If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt "Del Cecchi"
wrote: History would show that bad cheap drives out good. I give you microchannel vrs ISA as an example. In fact the whole consumer PC market is an example. With small margins, and no evidence that people walking in walmart or best buy have any interest in paying a premium for some nebulous reliability claim why should manufacturers waste perfectly good bits. Exactly. Servers are a different story. Which is why most ECC memory is marketed "for servers". -- _____ / ' / â„¢ ,-/-, __ __. ____ /_ (_/ / (_(_/|_/ / _/ _ |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Del Cecchi wrote:
History would show that bad cheap drives out good. I give you microchannel vrs ISA as an example. That may have been more a matter of open vs. closed; note that VLB beat both MCA and EISA, and (1st-gen) PCI succeeded more because of getting a lot of manufacturers on board (including Apple) than any technical superiority. This was a design decision made by IBM. They considered a crash better than corrupted data. I agree. Actually, how was windows supposed to recover from parity error? IBM didn't write windows. It didn't write DOS either, but given that it was the organization that pushed and marketed DOS for Microsoft, it still shares a fair bit of culpability. It also was the one who designed the original PC motherboard with the dubious "parity error goes to NMI" design to begin with. Last time I talked to my buddy that tracks failures, it was software first, then disks, then electronics. A little research and a few calculations will tell you how often there will be a memory error. That certainly matches my experience. Also, cooling fans are in there between drives and electronics: moving parts break down WAY faster than most electronics (although bad caps are up there too.) -- Nate Edel http://www.cubiclehermit.com/ preferred email | "With all the accumulated wit and wisdom in the is "nate" at the | world, it is pointless to try to select a few posting domain | choice quotes." (some guy from my HS yearbook) |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
Frank McCoy wrote:
The problem is: WITH ECC built in, probably over half the cases of "Blue Screen of Death" or computer crashes and foulups *could* be things of the past! Really, so why does my linux installation run without crashes on exactly the same hardware that Windows used to crash on regularly? I think you'll find the problem is not related to whether it has or has not got ECC memory! The worst part is, people could actually be KILLED by such mistakes made by a computer that might have been corrected with ECC ... Yet nobody will trace it back to that; just: "Sorry, the computer crashed!" Well, if you must insist on running Windows, that is a risk you have to take "I've ran my computer for years without ECC; and it ran just FINE!" Only that ignores the freezups, crashes, blue-screens, and other crap that got attributed to software instead of memory failures. ;-{ Try attributing those freezups, crashes, blue-screens and other crap to WINDOWS instead of lack of ECC. Linux runs fine without ANY of these problems on the SAME hardware (disc formatted and linux installed instead of Windows). Current uptime, 70 days on a linux system that runs 100% CPU usage on BOINC projects 24/7, so not just some box that is sitting idle in the corner. These days people seem to *expect* such failures, when 99.99% of the ones caused by bad memory (probably well over half) could be fixed. No, most of these failures are caused by Windows. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips Del Cecchi wrote in part:
History would show that bad cheap drives out good. .... expensive. Plenty of similar pseudo-examples like VHS vs beta. Yet it is a canard. Quality is an attribute like any other. Just like price. There is such a thing as excessive quality, particularly if it comes at the expense of some other desireable attribute like price. I give you microchannel vrs ISA as an example. Another canard. I used both in the day. Yes, ISA had fun IRQ clashes, but those were easy enough to avoid. Not worse than todays PCI-BM card shuffling. Microchannel certainly was more elegant but had that rather tedious install diskette process. In the end, both boxes were stable with good drivers. IBM usually had better, but I ran Linux MC TR for years. In fact the whole consumer PC market is an example. When a new product is introduced, it is usually expensive and aimed and very demanding customers. The quality almost always is the maximum that can be achieved. As the product gains acceptance and market size, both the price and the quality should decrease because these new customers have different values. Their values are indisputably theirs and they have a right to pursue them. With small margins, and no evidence that people walking in walmart or best buy have any interest in paying a premium for some nebulous reliability claim why should manufacturers waste perfectly good bits. Actually, the PC market is highly fragmented, with quite a quality range. A desktop sells anywhere from $200 to $900+. The upper end would surely like more to differentiate themselves with. If ECC was that big a reliability win, it would not be a nebulous claim. Servers are a different story. Always. Last time I talked to my buddy that tracks failures, it was software first, then disks, then electronics. A little research and a few calculations will tell you how often there will be a memory error. Electronics probably including electrolytic capacitors which have to be at least half of all "electronic" failures. How seriously you take it depends on how you feel about errors and especially undetected errors. Certainly. I would be most interested in ECC error log reports -- how many errors detected in how many GB over how many power-on hours. Hard data like this makes a reasoned decision over ECC possible. Otherwise, it's all anectdotal and worse. -- Robert |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
Igor,
please read your replys here and then do some intropection. Mike "Igor" wrote in message newsp.tzl9yfmgkkm7ou@a... On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 06:03:21 -0400, kony wrote: On Wed, 03 Oct 2007 05:38:58 -0400, Igor wrote: I found the insinuation that I *should have* provided the make and model of my motherboard, that not doing so was an oversight on my part, and that my questions couldn't be properly answered as I had posed them, just a bit patronizing. maybe, but on the other hand if you can't make the effort to do that, why should others make the effort to guess about what is likely, instead of knowing more certainly if you have hardware upon which the details might be more likely, and/or known problems? Like I said, they were general questions, and all that was called for were general responses (which you did, in fact, provide, and which you did, in fact, say in an earlier post required less effort than the detailed answers Paul likes to give). |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt Robert Redelmeier
wrote: Plenty of similar pseudo-examples like VHS vs beta. While Beta was a much better *recording media* than VHS ever will be, the competition wasn't between the media but between the *recorders*; and there Sony completely dropped the ball. People bought VHS, not because VHS was better or cheaper; it wasn't on BOTH counts. Beta tapes were better, produced far better pictures, were far less likely to jam AND were slightly cheaper (because of the reduced size). People bought VHS *recorders* because they offered far more features (like delayed and programmed recording) long before Beta machines ever did. Since most people don't give a **** about minor quality issues; tiny problems not showing up until quite a while *after* the machine was bought, the minor price-differential (in favor of Beta, BTW), they both had similar prerecorded movies out, and the prices of the machines were almost identical, what made VHS "win the war" was the fact that Sony thought it owned the market; and saw no reason to upgrade or add features to their machines. The competition did. I still have one of the last Beta machines around. The only "programming" you can do is set up a recording-time pressing buttons on the front of the machine. You can't set up multiple records, sets of records, or even change stations from one station to another while recording except by manually going up to the machine and pressing another station-button. All the VHS machines by then could do FAR more; most having on-screen programming for at least a week of recording. Pure idiocy (in my opinion anyway) on the part of Sony management. -- _____ / ' / â„¢ ,-/-, __ __. ____ /_ (_/ / (_(_/|_/ / _/ _ |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt Robert Redelmeier
wrote: If ECC was that big a reliability win, it would not be a nebulous claim. Actually, it IS. That's why almost every SERVER gets ECC memory. What ECC doesn't have, is anybody SELLING the advantage. For most common PC users (and retailers) nobody gives a damn; and those few people who *do* know the advantage, usually don't speak to the customers and TELL them. How is anybody supposed to know the difference, if they'r not educated? Besides, all most lusers see on the sticker is the hard-drive size, the monitor-size, the CPU speed, and the memory-size. Since NONE of the packaged products comes default-with ECC, how are they going to know it's even an option? Nobody mentions it to them. Nobody *suggests* it as an option. Nobody sees it in any on-shelf PC. Only those who *know* about it would even ask! How many are that? Less than 1%? If it ain't being sold, *of course* it ain't going to sell! Now most professionals, people who build server-boxes, probably wouldn't be caught dead putting non-ECC memory into a system. But THEY know what it is and is-for, what it does, and how it improves reliability. However geeks like that don't talk to home-PC customers. I'll bet most put ECC memory in their own systems at home though. Just like they buy decent power-supplies and motherboards; not the crap that Dell sells. -- _____ / ' / â„¢ ,-/-, __ __. ____ /_ (_/ / (_(_/|_/ / _/ _ |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:20:43 -0500, Frank McCoy wrote:
[blah blah ...] Now most professionals, people who build server-boxes, probably wouldn't be caught dead putting non-ECC memory into a system. But THEY know what it is and is-for, what it does, and how it improves reliability. Well, no. The *customer* has a check list, and ECC is on it. Otherwise the "people who build server boxes" would put non-ECC memory in it and pocket the cost differential. However geeks like that don't talk to home-PC customers. I'll bet most put ECC memory in their own systems at home though. So, how many desktop chipsets actually even support ECC these days? /daytripper |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt daytripper
wrote: On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:20:43 -0500, Frank McCoy wrote: [blah blah ...] Now most professionals, people who build server-boxes, probably wouldn't be caught dead putting non-ECC memory into a system. But THEY know what it is and is-for, what it does, and how it improves reliability. Well, no. The *customer* has a check list, and ECC is on it. Otherwise the "people who build server boxes" would put non-ECC memory in it and pocket the cost differential. However geeks like that don't talk to home-PC customers. I'll bet most put ECC memory in their own systems at home though. So, how many desktop chipsets actually even support ECC these days? ALL of them do. It's on the DIMM, not the motherboard. Completely transparent. The mobo doesn't even know it's there. The DIMM is just a bit bigger; and has extra chips on it. Fits in the same slot. You just buy PC2100 ECC memory instead of PC2100 non-ECC memory. They meet the exact same specifications. The only difference is the ECC memory doesn't have errors. -- _____ / ' / â„¢ ,-/-, __ __. ____ /_ (_/ / (_(_/|_/ / _/ _ |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
Questions about DDR RAM
On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:59:05 -0500, Frank McCoy wrote:
In alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt daytripper wrote: On Tue, 09 Oct 2007 15:20:43 -0500, Frank McCoy wrote: [blah blah ...] Now most professionals, people who build server-boxes, probably wouldn't be caught dead putting non-ECC memory into a system. But THEY know what it is and is-for, what it does, and how it improves reliability. Well, no. The *customer* has a check list, and ECC is on it. Otherwise the "people who build server boxes" would put non-ECC memory in it and pocket the cost differential. However geeks like that don't talk to home-PC customers. I'll bet most put ECC memory in their own systems at home though. So, how many desktop chipsets actually even support ECC these days? ALL of them do. It's on the DIMM, not the motherboard. Completely transparent. The mobo doesn't even know it's there. The DIMM is just a bit bigger; and has extra chips on it. Fits in the same slot. You just buy PC2100 ECC memory instead of PC2100 non-ECC memory. They meet the exact same specifications. The only difference is the ECC memory doesn't have errors. Ummm....No. And might I add, you really stepped in the dog poo this time... /daytripper (sic' im, Keith ;-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Linksys NAS200 questions (general questions about RAID 0, 1) | Aloke Prasad[_2_] | Storage (alternative) | 0 | August 6th 07 01:04 AM |
A few questions regarding RAM | Simeon Maxein | Overclocking | 3 | June 10th 07 06:54 PM |
Computer Set Up Questions--3 Final Questions | Skip | General | 3 | March 30th 05 01:55 PM |
SATA drive questions + raid questions | O |V| 3 G A | General | 17 | September 29th 03 11:28 PM |
SATA drive questions + raid questions | O |V| 3 G A | Homebuilt PC's | 17 | September 29th 03 11:28 PM |