes of labor, a digital meter, and requested instructions. To discover what that Asus message is reporting - and why. It is reporting a defect. One cannot say (conclude) anything more with getting numbers. A defective computer can work fine for months or even a year. Then get unstable. Until one has numbers, then one cannot possibly know what causes that reported defect. Do you measure a voltage, compare that number to one provided in ATX specs, then assume it is OK because a measured number lies within 5%? Then you did not learn how power systems work. A volt number can lie in that 5% and still be reporting defective hardware. A useful reply from the fewer who really know this stuff is impossible without providing numbers (ie from a digital meter). Without numbers (so many recommendations are only subjective), then useful reply is impossible. We know an Asus surge message is reporting a defect. Nobody can say what that defect is (anything useful) until a meter, minutes of labor, and requested instructions are done. Nobody.[/QUOTE] You're talking absolute nonsense. The spec is the spec. If you're within 5% of the nominal voltage, you're within spec -- not defective in any way. The downstream power supplies are designed around the same spec, so [b]must[/b] work for +-5% input voltage. This 0.1V figure you keep mentioning is meaningless. In reality the system would probably be able to run fine with the 12V bus at 10V or so. Nothing on the machine actually runs at 12V, it's just a convenient intermediate voltage before the next step down converters in the chain. You're absolutely right about using a voltmeter, it's always better to know than to guess. You seem to have quite a liberal interpretation of "spec" though.

[QUOTE=r0b0tsquid;51990617]You're talking absolute nonsense. The spec is the spec. If you're within 5% of the nominal voltage, you're within spec -- not defective in any way. The downstream power supplies are designed around the same spec, so [b]must[/b] work for +-5% input voltage. [/QUOTE] Most assemblers do not understand what those numbers report. Please learn about other factors (ie ripple voltage) before assuming ATX spec numbers say everything. I said 0.2 volts. Basic power system experience would know why that number is relevant. Knowledge that is beyond the expertise level being discussed. Voltmeter provides numbers. But those numbers cannot be compared (one to one) with ATX spec numbers. Volt meter numbers are combined with other knowledge to say whether a power system defective exists or not. Volt meter can report a number within that 5% ATX spec numbers - and still be reporting a defect. That would be a defect that an Asus error message is also reporting. But without numbers, then nobody can really define that Asus error message. I was probably designing power supplies before most here were born - long before PCs existed. More numbers apply besides 5% numbers. Those other numbers also say why 12 volt bus at 10 volts causes problems.

[QUOTE=westom;51996155]Most assemblers do not understand what those numbers report. Please learn about other factors (ie ripple voltage) before assuming ATX spec numbers say everything. I said 0.2 volts. Basic power system experience would know why that number is relevant. Knowledge that is beyond the expertise level being discussed.[/QUOTE] Stop moving the goalpost, it makes you look arrogant. You've been corrected and dis-proven multiple times, yet you ignore facts and pretend like it was you who stated the facts in the first place. [QUOTE=westom;51996155]I was probably designing power supplies before most here were born - long before PCs existed. More numbers apply besides 5% numbers.[/QUOTE] Being an 80 year old man that hates the world is not a required qualification for building a properly working power supply. People with similar stances to yours are usually afraid of being made redundant/obsolete in the economy, so they try and shroud their work in secrecy even though its not secret at all. Your entire argument falls flat due to the points I posted above.

[QUOTE=GiGaBiTe;51997529]Your entire argument falls flat due to the points I posted above.[/QUOTE] Personal attacks because basic (simplest) electrical knowledge was never learned. The naive cannot answer hoestly. So personal attack somehow prove Asus must be wrong. First indication of knowledge and honesty are posts with numbers (beyond a 5% defined in ATX standards). You post no technical facts and lack honesty. With a smidgen of knowledge, then numbers were posted. We know voltage must not vary by more than 0.2 volts. A meter that measures a voltage within 5% may be reporting a defect - including voltages that vary well beyond 0.2 volts. But that means learning basic power supply concepts. That means basic electrical concepts (even taught in a 1st semester) must be part of a conclusion. Asus reports a defect because that defect exists. Conclusions, using wild speculation, speculate that Asus must be wrong. "I feel it is true - therefore it must be true." Wild speculation also declared 10 volts on a 12 volt bus as OK. It shouts from the highest mountain, "You have no design experience." Your entire argument falls flat due to what is obvious - including insufficient (and probably no) technical education. Demonstrated by another post that is subject (no technical numbers) and only contains cheapshot personal attacks. A Check Engine light was on. But that car worked fine. It proves a Check Engine light is wrong - until a breakdown or resulting damage costs $thousands. Replace 'she' with 'you'. Same rationalizations are based in wild speculation. If basic knowledge existed, then your reply was technical with numbers that say why. None provided because none exist. The informed use a meter (combined with requested instructions) to identify an Asus detected defect. Then one who really knows this stuff can provide informed assistance. Only the naive assume 10 volts measured on a 12 volt bus is acceptable.

No one is winning.

No one is suppose to win. And no one is suppose to lose. Only a solution should exist. Useful solution exists when defined by numbers that first define a defect. Solutions come later. Asus clearly reports a defect. But does not say what that defect is. Unfortunately many even want to deny the defect exists. Sound just like many who just know global warning does not exist - because they feel it does not exist. Facts and numbers be damned. So we all lose. A dying PSU is one of many possible defects detected by Asus. Numbers would say so much more.

you guys think this argument will help OP?

[QUOTE=westom;51998021]You post no technical facts and lack honesty.[/QUOTE] You're going to need a citation for that bold claim. You may also want to post citations for your age and qualifications in electrical knowledge that dispute the facts of standards bodies, since you seem to be throwing them around in lieu of actual evidence to support your claims. [QUOTE=westom;51998021]Asus reports a defect because that defect exists. Conclusions, using wild speculation, speculate that Asus must be wrong. "I feel it is true - therefore it must be true."[/QUOTE] Indeed this is a wagon wheel of you not reading evidence that ASUS confirmed the problem. And your whole argument hinges on the belief that a motherboard sensor is more accurate than a DMM, when it's far less accurate. You'll never believe it though because all end users are incompetent in your eyes apparently. [QUOTE=westom;51998021]A Check Engine light was on. But that car worked fine. It proves a Check Engine light is wrong - until a breakdown or resulting damage costs $thousands[/QUOTE] I'm a mechanic, your analogy doesn't work, sorry. [QUOTE=westom;51998163]Asus clearly reports a defect. But does not say what that defect is. Unfortunately many even want to deny the defect exists. Sound just like many who just know global warning does not exist - because they feel it does not exist. Facts and numbers be damned. So we all lose.[/QUOTE] Just like your car analogy, non sequitur fallacies do not make a valid point. [QUOTE=NitronikALT;51998238]you guys think this argument will help OP?[/QUOTE] I'm trying to disprove hogwash FUD that westom is trying to perpetuate, so it helps people to understand he doesn't know what he's talking about.

You're going to need a citation for those so many bold denials. You do not know how power supplies work. You do not know about simplest electrical concepts such as ripple voltage. You post denials without even one fact to justify what are only feelings. The Asus surge message report a defect. We who actually design this stuff see PSUs that are defective while the system is still working. You don't know that. You even do not understand the significance of a 0.2 voltage variation. So you attack the messenger rather than post a single honest technical fact. You're going to need citations to justify so many bold denials. Due to complete electrical ignorance, your every denial is subjective. And spiced with personal attacks. Attacks that are typical when one's knowledge only comes from hearsay and speculation. Again, a statement, posted[i] repeatedly[/i], that results in informed assistance: get a meter, request instructions, and perform maybe two minutes of labor. Post those numbers. Then have a complete answer that explains why Asus sees an error. And probably what one part is defective. Without wild speculation and emotional (subjective) denials. Due to nasty and emotional denials, that well informed recommendation has been overlooked - by the OP and by others.

[QUOTE=westom;52000043]You do not know how power supplies work. You do not know about simplest electrical concepts such as ripple voltage. You post denials without even one fact to justify what are only feelings.[/QUOTE] Trying to discredit people by saying they're personally attacking you (which never happened) and then trying to be the authority of someone else's qualifications you have no possible way of knowing gives you absolute zero credibility at this point, in addition to looking incredibly arrogant. Sources were posted and citations made quoting standards bodies, which you chose to ignore. That's 100% on you, not anyone else here so don't try to point fingers at us. [QUOTE=westom;52000043]Due to nasty and emotional denials, that well informed recommendation has been overlooked - by the OP and by others.[/QUOTE] Yep, the solution [B]provided by ASUS and the internet community is to disable anti-surge functionality in the BIOS.[/B] Reiterating ad-nauseum, I agree with the community on the verdict that anti-surge is a gimmick and unreliable. If your PSU is less than 5 years old and not an IED brand, then the error is almost always a false positive.