/    Measurement database » Power supplies » Meanwell NET-35A (presumably NET-35C) or Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A
Support the project on Patreon


Comparison · Power supplies

Meanwell NET-35A (presumably NET-35C) or Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A

Two models side by side: measurements taken by the author in their reviews, and their conclusions. The better value in each row is highlighted.

In brief: Based on review measurements: In test: Meanwell NET-35A (presumably NET-35C) (47 W vs. 34.7); Test current: Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A (6.8 A vs. 3.6); Temperature rise: Meanwell NET-35A (presumably NET-35C) (70 °C vs. 120).

ModelMeanwell NET-35A (presumably NET-35C)Meanwell NET-35A (presumably NET-35C)2023Read review →Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 ARaxfly, 5 V 7.2 A2017Read review →
Power, W3536
In test, W4734.7
Test current, A3.66.8
Temperature rise, °C70120
Review conclusion—Not recommended

Only in one review: Voltage 5 V (Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A); Current 7.2 A (Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A); Ripple 150 mV (Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A); Efficiency 80 % (Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A); Protection 3.6 A (Meanwell NET-35A (presumably NET-35C)); Price 11 $ (Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A).

Meanwell NET-35A (presumably NET-35C): The supply sustained about 45 W in a long test, but its model marking and original protection-resistor value caused confusion.

Raxfly, 5 V 7.2 A: The charger fell short of its rated current and power and overheated under sustained load.

Figures were taken from the review text and checked against the quoted passages. Measurement conditions differ between reviews, so read the reviews yourself before buying. Prices at the time of review.

Compare two modelsor

Similar comparisons

← All: power supplies