Can MEMTEST86+ check memory running at faster bus speed?

Memtest86+ is actually a good, if not the best, software based
memory tester. It is certainly a very good confidence check


false sense of security

But how much data corruption might have occurred before Windows
throws up a BSOD? I can't really afford to run the risk of corrupt
data just because I want to use Windows to test my memory in the way
you mention.


if there were horrible things wrong with your memory you will know it
long before you test with SW testers.

BSOD tell the tale when they come up. If there are memory registers in
the 'cause' line you will know its memory related.

if you are that concerned about memory errors...use ECC memory
only....

the only way to know for certain is to remove the stick and take it to
a hardware tester. There are memory controllers and many other things
indirectly controlling memory, if this is the area of concern,
software checkers are not up to snuff, and may give you memory errors
that are not chip related, or NOT tell you and you replace mods for no
reason.



"Franklin" wrote in message
...
On 15 Oct 2004, Shep© wrote:

True that software testers are limited in their capabilities but
to say that none will "point out anything of relevance" is
absurd and ill-informed. Have you even tried it?

Yes.Next to useless and not worth the download let alone
running.

I had heard it was one of the best testers.

Memtest86+ is actually a good, if not the best, software based
memory tester. It is certainly a very good confidence check
that nothing is horribly awry and I consider it standard
practice to run Memtest86+ for a couple of hours before
attempting installation of an OS. IME, a system which has
passed the checks - as well as a hard disk diagnostic - has
always installed and run the OS without problems.

Window's itself is a good test of hardware memory.

But how much data corruption might have occurred before Windows
throws up a BSOD? I can't really afford to run the risk of corrupt
data just because I want to use Windows to test my memory in the way
you mention.



It will balk
if there's anything wrong usually throwing up a,"Registry"
fault. Why some people defend a piece of software that they get
for free I'll never know.Hardware RAM testing machines run into
the thousands.Go figure.

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 04:10:44 -0500, David Maynard
put finger to keyboard and composed:

Franc Zabkar wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 06:23:06 -0400, George Macdonald
put finger to keyboard and
composed:


Memory testing software is nothing new - it was used on mainframes and
minicomputers for years. It can generated crafted memory access patterns
which may occur once a day or less in a running OS.


I agree, but I recall one particularly troublesome memory board in a
minicomputer during the 80's which was not faulted by regular
diagnostic software. This software was very intensive, probably more
so than Memtest-86. It generated many different patterns, and tested
for interference between adjacent memory cells. I ran this software
for several days but was not able to fault the board. However, the OS
and/or application software would crash about once a day with a parity
error. The OS was able to trap the address of this error, but could
not identify the faulty bit. As each bit was stored in a different
DRAM chip, I was facing the prospect of desoldering and replacing up
to 17 chips (16 + parity). Fortunately I eventually narrowed down the
faulty bit after writing a very simple diagnostic routine to exercise
this one location in a tight loop.

The one reservation I have with RAM testing software is that some
appear to have no adequate test for refresh problems. Faulty refresh
logic is more likely to show up in normal use, but not during a memory
test when cells are accessed (and therefore refreshed) continuously.


- Franc Zabkar

I can recount a few stories about diagnostic software that missed a
particular type of fault too but that doesn't mean they were useless.

I did not mean to imply that at all. My anecdote was intended to
demonstrate that memory faults can be quirky and highly intermittent.
The diagnostic software I was using was very thorough - it just wasn't
"lucky" in this particular case.

As for refresh problems, I notice that the latest version of
Memtest-86 now has a "bit fade" test (test 12) which appears to target
these types of faults. Unfortunately my system bombs early on in this
test with an "unexpected interrupt error". :-(

FWIW, the old minicomputer memory diagnostic also had a test which
used the "Knaizuk algorithm". I haven't heard of this technique in
modern software, though. Perhaps this algorithm is not as useful in
testing modern DRAM architecture???


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:22:09 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:

Memtest86+ is actually a good, if not the best, software based
memory tester. It is certainly a very good confidence check


false sense of security

But how much data corruption might have occurred before Windows
throws up a BSOD? I can't really afford to run the risk of corrupt
data just because I want to use Windows to test my memory in the way
you mention.


if there were horrible things wrong with your memory you will know it
long before you test with SW testers.

Not if you are wise. Wise tech never boots windows if the
memory stability is in question. One single boot is enough
to trash a windows install from memory errors.


BSOD tell the tale when they come up. If there are memory registers in
the 'cause' line you will know its memory related.

Nope, often registers are mentioned with no physical memory
error... just had one the other day related to MS
Messenger, which user had left enabled.


if you are that concerned about memory errors...use ECC memory
only....

.... and then there's the better-than-nothing approach, to at
least make sure the box in front of you, as configured, has
no errors before corrupting any data. "Best" is always nice
but you wouldn't want to ignore testing the memory if it
were ECC either.


the only way to know for certain is to remove the stick and take it to
a hardware tester. There are memory controllers and many other things
indirectly controlling memory, if this is the area of concern,
software checkers are not up to snuff, and may give you memory errors
that are not chip related, or NOT tell you and you replace mods for no
reason.

True, but it doesn't necessarily matter. Memory module "X"
won't work in board "Y", then it has to come out regardless
of what's to blame. Within the expensive hardware tester
another module is tried instead... It's pointless to even
mention hardware memory testers since less than 0.1% of the
techs out there have access to one.

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 16:31:22 GMT, "Alexander Grigoriev"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

My MEMTEST (http://home/earthlink.net/~alegr/download/memtest.htm) allows to ...

Your link appears to be broken. This link works for me:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alegr...ad/memtest.htm

... check for refresh, by inserting a delay between memory fill and pattern
check runs. The delay can be specified in the command line. For every other
pass it's 2 seconds default, every 63th pass it's 60 seconds by default.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

oops.. put a slash instead of period...

"Franc Zabkar" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 16:31:22 GMT, "Alexander Grigoriev"
put finger to keyboard and composed:

My MEMTEST (http://home/earthlink.net/~alegr/download/memtest.htm) allows
to ...

Your link appears to be broken. This link works for me:
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~alegr...ad/memtest.htm

... check for refresh, by inserting a delay between memory fill and
pattern
check runs. The delay can be specified in the command line. For every
other
pass it's 2 seconds default, every 63th pass it's 60 seconds by default.


- Franc Zabkar
--
Please remove one 's' from my address when replying by email.

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:22:09 -0700, "JAD" wrote:

Memtest86+ is actually a good, if not the best, software based
memory tester. It is certainly a very good confidence check


false sense of security

Snipping to create context you can argue with is a nasty Usenet habit.

But how much data corruption might have occurred before Windows
throws up a BSOD? I can't really afford to run the risk of corrupt
data just because I want to use Windows to test my memory in the way
you mention.


if there were horrible things wrong with your memory you will know it
long before you test with SW testers.

BSOD tell the tale when they come up. If there are memory registers in
the 'cause' line you will know its memory related.

Again...RUBBISH!

if you are that concerned about memory errors...use ECC memory
only....

Once "validated" through testing, diagnostics and a few days of running
with an OS, modern memory modules are generally good for years of reliable
use...IME. ECC has its place of course... which is slightly different from
initial checking/validation.

the only way to know for certain is to remove the stick and take it to
a hardware tester.

sighWe all have to start somewhere when dealing with a newly built system
- memtest86 does a reasonable job and serves its purpose. It's simply part
of a proactive approach to system integrity at time of build and
installation.

This is simple stuff: we have a mbrd from one supplier, a CPU form another
and memory modules from a 3rd, all supplied with power from a 4th. Why
anyone would want to argue with the concept of running some diagnostics as
a first step beats me... possibly you rely on Dell to do that for you??ô_ô

There are memory controllers and many other things
indirectly controlling memory, if this is the area of concern,
software checkers are not up to snuff, and may give you memory errors
that are not chip related, or NOT tell you and you replace mods for no
reason.

Hmm, seems to contradict what you just said about registers and memory
errors.shrug Then again, it depends on the system - AMD64 systems have
no "other things" between the CPU package and the memory, other than the
mbrd traces and sockets.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" - Who, me??

go ahead gmac play at it...


"George Macdonald" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 10:22:09 -0700, "JAD"
wrote:

Memtest86+ is actually a good, if not the best, software based
memory tester. It is certainly a very good confidence check


false sense of security

Snipping to create context you can argue with is a nasty Usenet
habit.

But how much data corruption might have occurred before Windows
throws up a BSOD? I can't really afford to run the risk of
corrupt
data just because I want to use Windows to test my memory in the
way
you mention.


if there were horrible things wrong with your memory you will know
it
long before you test with SW testers.

BSOD tell the tale when they come up. If there are memory registers
in
the 'cause' line you will know its memory related.

Again...RUBBISH!

if you are that concerned about memory errors...use ECC memory
only....

Once "validated" through testing, diagnostics and a few days of
running
with an OS, modern memory modules are generally good for years of
reliable
use...IME. ECC has its place of course... which is slightly
different from
initial checking/validation.

the only way to know for certain is to remove the stick and take it
to
a hardware tester.

sighWe all have to start somewhere when dealing with a newly built
system
- memtest86 does a reasonable job and serves its purpose. It's
simply part
of a proactive approach to system integrity at time of build and
installation.

This is simple stuff: we have a mbrd from one supplier, a CPU form
another
and memory modules from a 3rd, all supplied with power from a 4th.
Why
anyone would want to argue with the concept of running some
diagnostics as
a first step beats me... possibly you rely on Dell to do that for
you??ô_ô

There are memory controllers and many other things
indirectly controlling memory, if this is the area of concern,
software checkers are not up to snuff, and may give you memory
errors
that are not chip related, or NOT tell you and you replace mods for
no
reason.

Hmm, seems to contradict what you just said about registers and
memory
errors.shrug Then again, it depends on the system - AMD64 systems
have
no "other things" between the CPU package and the memory, other than
the
mbrd traces and sockets.

Rgds, George Macdonald

"Just because they're paranoid doesn't mean you're not psychotic" -
Who, me??

Memtest86+ is actually a good, if not the best, software based
memory tester. It is certainly a very good confidence check

false sense of security

Better than blind faith.


if there were horrible things wrong with your memory you will know it
long before you test with SW testers.

Or you could corrupt what you write in the hard-drive installed on your
system long before you find out you have a problem with your memory.

BSOD tell the tale when they come up. If there are memory registers in
the 'cause' line you will know its memory related.

What makes you think you have any right to expect a bluescreen at all? I got
a complete lockup as reward for my troubles half of the time, and half of
the time, *blink*, a happy, quick reset. Testing the memory found the
problem very quickly after hours of taking the new system apart. Should have
done that first, not last.

if you are that concerned about memory errors...use ECC memory
only....

No one is 'concerned' about memory errors, merely aware of the possible
problem and following a good, solid practises to make sure that cheap
consumer parts work as advertised. You just need to be in the ****ty
situation yourself, once, and you will not it find so easy to be clever
afterwards when someone else had problems.. and this should be a no-brainer,
since the solution was handed to you on a silver platter.

Not everyone here owns, or has easy access to a hardware memory tester.
Guess what? I don't have eeprom burner either here with me, shocked?

the only way to know for certain is to remove the stick and take it to
a hardware tester. There are memory controllers and many other things

But not the only way to find problems. www.simmtester.com has following to
say on the topic:

"Hardware Memory testers are designed for PC service professional who need
to test relatively high volume of modules and not for those who test only
one or two modules. "

software checkers are not up to snuff, and may give you memory errors
that are not chip related, or NOT tell you and you replace mods for no
reason.

Display driver trouble is wevy wevy wevy common in Windows(R) /Elmer Budd's
voiceover, from the symptoms you would think that it is hardware failure--
software such as display driver can crash Microsoft Windows(R) and go to the
nearest hardware tester. The hell you would, you would try to resolve this
"software problem" first-- how many times you have had malfunctioning memory
anyway? What have you done in one or two instances care to share with us?

Don't tell me. You did go directly to the hardware memory tester only to
find out that the memory works perfectly didn't you?

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 18:46:39 -0700, JAD wrote:

go ahead gmac play at it...

Top-posting kidz. yawn

--
Keith

yeah and for every specific instance you named I could name others
that support my views then you then me so on and so on..if you want to
sit in front of a memory tester(software) because you fear your data
may be corrupt in the future due to memory problems go for it. Let
your machine be useless for that time...test the cooling of your
memory and case..to find out that after all night of running it while
you slept with your head on the desktop, drooling all over the mouse
pad, the system rebooted and didn't save a log.

"assaarpa" wrote in message
...
Memtest86+ is actually a good, if not the best, software based
memory tester. It is certainly a very good confidence check

false sense of security

Better than blind faith.


if there were horrible things wrong with your memory you will know
it
long before you test with SW testers.

Or you could corrupt what you write in the hard-drive installed on
your
system long before you find out you have a problem with your memory.

BSOD tell the tale when they come up. If there are memory
registers in
the 'cause' line you will know its memory related.

What makes you think you have any right to expect a bluescreen at
all? I got
a complete lockup as reward for my troubles half of the time, and
half of
the time, *blink*, a happy, quick reset. Testing the memory found
the
problem very quickly after hours of taking the new system apart.
Should have
done that first, not last.

if you are that concerned about memory errors...use ECC memory
only....

No one is 'concerned' about memory errors, merely aware of the
possible
problem and following a good, solid practises to make sure that
cheap
consumer parts work as advertised. You just need to be in the ****ty
situation yourself, once, and you will not it find so easy to be
clever
afterwards when someone else had problems.. and this should be a
no-brainer,
since the solution was handed to you on a silver platter.

Not everyone here owns, or has easy access to a hardware memory
tester.
Guess what? I don't have eeprom burner either here with me, shocked?

the only way to know for certain is to remove the stick and take
it to
a hardware tester. There are memory controllers and many other
things

But not the only way to find problems. www.simmtester.com has
following to
say on the topic:

"Hardware Memory testers are designed for PC service professional
who need
to test relatively high volume of modules and not for those who test
only
one or two modules. "

software checkers are not up to snuff, and may give you memory
errors
that are not chip related, or NOT tell you and you replace mods
for no
reason.

Display driver trouble is wevy wevy wevy common in Windows(R)
/Elmer Budd's
voiceover, from the symptoms you would think that it is hardware
failure--
software such as display driver can crash Microsoft Windows(R) and
go to the
nearest hardware tester. The hell you would, you would try to
resolve this
"software problem" first-- how many times you have had
malfunctioning memory
anyway? What have you done in one or two instances care to share
with us?

Don't tell me. You did go directly to the hardware memory tester
only to
find out that the memory works perfectly didn't you?