Yes - that’s right. The only point I’m making is that it’s not ‘wrong’ to label or market the cable as H++ if it’s compliant with the H++ spec.
It’s also not wrong to say the cable is ‘new’ or ‘different’ to a previous version of the cable sold if there are any changes to it. If the changes are for safety reasons (such as making the ends of the cable a different colour) then it becomes a ‘new, different and safer H++’ cable.
I would agree though that some manufacturers are exploiting the situation by marketing cables as if it’s a change in the H++ spec that makes the cable itself new, hence they are deserving or ire.
The big HOWEVER though is this:
Spot on.
If you are using a PSU which is H+ then unfortunately you aren’t going to be 100% benefiting from the H++ socket on the GPU.
A H+ socket is less safe. If you connect a 50 series GPU to a H+ GPU then you are not covering the GPU being exposed to a faulty H+ connection. You're still in the ‘4090 melty cables’ zone. The H++ on the GPU end isn’t going help.
I would not be connecting a 5090 to an outdated native H+ socket on the PSU. One one hand, it’s even riskier than it was at the launch of the 4090 because the 5090 draws more power. But at least you’d be reducing the location of a ‘bad connection’ by half.
*******
TLDR:
You will miss out on having ‘all of the benefit’ from the new H++ safety standards (which aim to reduce the chance of ‘melty cables’) if you use a now outdated H+ socket on the PSU. This is particularly relevant for 5090s, which are the riskiest GPUs because of the high power draw.
This applies regardless of whether you use a cable that is marketed or marked as ‘12VHPWR / H+’ or ‘12V-2x6 / H++’.
H++ at the GPU end does not save your GPU from a H+ connection failure at the PSU end.