XP-G -- Is it really going to be so great?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    169

    XP-G -- Is it really going to be so great?

    With the announcement of the XP-G there was a lot of hype. It sounded great to me. More light out od the same tiny package as the XP-E. Then I started reading more about it. I'm not really buying into the hype so much any more. From how I read the info available it's not really more efficient. It just uses a larger die. That larger die is driven with less current density and the result is that it's more efficient. The XP-G die is twice the size as the die in XP-E and XR-E. If I'm calculating correctly, you can use two R2 bin XP-E's (or XR-E's) and drive them at half the current you get essentially the same lumens per watt. Those two R2 XR-E's driven at an amp each give about 550 lumens vs 340 for the XP-G.

    The pro's
    It makes more light in a small footprint that's for sure. There is no denying that. Did I say it's small? It's the new cool thing. It has great efficiency.

    The con's
    It's new so it's going to be expensive

    It uses a die twice the size so that will make it more expensive by a good percentage no matter what.

    The larger die will not focus as well.




    It just doesn't seem like it's such a breakthrough like the press releases made it sound like. I'm expecting it to be at least 2x to 3x the cost of the XP-E's. I see it as a premium model. If you want the smallest and brightest regardless of cost then the XP-G is the way to go.

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    Yep, thats definately a bit of a cheat and the focusing issue puts me off, ofcourse twice the area isn't much bigger @40% wider and taller depending on how your looking at it.

    Still focus better than a MC-E or P7 though I guess.

    I bet given good heat sinking you can run them a lot higher than 1000ma's,

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by vroom9
    With the announcement of the XP-G there was a lot of hype. It sounded great to me. More light out od the same tiny package as the XP-E. Then I started reading more about it. I'm not really buying into the hype so much any more. From how I read the info available it's not really more efficient. It just uses a larger die. That larger die is driven with less current density and the result is that it's more efficient. The XP-G die is twice the size as the die in XP-E and XR-E. If I'm calculating correctly, you can use two R2 bin XP-E's (or XR-E's) and drive them at half the current you get essentially the same lumens per watt. Those two R2 XR-E's driven at an amp each give about 550 lumens vs 340 for the XP-G.

    The pro's
    It makes more light in a small footprint that's for sure. There is no denying that. Did I say it's small? It's the new cool thing. It has great efficiency.

    The con's
    It's new so it's going to be expensive

    It uses a die twice the size so that will make it more expensive by a good percentage no matter what.

    The larger die will not focus as well.




    It just doesn't seem like it's such a breakthrough like the press releases made it sound like. I'm expecting it to be at least 2x to 3x the cost of the XP-E's. I see it as a premium model. If you want the smallest and brightest regardless of cost then the XP-G is the way to go.
    I think it is easy to get a little complacent about a new line in the sand of efficiacy when perhaps it does not appear to be a giant leap. It may in fact be akin to intel adding more cache to pentiums, reducing memory access time and calling it a faster processor, in both cases we have from a user perspective an improvement in performance. Sometimes development is about stepping back and taking all that you have done and all you know and reengineering a new commercially excellent product at the expense of try to extend the urine stream. Your right you could do the same with two R2, but you dont have to. This is going to be an very good led, as you say lets not get caught in the hype but maybe consider the led with respect to what it actually delivers relative to what else is in the market. In that context it stands up pretty well
    Cheers
    WeLight

    Cutter Electronics Pty Ltd www.cutter.com.au

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: yetibetty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,781
    Quote Originally Posted by WeLight
    try to extend the urine stream.

  5. #5
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    For me I think it is a pretty good improvement over the XPE However it has been achieved.
    I have really liked these small footprint leds since the first light I made
    and to get the same or better performance using 2 less leds is in my view a good sized jump .


    I dont think they are going to be that difficult a led to focus into a nice beam and certainly a whole heap better than the MCE/P7 s .

    as for cost Yes it is gonna be more expensive But Cree are going to want them to sell in as many markets as possible so it might not be a huge price hike ( wishfull thinking on my part)

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    296
    Quote Originally Posted by yetibetty
    its a pisxxxxg contest
    Cheers
    WeLight

    Cutter Electronics Pty Ltd www.cutter.com.au

  7. #7
    mtbr member
    Reputation: znomit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,980
    Quote Originally Posted by vroom9
    If I'm calculating correctly, you can use two R2 bin XP-E's (or XR-E's) and drive them at half the current you get essentially the same lumens per watt. Those two R2 XR-E's driven at an amp each give about 550 lumens vs 340 for the XP-G. [/INDENT]
    If you can run two XP-G instead of three XP-E then even a 50% cost increase is a net benefit (you save on one optic, smaller housing, big reduction in DIY effort). Plus you have 690lm instead of 630lm, more battery options.

    A single XP-G at 1A is a little brighter than two XP-E at 500mA(345lm vs 325), which suggests there is more going on than simply a bigger die.

    Apparent die size is likely around the same as an XR-E so optics would be a similar size, certainly larger than the XP-G if you want a tight beam, but probably we will see nice solutions under 2cm.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation: troutie-mtb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,062
    well samples are shipping out and have arrived on CPF

    but he is not allowed to say much about them .

    How long from samples to Cutters and then us

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: znomit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,980
    Quote Originally Posted by troutie-mtb
    How long from samples to Cutters and then us
    TOMORROW!


  10. #10
    A waste of time it is is
    Reputation: emu26's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    3,456
    LOL znomit, Imade note of that claim when i got the email the other day as well, shall we call it "poetic licence"

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    169
    I saw those posts over on CPF. My guess is that it will still be a while before they are widely available. Atleast two months if not longer.

    I wonder why they are being so secretive? I can understand not wanting pre-production samples getting out that might not be repreentative of the actual production parts, but they seem kind of over the top.

  12. #12
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    296
    While the debate rages about the real gains in performance of XPG, from Cree's perspective it canes anything else in the market and they are extremely careful about 'leaky' boats when it comes to information, I cant get any myself unless I sign a non disclosure agreement. The great news is if they are sampling, they are not far off shipping
    Cheers
    WeLight

    Cutter Electronics Pty Ltd www.cutter.com.au

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,330
    6 - 8 weeks I'd guess, so should be able to buy a XP-G torch from DX by Mid October that runs of a 18650 only ( fingers crossed on that )

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    692
    Any idea on if these will work well with the XPE optic? I hope we don't have to wait around for optics as well. I have been trying to decide whether to just get the 20mm triple XPE from cutter or wait for the XPG. I know it will be brighter, but it sounds like they will initially be the cooler tints and people seem to like the warmer tints better for biking.
    =========================================
    Minnesota Off Road Cyclists www.morcmtb.org

  15. #15
    mtbr member
    Reputation: znomit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,980
    Quote Originally Posted by tedsti
    Any idea on if these will work well with the XPE optic?
    It should fit but the beam will be wider.

    Hopefully Cutter will get in the 20 or 26mm carclo xp single optics, these are tighter so should be useful. Are you listening Welight

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.