Sandwich Posted May 3, 2005 Share Posted May 3, 2005 I have two pairs of TWINX1024-3200LL memory and one module from each pair tests bad when I run memtest on them individually. They become very unstable when either pair is run in dual channel mode. They are installed in an ASUS P4P800 Dlx with a P4 3.2GHz processor. CAS settings are set to 2.3.2.6 and DDR voltage set to 2.85v. If I run the two good modules as a pair, they run perfect. One pair is from Newegg.com and the other is from Zipzoomfly.com and both are beyond the return period. Do I return the bad modules with the set or individually? If I have to return them as a set, I will need two seperate RMA's to keep one set while the other is replaced. PS. I've been trying to post to this forum for a week and it finally went through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsair Employees RAM GUY Posted May 3, 2005 Corsair Employees Share Posted May 3, 2005 Are all of the modules the same revision? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandwich Posted May 3, 2005 Author Share Posted May 3, 2005 Each TWINX set is the same revision but the two sets are different revisions. I don't have the info with me at the moment but I believe the set from Newegg was version 3.XX and the set from Zipzoomfly is version 1.2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsair Employees RAM GUY Posted May 3, 2005 Corsair Employees Share Posted May 3, 2005 Please try and set the timings to Cass 2.5-3-3-7 and set the Dim Voltage to 2.8x Volts and test them with http://www.memtest.org but please disable legacy USB and make sure PAT/PAM/MAM is disabled and the performance mode is set to AUTO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandwich Posted May 4, 2005 Author Share Posted May 4, 2005 Retested "bad" modules with CAS settings set to 2.5-3-3-7, voltage 2.85v, disabled legacy usb, PAT disabled, Performance mode set to Auto (default) with memtest86+ v1.51. XMS3205v3.2 module that previously failed reports no errors after two full passes of memtest. XMS3205v1.2 module that previously failed reports 1014 errors on test #5 and 7 errors on test #7 on first pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsair Employees RAM GUY Posted May 4, 2005 Corsair Employees Share Posted May 4, 2005 Please follow the link in my signature “I think I have a bad part!” and we will be happy to replace them or it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandwich Posted May 4, 2005 Author Share Posted May 4, 2005 Do I return each Twinx set? I assume they're replaced as a set even though only one module is bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsair Employees RAM GUY Posted May 4, 2005 Corsair Employees Share Posted May 4, 2005 Yes, and Yes! You should submit the RMA for 1 Twinx set and send both modules so they match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandwich Posted May 14, 2005 Author Share Posted May 14, 2005 Thank you RAM Guy for your advice and Corsair for thier generosity. I received my replacement for my first set of bad twinx1024-3200LL memory. A twinx1024-3200XL set. It runs perfectly and passes memtest using 2-2-2-5 latency settings and I couldn't be more pleased. I can only hope that when I return my second offending twinx1024-3200LL set (already submitted the RMA request) that I will be so lucky as to get another XL set in return to keep them matched. I do have one other question for you. My ASUS P4P800 Dlx MB bios has one other RAM setting: DRAM Burst Length. It is currently set to 8 clocks but can also be set to 4 clocks. Any recommendation would be appreciated. Thanks again for your help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corsair Employees RAM GUY Posted May 16, 2005 Corsair Employees Share Posted May 16, 2005 You will need to talk to customer service and let them know the issue. 888-222-4346 and dial "0" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.