Quote Originally Posted by jonny_ftm View Post
I'd care, yes. Look at the home forum of OCCT on hardware.fr (french only). I participated in the beta program. I was one of those who sputted on OCCT and its 30mn test. Now, in RAM mode, OCCT is for me the way to go.

OCCT new beta was completely redesigned for quad cores compatibility. My setup (in my sig) is stable Prime95 small/large/blend at 9x400 MHz. It never passed OCCT last beta in RAM mode above 390MHz. OCCT will stress the CPU less than Prime95, but the way calculations are made, stresses the CPU-NB-MB pathway a lot.

OCCT is not only a 30mn test. Most people banned it because of that 30mn message saying you're stable. Now, in new final release, it will be shown as: "no errors detected". The 30mn test is meant for a quick stability check only and can't be compared to a Prime95 12h run. You need to run a custom longer test, like with prime95, many hours to be safe

I won't go in a always hostile debate Prime95 or OCCT, but if you're OCCT unstable, than you're unstable. To rule it out, run OCCT in stock settings and you get your answer. You can ignore it, but you know, once in a while: you'll hang up...

I also agree saying memtest isn't a stress testing really, it only checks physical damage on memory modules. For unstable OC, it needs a really unstable one to fail
If OCCT would tell you what test it was running when it crashed, then it may be of use, but until it does, when it crashes, how do you know what to change? This is my only complaint about the program.

As I posted, I have run it, it IS part of my stability testing, but so is every other "Stress Test" Proggie with error-checking. It's not that it isn't useful...but it's not AS useful as Prime95 for me.


BTW, if you want to relate my comments to the OCCT writers, I'd much appreciate it.