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

>>> 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 particular ram is what
>> it can handle and I dont believe Kingston ships ram like that.

> I thought the standard of quality should be that the memory
> works perfectly in all computers for which it's specifed,

Not all bios can setup the chipset properly with some ram.

We're currently seeing a considerable problem with DDR2 ram
in some gigabyte motherboards, with later bios doing better.

We have also seen some DDR ram thats
know to not work well with all chipsets etc.

> not just in one of them.

You havent established that it only works fine in one, just
one of the ones you have. I just dont believe that Kingston
is shipping ram that fails at that 8 out of 11 or 12 rate in
the vast bulk of systems that can take that type of ram.

>> 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.

> I had some PC2100 modules that always failed testing at their rated 266
> MHz bus speed, regardless of how slow the other timings were, but they
> worked fine at 200 MHz. So by your reasoning, those modules weren't bad?

Only if you get that result in all systems that can take PC2100 modules
and I just dont believe that Kingston would be shipping ram like that.