Skip to content
Sprout & Spectrum

Mars Hydro TS 1000

The highest published photon output of any fixture we cover, and one of the few whose spec sheet gives you enough to check the coverage claim yourself.

By Scooter M. — An enthusiast who's genuinely into this. I read the manuals, compile the published specs, and do the math. No lab coat.

Published · How we pick

A flat white-light LED grow panel suspended above a tray of young plants on a wire rack

Photographs on this site are licensed stock and are illustrative of the fixture type. We do not own the units we write about.

How this page is funded: the buy links here are Amazon Associates links, and we earn a commission on qualifying purchases at no extra cost to you. We have not been paid to feature anything on this page, we accept no free product, and commission plays no part in the ranking. Full disclosure.

We have not tested these units. Everything below comes from the manufacturer’s own published specifications, or from arithmetic we have shown our working for. Where a figure is not published, we say so instead of estimating one. Read the method.

The reasoning

We have not tested this fixture. We have not owned one, plugged one in, or measured anything about it. What follows is every figure Mars Hydro publishes for the TS 1000, our arithmetic on those figures with the working shown, and a list of what the spec sheet leaves out.

What it publishes, and why that matters

Mars Hydro publishes 343 µmol/s of photon flux, 150 W ±5% at 100–277 V AC, and 2.3 µmol/J of efficacy. Three figures, related to each other, which means the claim can be tested against itself.

Do the three published figures agree?

343 µmol/s ÷ 150 W = 2.29 µmol/J.

Mars Hydro publishes 2.3. That is the same number to the precision given.

Internal consistency is not proof of accuracy — all three could be optimistic together — but a spec sheet whose numbers contradict each other tells you something is wrong, and this one does not.

What 343 µmol/s actually buys you

Mars Hydro states a 2.5 × 2.5 ft vegetative footprint. Taking both published figures together:

Average PPFD across the stated footprint

2.5 × 2.5 ft = 6.25 sq ft = 0.581 m².

343 ÷ 0.581 = 590 µmol/m²/s at perfect uniformity; at a 0.8 uniformity factor, about 472 µmol/m²/s average.

That is above University of Minnesota Extension’s high-light band of 250–450. For seedlings, herbs or greens it is more than the target; for a monstera it is far more than the plant will use.

The useful conclusion is not that the fixture is too bright. It is that the TS 1000 over 6.25 sq ft is over-specified for most home situations, and the sensible response is to spread it over more area or dim it. Both are free.

Area this fixture covers at a seedling-appropriate 250 µmol/m²/s
11.8 sq ft

343 ÷ 250 × 0.8 = 1.097 m², which is 11.8 sq ft. Nearly double its stated vegetative footprint, because that footprint is quoted at a much higher light level.

Running cost

150 W across a five-month winter

150 W × 14 h ÷ 1000 = 2.1 kWh a day.

2.1 × 30 = 63.0 kWh a month = $11.56 at 18.34 cents per kWh.

Across 150 days: 315 kWh = about $57.77 for the season.

The same photons from a 2.7 µmol/J fixture would draw about 127 W and cost roughly $49 — a $9 difference over a winter, which is the honest size of the efficacy gap here.

What Mars Hydro does not publish

A PPFD figure at any stated distance. That is the notable gap: with 343 µmol/s and a footprint you can compute an area average, but you cannot know how the light is distributed within that footprint, or what a plant directly beneath the center actually receives. For a panel — which concentrates output at a point — that is exactly where the interesting variation lives.

Soltech, a far smaller fixture, publishes PPFD at three distances. It is not a technically difficult thing to measure.

Who should buy it

  • Yes if you are lighting a genuinely large area — 2 × 4 ft or more — and want a single fixture to do it.
  • Yes if you want a fixture whose output claim divides correctly out of its own wattage.
  • No for a bookshelf or a single plant. 343 µmol/s over a small area is light you pay 150 W to produce and then throw away.
  • No if you want to place it by published PPFD, because there is not one.

Head to head against the other fixture in its class, see Mars Hydro versus ViparSpectra. To size it against your own space, use the coverage calculator.

The fixture in full

A flat white-light LED grow panel suspended above a tray of young plants on a wire rack

Mars Hydro TS 1000

LED panel

The most photons of anything on this list, and one of only three fixtures here that publishes both PPF and efficacy so the claim can be checked against itself.

What Mars Hydro publishes

Power draw
150 W +/-5% at 100-277 V AC (source)
PPF (photon output)
343 umol/s (source)
Efficacy
2.3 umol/J (source)
Stated coverage
2.5 x 2.5 ft vegetative, 2.3 x 2.3 ft flowering (source)
Spectrum
660-665 nm, 730-740 nm, 3000 K, 5000 K (source)
Diodes
Bridgelux (source)
Dimming
Yes, 0-100% dimmer knob (source)
Dimensions
406 x 326 x 50 mm (source)

Our arithmetic

  • Average PPFD across its stated 2.5 x 2.5 ft vegetative footprint: about 470 umol/m2/s
    2.5 ft x 2.5 ft = 6.25 sq ft = 0.581 m2. 343 umol/s divided by 0.581 m2 = 590 umol/m2/s at perfect uniformity; applying a 0.8 uniformity factor gives about 472 umol/m2/s average.
  • Electricity used at 14 hours a day for 30 days: 63.0 kWh a month
    150 W x 14 h x 30 d / 1000 = 63.0 kWh.

Who should skip it

Skip it if you are lighting a bookshelf. 343 umol/s concentrated into a 2.5 ft square is far more light than a monstera wants, and you pay 150 W to deliver it.

Questions people actually ask

+Is the Mars Hydro TS 1000 good for seedlings?
It is more light than seedlings need over its stated footprint — about 472 µmol/m²/s average against a seedling target near 250. That is manageable: raise it, dim it, or spread it over roughly twice the area, where it comfortably hits the 12 mol/m²/day seedling target at 14 hours.
+How big an area does the TS 1000 cover?
Mars Hydro states 2.5 × 2.5 ft vegetative and 2.3 × 2.3 ft flowering. By our arithmetic on its published 343 µmol/s, it covers about 11.8 sq ft at a seedling-appropriate 250 µmol/m²/s, which is nearly double the stated footprint because that footprint is quoted at a much higher light level.
+What does the TS 1000 cost to run?
At 150 W and 14 hours a day, 63 kWh a month, or about $11.56 at the US residential average of 18.34 cents per kWh. Over a five-month winter that is roughly $58.
+Have you tested the Mars Hydro TS 1000?
No. We have not owned or measured this fixture. Every figure above is either published by Mars Hydro with a link to the source, or computed by us from those published figures with the arithmetic shown.

Sources

Read next

Where this sits

This page belongs to Fixture Reviews and Roundups. Every figure on it is either quoted from a named published source or derived in view — the full method is on our methodology page, and how the site is funded is on the affiliate disclosure.