Re: Bad/Counterfeit memory? [Was: Upgrading to hamm]
- To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bad/Counterfeit memory? [Was: Upgrading to hamm]
- From: Jeff Noxon <jeff@planetfall.com>
- Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 13:06:39 -0500
- Message-id: <19980417130639.09215@mystic>
- In-reply-to: <liiwi-980415211656.A018748@lonesom>; from Jaakko Niemi on Wed, Apr 15, 1998 at 09:16:57PM +0300
- References: <19980415090656.21508@mystic> <liiwi-980415211656.A018748@lonesom>
FWIW,
I took the suggestion to try 2.0.32, and my system still acts up with
128M in it. 64M is fine. I think it's the new SIMMs. They don't fail
memtest86, but gcc and dselect won't work...
I haven't tried to test *just* the new SIMMs yet, but I'm suspicious of
them simply because they have a Micron Technology logo on the chips,
which has been carefully laser(?)-etched to the point where it's nearly
impossible to see. There is a diamond pattern over the MT logo.
The outfit that sold them to me told me that they were Micron chips,
and it took me a *long* time to discern the MT logo at all. I suspect
that they're rejects, or don't test out at 60ns like they're marked,
or something... Can anyone verify this? I tried them at 70ns and they
still don't work.
Be careful when buying "Major" brand memory, and get a commitment to
the manufacturer name in advance if possible.
Thanks,
Jeff
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: