XP-E vs. XP-G?

HighlanderNorth · May 29, 2012

Right now I have 4 higher end LED flashlights, and a 5th on the way. I finally decided to buy the Lumapower D-Mini ex-2, after having bought the Zebralight SC600 instead about 5 weeks ago. So now I have 2 XM-L lights(ZL SC600 and Solarforce L2P with Thrunite 3 mode XM-L 9v drop in module). The Lumapower D-Mini ex-2 will also have an XM-L, but should be more of a thrower than the SC600, which is one reason I'm buying it.

The other 2 lights I have run on an XP-G R5(Jetbeam BC-10) and a CM-E(iTp A6 Polestar). I have read how a smaller diameter LED emitter equals more throw, unless the larger diameter LED emitter is set in a MUCH larger reflector. That explains why my SC600 is such a floody light(but its really bright).

But today I was reading a post here where a person was asking about whether he should get a module with an XP-E or an XM-L, and which one would give better throw in a certain size reflector. He was told to buy the XP-E, even though it isnt as bright, it supposedly would be more of a thrower.

When I looked at the XP-G(R5) vs. the XP-E(R2), they seem to be about the same size, and from the little info and specs I read, they also seem to be pretty similar in power potential(both around 300L).

I'm thinking of buying the Fireworm(dumb name) F1 Ti, but the one thing that originally turned me off, was that it uses an XP-E R2, and I initially thought that LED must be very outdated, since it only runs at 240L on high with an 18650, but now I'm not sure what the deal is with the XP-E, as the XP-G is pretty darn good!

So, what is the difference, and which do you prefer? I assume, just by going in alphabetical order that the XP-E must have come out 1st...

enomosiki · May 29, 2012

XP-G's die size is larger than XP-E's, at 1.4mm² (EZ1400) versus 1mm² (EZ1000).

Cree's binning of its emitters is that, for each increase in tier, it will be 7% brighter. Examples: R5 will be 7% brighter than R4; R5 will be 21% brighter than R2.

In regards to XP-E being able to achieve better throw than XP-G, I'll explain blow.

There are two reasons; the first is that XP-E has higher luminosity density than XP-G. At the moment, XP-E is maxed out at R4 bin, while XP-G is at S3. This means that the top bin of XP-G is 21% brighter than XP-E when they are both driven at same current. However, since XP-E's die is approximately 71.4% of the surface area that of XP-G's, it means that, pound for pound, XP-E is brighter than XP-G. Simply put, XP-G is 28.6% larger than XP-E but only produces 21% more brightness.

The second reason is that XP-E has a narrower viewing angle than XP-G, at 115° versus 125°, which means that XP-E's beam can be focused tighter and, thus, achieve higher lux, translating into increased throw.

Combining the two reasons above, if you have two flashlights, one equipped with XP-E and another with XP-G, that have the same drive current and reflector sizes, it will mean that the one with XP-E will produce a hot spot that is tighter and more intense than the one with XP-G.

Most manufacturers prefer XP-G R5 bin due to its tint stability. Higher XP-G bins--S2 and S3--have problems with tints, and many end-users have reported them to be green. This is why we don't see much S2 or S3 binned XP-G flashlights, and most of the flashlights currently being produced with XP-G have the R5 bin. On the other hand, R4 bin of XP-E is slowly being trickled into the market, and few manufacturers, such as Fenix and Dereelight, have started adopting it.

However...

XP-G still has the advantage of being able to be driven at higher currents than XP-E. XP-G's maximum recommended drive current is 1.5A, while XP-E's is 1A. Also, due to the fact that XP-G can handle the current and heat better than XP-E, XP-G has the advantage of being not losing as much efficiency as XP-E due to less thermal sag.

In the end, it's all up to one's preference.

ZMZ67 · May 30, 2012

enomosiki gives a great explanation! I find that I like the XP-E in small lights despite the better efficiency of the XP-G.My EDC is a Quark 1X123 with an XP-E.I purchased a Quark 1X123 with an XP-G more recently but,tints being equal,I would rather have the throw of the XP-E Quark 1X123.

Lightwriter · May 30, 2012

I have a 2D MagLED with XP-E, and a 3D Maglite with Malkoff XP-G. Indoors, the Malkoff is slightly brighter when aiming at the ceiling and lighting up a room. Outside, I can't tell the difference in brightness/lumens. The XP-E can focus into a tighter hotspot, though I think it's due to the deeper reflector.

I haven't run either for long periods so I can't tell you if there's any drop-off due to heat.

orbital · May 30, 2012

enomosiki said:
XP-G's die size is larger than XP-E's, at 1.4mm² (EZ1400) versus 1mm² (EZ1000).

Cree's binning of its emitters is that, for each increase in tier, it will be 7% brighter. Examples: R5 will be 7% brighter than R4; R5 will be 21% brighter than R2.

In regards to XP-E being able to achieve better throw than XP-G, I'll explain blow.

There are two reasons; the first is that XP-E has higher luminosity density than XP-G. At the moment, XP-E is maxed out at R4 bin, while XP-G is at S3. This means that the top bin of XP-G is 21% brighter than XP-E when they are both driven at same current. However, since XP-E's die is approximately 71.4% of the surface area that of XP-G's, it means that, pound for pound, XP-E is brighter than XP-G. Simply put, XP-G is 28.6% larger than XP-E but only produces 21% more brightness.

The second reason is that XP-E has a narrower viewing angle than XP-G, at 115° versus 125°, which means that XP-E's beam can be focused tighter and, thus, achieve higher lux, translating into increased throw.

Combining the two reasons above, if you have two flashlights, one equipped with XP-E and another with XP-G, that have the same drive current and reflector sizes, it will mean that the one with XP-E will produce a hot spot that is tighter and more intense than the one with XP-G.

Most manufacturers prefer XP-G R5 bin due to its tint stability. Higher XP-G bins--S2 and S3--have problems with tints, and many end-users have reported them to be green. This is why we don't see much S2 or S3 binned XP-G flashlights, and most of the flashlights currently being produced with XP-G have the R5 bin. On the other hand, R4 bin of XP-E is slowly being trickled into the market, and few manufacturers, such as Fenix and Dereelight, have started adopting it.

However...

XP-G still has the advantage of being able to be driven at higher currents than XP-E. XP-G's maximum recommended drive current is 1.5A, while XP-E's is 1A. Also, due to the fact that XP-G can handle the current and heat better than XP-E, XP-G has the advantage of being not losing as much efficiency as XP-E due to less thermal sag.

In the end, it's all up to one's preference.

+

Post of the day, deserving to quote the entire thing!

One thing though about tint consistency & your wording, not to confuse people.
xp-e will be better at maintaining tint overall,...but lower bin xp-g will be more tint consistent over higher bin (S2 ect.) xp-g.

>> If I had a choice between two lights; one with xp-e R3 & one with an xp-g r5,...I'll take the R3 because I'v just had good luck w/xp-e beam.
...predictable, user friendly emitter.

You'll be able to drive an xp-e to around 1.4A before it gets too angry :grin2:

BringerOfLight · May 30, 2012

enomosiki said:
XP-G's die size is larger than XP-E's, at 1.4mm² (EZ1400) versus 1mm² (EZ1000).

No, XP-G is 1.35mm x 1.35mm = 1.8mm². XP-E is .95mm x .95mm = 0.9mm².

Cree's binning of its emitters is that, for each increase in tier, it will be 7% brighter. Examples: R5 will be 7% brighter than R4; R5 will be 21% brighter than R2.

In regards to XP-E being able to achieve better throw than XP-G, I'll explain blow.

There are two reasons; the first is that XP-E has higher luminosity density than XP-G. At the moment, XP-E is maxed out at R4 bin, while XP-G is at S3. This means that the top bin of XP-G is 21% brighter than XP-E when they are both driven at same current. However, since XP-E's die is approximately 71.4% of the surface area that of XP-G's, it means that, pound for pound, XP-E is brighter than XP-G. Simply put, XP-G is 28.6% larger than XP-E but only produces 21% more brightness.

Only when driven at the same current, but many lights drive the LEDs at the max current they are rated for, 1000mA for XP-E, 1500mA for XP-G. At those currents, a R5 XP-G will be 70% brighter (in terms of lumen output) than a R3 XP-E, but have 2x the die area. All things being equal, throw is proportional to the die area, so the XP-E still wins with throw (with the same reflector size).

GordoJones88 · Jun 1, 2012

There is a new XTE emitter on the new EagleTac 18650 light. Look at that pic at the bottom.

Here are 2 slightly different charts for 18650, look at the Peak Throw column.
I think some of these are not 18650.

peterharvey73 · Jun 1, 2012

In the table provided by Dr Jones below, in the bottom row, we can see that the two different types of XR-E emitters both have greater surface brightness than the XP-G emitter.
When driven to their maximum recommended amperage of 1.0 and 1.5 amps respectively, the XR-E's have greater surface brightness, so throw further.

On the second last row, the XP-G has the greater maximum volume of light at 493 lumens, versus the XR-E's 253 lumens.
Remembering that the total lumen output is the product of the intensity of brightness, multiplied by the surface area of illumination.
The greater the intensity, the greater the total lumen output.
The greater the surface area of illumination, the greater the lumen output also...

XP-E vs. XP-G?

HighlanderNorth

Flashlight Enthusiast

enomosiki

Flashlight Enthusiast

ZMZ67

Flashlight Enthusiast

Lightwriter

Newly Enlightened

orbital

Flashlight Enthusiast

BringerOfLight

Newly Enlightened

GordoJones88

Flashlight Enthusiast

peterharvey73

Flashlight Enthusiast

Similar threads

Latest posts