Yea i need to install my Booster...I'm gonna do it "right Now"Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi_NZ
Printable View
Yea i need to install my Booster...I'm gonna do it "right Now"Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi_NZ
show us some results! :D
Don't know why i started Burn-in Without my DDR Booster... :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi_NZ
I have been Very Busy and now i have 4Days off :banana:
Anyhow this is Much Better...
@enzoR, I'm sticking to this thread like "Flys on $hit"
So you know im gonna show some results...
Also want to thank you for the "GREAT" Find!!
-Sean
Reefer_Madness over at ocforums posted this link. It might be useful for showing people what to look for. About half-way down it shows the TwinMOS/MTec chips. http://www.biwa.ne.jp/~yok/TENJIKAN-DDR.htm
OK...I'm right where you were 270@ 3.3v and that was as far as i couldQuote:
Originally Posted by trans am
go without a Reboot...I'm sure that with some more BURN they will yeild
even better ;) Right now im at 260 and its stable(Super_PI)& Sandra
so im gonna leave it there for the Burn...
-Sean
wow... now... 3.5v :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by seldomsean
just because you got into windows at 270 without a reboot doesn't mean it's stable. set in bios and boot right into memtest86 and select test. loop test 5 and 8. it's much faster at finding results, And great for burning.
Second that!Quote:
Originally Posted by enzoR
please someone point me to 512 modules ????? 10x
Gotcha!! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Rabbi_NZ
Yes i realise this...I'm gonna have to Flash to 10/15 with memtest86Quote:
just because you got into windows at 270 without a reboot doesn't mean it's stable.
as i don't have a Working floppy...
It's Reefa not Reefer _Madness...you are going to make people think bad (or good, I guess, depending on your perspective) of me posting my name that other way (Jimmy Buffet's way). You're not from the Boston area, are you...I had a teacher once from Boston that pronounced it that way. He told me I had a very "contemporary name", of course, that was back in 1973.
I believe the link above has already been posted in this thread, but I may have gotten confused (there is that Madness again) with another related thread. In any event, it is helpful but I would think most guys here probably would know a Winbond chip on sight.
The KVR has a quirk that maybe someone can help me with. I have a set that looks/appears to be the correct chips, however, there are only 54 legs/solder points (27 on each side) on the IC to PCB, instead of the typical 66 (33 on each side). That of course is how the older Kingston relabeled bh-5/bh-6 were, but these have mid 2004 (0423) production dates so they are confusing me.
I have not opened the box because they were expensive ($175 with tax for a 2x256) and since then I have ordered the TwinMOS. I was hoping that I could find a sale/rebate deal before my return period expired on these, but it doesn't really matter now, however, I'm more interested in the riddle of the 54 vs 66 legs.
Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I will probably end up returning them, as the Speed Premiums with the BP PCB appear to be a much better choice anyways.
tic tac and everyone else. I just opened my newegg package and the 512 sticks have id sticker on ram that shows 44DT suffix. Should I open them? According to tic tac's friend he's also has 44DT so the AA4T theory could be wrong. I can't see dimples with them in the box because the stickers are covering the ics.Quote:
Originally Posted by tictac
If they were advertised as AA4T and you received 44DT then you can RMA them anyway right?
May as well try them if you are guaranteed an RMA
Did tictac's friends state they had the AADTs? I tried to look at them earlier when the pictures were up and could not tell. Is it in that other thread?
It would be nice if they rock as well, maybe the key is the date on them and not the codes (4 vs D)
There was someone in this thread that says he managed 250 and one of the screenies shows 44D chips.
maybe 4 for 256mb sticks, D for 512mb?
ok, i took one of the 512's out of the pack and tried to boot her up at 2-2-2 and no dice.
won't even post. It seems these don't have dimples and are from week 43. Also where it shows the date on the ic (middle line) it reads "0443D" the good ones just had the date ex. "04464" and no D at the end.
http://xtremesystems.org/forums/atta...id=22186&stc=1
http://xtremesystems.org/forums/atta...id=22187&stc=1
Here are the good ones/ these are 256.
http://xtremesystems.org/forums/atta...id=22188&stc=1
http://xtremesystems.org/forums/atta...id=22189&stc=1
maybe if the date ends in a "4" they r the UTT?
Mine are identiacal to yours trans. But I can make out the winbond dots on the chips. No boot here either. So twinmos is saying all the NEWER stock will have the utt chips?
what is your date code sparkie?Quote:
Originally Posted by sparkie34
0443D, reset the cmos multiple times. 3.4vdimm at 200mhz no go. The dimples are real faint. I'm talking real faint.
ah man, must've said the wrong prayers.
This is getting way too complex! Mind you if anyone works this UTT riddle out it'll be you I think.
The 44D on the chips is good, trans am's 256 stick had those codes on the CHIPS, so did the guy posting over at OC Forums with the OCZ sticks. The TwiNMOS parts # is the one in question. If it ends in AA4 T they are good and if it ends in AAD T they are questionable.Quote:
Originally Posted by HermS
Some one else mentioned the 4 vs. the D on the date code. That info matches the product codes...if it performs well..it has a 4 after the date AND on the parts # label, if it doesn't, the ones with the D after the date code also have it in the part # and these do not clock as well.
The TwinMOS parts number is just indicating the same thing that is being printed on the chips themselves.
This 4 is what we should be looking for and is indicating the Winbond chips, whether or not it is a TwinMOS or an M.tec chip, they both are holding true on this.
if there is any more controversey, i am gonna get a migraine