Search: Budget Friendly Grow Light

You mostly pay for efficacy. The results will be the same unless the extra heat produced by cheaper lights causes a problem. Obvioulsy, plenty of ways to mitigate that. Cost of ownership - spend a little more today and you save more over the lifetime of the product. There are lots of things you should absolutely stick with generics on, but a light can be found with good efficacy for a fair price. .8*.8 is .64m^2 18-hour operation needs about .64 * 600 = 380-400 umol/s PAR produced from the light. 12-hour operation needs about .64 * 900 = 575-600 umol/S PAR If you only grow autoflowers and absolutely no intention to ever grow photoperiods, any light with true specs near that 400umol/s production of photons will be safely at the higher end how much light you can provide with ambient co2. If you have any intent to grow photoperiods, buy a light that produces about 600umol/s of PAR +/- 5% won't matter much. After that efficacy is the concern. You can discern lies with some simple math. LM301 didoes only -- higher efficacy lights will be powering individual diodes at .2-.25 watts per diode. Dividing watts / diode count will give a rough estimate... a few percent of diodes being different is mostly inconsequential for the level of precision needed here. Avoid the lights up around 0.5 watts per diode and higher for sure. They have cut the corners WAY too much on diode count. heat production will be high and extra electricity costs every month of use add up to more than the price differnce more times than not. Even if they used more expensive 'binning' options for the lm301 diodes, you might still get good efficacy but longevity is shortened nonetheless when you over power these diodes. samsung.com tests at .2watts per... anything above that shortens life rather quickly and reduced efficacy compared to samsung's test specs. This is how you discern accurate specifications from manufacturer vs manufacturers that lie their asses off while hoping you are none the wiser.