A lot of those "up to"s are expressing user options, though -- "up to" 512 GB RAM means that there are configurations that include that, but also cheaper configurations that don't. That's a pretty different beast than "up to 4.3x faster performance", which means (presumably) that exactly one benchmark showed a 4.3x improvement and the rest showed less -- which is to say, means very little.
> They're trying NOT to say it had a 1440 watt power supply.
It isn't, though. That rating is for circuit sizing. Power supplies are rated by their output power. If you assume an 89% efficiency for the power supply, and assume 1.0 PFC, and assume that it must be able to supply its rated power at the critical corner (low voltage), and assume zero margin on the current rating, then this is a 1068 W power supply. More likely its design spec is around 1000 W; it certainly can't be 1440 W.
46, actually. 46. I am pretty certain that the explanation lies completely elsewhere...
(overuse of overstatements, for the sake of manipulation, perhaps? something that makes their saying unreliable this way - e.g. they forget to mention the other end of the range, or perhaps the mean, completely .... except when it is good for them, e.g. prices ... that's borderline to lying this way...)
