larry moe 'n curly <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>>> larry moe 'n curly <larrymoencurly@my-deja.com> wrote

>>> My batting average for Kingston ValueRAM is 8 bad PC3200 modules
>>> out of 11 or 12 and maybe 30% bad PC2100 modules. The number
>>> of errors seemed to correlate with the markings on the chips

>>> One BIOS was in an Asrock/Asus KT400
>>> mobo, the other in an ECS nForce3 mobo.

>> I just dont believe that Kingston is shipping ram with
>> anything like that percentage BAD at the top. Bad in the
>> sense that you get that percentage in every system.

> Not in every system. I counted a module as bad if it failed in at
> least one of those systems when it was run at its SPD settings.

Thats nothing like bad ram, just that system not using the spd values properly.

>> That is just plain silly, it must have a problem
>> with just some chipsets, like I said.

> Then why didn't any of my Corsair or PNY modules fail in any of the systems,

Different timing detail that the bios can handle better.

> even when overclocked, and why did the Kingstons with the Fxxxxxx chips
> work much better than other Kingstons with the same SPD information?

Again, different timing detail that the bios can handle better.

It would only be bad ram if you got that 8 out of 11 or 12 result
in all systems that specify that that particular ram is what it can
handle and I dont believe Kingston ships ram like that.

It isnt bad ram unless its not possible to find any timing specs which give
an error free result with say memtest86 and the Prime95 ramfucker test.