Hi all; I've upgraded memory in an old mobo. The results are confusing.

I've tried running memtst86, but this hangs after only a few seconds and
needs power cycling to get back control. (Runs fine with the original
memory re-installed).

However, the OS (linux mint) seems to run just fine. Indeed, I'm typing
this on the upgraded machine.

I've spoken to Crucial, who asked me to try moving memory around
(already done, to no effect) and then suggested a BIOS upgrade. I don't
really want to do that just 'on spec', although I know there have been
several updates in the 9 years since I bought the box.

The memory timings are different: the old memory is 9-9-9-24, with a
1330MHz clock. New is 11-11-11-28 at 1596MHz. The BIOS controls that
might affect clock rate seem inoperative, or I'd try under-clocking.

Any thoughts please about whether I should just let well alone?

Mobo is Gigabyte GA-B75-D3V, rev 1.1; BIOS is version f8a. memtst86 is
whatever is in the Mint 20 repo. Upgrade was from 2 x 2Gb to 2 x 8Gb.

--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England

On 21 Jun 2021 at 09:51:13 BST, "Mike Scott"
<usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

> I've spoken to Crucial, who asked me to try moving memory around
> (already done, to no effect) and then suggested a BIOS upgrade. I don't
> really want to do that just 'on spec', although I know there have been
> several updates in the 9 years since I bought the box.

Do the BIOS upgrade. They are usually for compatibility with attached
devices, special handling and looser timing options etc.

Cheers - Jaimie
--
BANACH TARSKI is an anagram of BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI

On 21/06/2021 10:54, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
> On 21 Jun 2021 at 09:51:13 BST, "Mike Scott"
> <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> I've spoken to Crucial, who asked me to try moving memory around
>> (already done, to no effect) and then suggested a BIOS upgrade. I don't
>> really want to do that just 'on spec', although I know there have been
>> several updates in the 9 years since I bought the box.
>
> Do the BIOS upgrade. They are usually for compatibility with attached
> devices, special handling and looser timing options etc.
>
> Cheers - Jaimie
>

Done (with considerable trepidation).

Makes no difference :-{

My problem is whether memtst86 is faulty somehow, or whether the OS will
eventually get round to hitting whatever memtst86 is finding.

I don't have much faith in Crucial for help with their memory on such an
old mobo. They've made the obvious suggestions, and if it's a BIOS
issue, they're hardly likely to approach Gigabyte for a fix I reckon.
IMBW; but I don't have time/patience for that route.

The question is whether to complain to the vendor (laptopsdirect) or
just hope it'll work in practice.

--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England

On 21 Jun 2021 at 19:22:20 BST, "Mike Scott"
<usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

> On 21/06/2021 10:54, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
>> On 21 Jun 2021 at 09:51:13 BST, "Mike Scott"
>> <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> I've spoken to Crucial, who asked me to try moving memory around
>>> (already done, to no effect) and then suggested a BIOS upgrade. I don't
>>> really want to do that just 'on spec', although I know there have been
>>> several updates in the 9 years since I bought the box.
>>
>> Do the BIOS upgrade. They are usually for compatibility with attached
>> devices, special handling and looser timing options etc.
>>
>>     Cheers - Jaimie
>>
>
> Done (with considerable trepidation).
>
> Makes no difference :-{

Boo.

> My problem is whether memtst86 is faulty somehow, or whether the OS will
> eventually get round to hitting whatever memtst86 is finding.

More likely the latter. The best memory error I had only showed as image
corruption in very long Firefox pages. No other issues at all.

When I finally got around to trying to work out why, one of the two 4gig
RAM sticks was completely badgered. Immediately identified by memtest86
with errors racking up as soon as it started.

How the OS could run, let alone run fine, is beyond me.

> The question is whether to complain to the vendor (laptopsdirect) or
> just hope it'll work in practice.

Depends if you want to spend the hour or two of time on it really. I
would.

    Cheers - Jaimie
--
"the first successful time machine will be used to retrieve
lost Doctor Who episode footage." - KKC, ugvm

On 21/06/2021 20:22, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
> On 21 Jun 2021 at 19:22:20 BST, "Mike Scott"
> <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 21/06/2021 10:54, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
>>> On 21 Jun 2021 at 09:51:13 BST, "Mike Scott"
>>> <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've spoken to Crucial, who asked me to try moving memory around
>>>> (already done, to no effect) and then suggested a BIOS upgrade. I don't
>>>> really want to do that just 'on spec', although I know there have been
>>>> several updates in the 9 years since I bought the box.
>>>
>>> Do the BIOS upgrade. They are usually for compatibility with attached
>>> devices, special handling and looser timing options etc.
>>>
>>>     Cheers - Jaimie
>>>
>>
>> Done (with considerable trepidation).
>>
>> Makes no difference :-{
>
> Boo.
>
>> My problem is whether memtst86 is faulty somehow, or whether the OS will
>> eventually get round to hitting whatever memtst86 is finding.
>
> More likely the latter. The best memory error I had only showed as image
> corruption in very long Firefox pages. No other issues at all.
>
> When I finally got around to trying to work out why, one of the two 4gig
> RAM sticks was completely badgered. Immediately identified by memtest86
> with errors racking up as soon as it started.
>
> How the OS could run, let alone run fine, is beyond me.
>
>> The question is whether to complain to the vendor (laptopsdirect) or
>> just hope it'll work in practice.
>
> Depends if you want to spend the hour or two of time on it really. I
> would.
>
>     Cheers - Jaimie
>

Thanks for the input.

I remember back in student days - glorious days of black vinyl - buying
a test record from the local record shop. "You'll never know whether
it's faulty equipment or the record" the guy quipped.

Seems in this case it's the test record. I googled for similar issues,
and landed up downloading a standalone USB bootable version from
memtst86.com, as this would generate a log file (the mint-supplied
version can't do this). I didn't need the log though: the test runs
perfectly. Two hours and at least 4 passes with zero errors found.

So it looks like a fault in the mint/ubuntu packaged version, which
hangs reliably at 35% through the first test. Not sure whether to file a
bug report, or even who to, on this one.

Thanks again.

--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England

On 22 Jun 2021 at 11:20:06 BST, "Mike Scott"
<usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:

>
> So it looks like a fault in the mint/ubuntu packaged version, which
> hangs reliably at 35% through the first test. Not sure whether to file a
> bug report, or even who to, on this one.
>

That's a good result. Pretty peculiar but it'll do!

    Cheers - Jaimie
--
It's important to be comfortable in your own skin
because it's illegal to wear someone else's.

On 21/06/2021 20:22, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
> On 21 Jun 2021 at 19:22:20 BST, "Mike Scott"
> <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 21/06/2021 10:54, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
>>> On 21 Jun 2021 at 09:51:13 BST, "Mike Scott"
>>> <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I've spoken to Crucial, who asked me to try moving memory around
>>>> (already done, to no effect) and then suggested a BIOS upgrade. I don't
>>>> really want to do that just 'on spec', although I know there have been
>>>> several updates in the 9 years since I bought the box.
>>>
>>> Do the BIOS upgrade. They are usually for compatibility with attached
>>> devices, special handling and looser timing options etc.
>>>
>>>     Cheers - Jaimie
>>>
>>
>> Done (with considerable trepidation).
>>
>> Makes no difference :-{
>
> Boo.
>
>> My problem is whether memtst86 is faulty somehow, or whether the OS will
>> eventually get round to hitting whatever memtst86 is finding.

There's another possibility - whatever media you're booting memtest from
is partially knackered. Can you verify the burned memtest image, or try
another USB stick?

--
Chris

On 28/06/2021 12:27, Chris Ridd wrote:
> On 21/06/2021 20:22, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
>> On 21 Jun 2021 at 19:22:20 BST, "Mike Scott"
>> <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/06/2021 10:54, Jaimie Vandenbergh wrote:
>>>> On 21 Jun 2021 at 09:51:13 BST, "Mike Scott"
>>>> <usenet.16@scottsonline.org.uk.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I've spoken to Crucial, who asked me to try moving memory around
>>>>> (already done, to no effect) and then suggested a BIOS upgrade. I
>>>>> don't
>>>>> really want to do that just 'on spec', although I know there have been
>>>>> several updates in the 9 years since I bought the box.
>>>>
>>>> Do the BIOS upgrade. They are usually for compatibility with attached
>>>> devices, special handling and looser timing options etc.
>>>>
>>>>      Cheers - Jaimie
>>>>
>>>
>>> Done (with considerable trepidation).
>>>
>>> Makes no difference :-{
>>
>> Boo.
>>
>>> My problem is whether memtst86 is faulty somehow, or whether the OS will
>>> eventually get round to hitting whatever memtst86 is finding.
>
> There's another possibility - whatever media you're booting memtest from
> is partially knackered. Can you verify the burned memtest image, or try
> another USB stick?
>

I see someone else has a similar issue (just replied to their thread).

It turns out the distributed memtst (installed on the system HD) from
the mint repo looks duff: a fresh USB version "from the makers" has run
for hours without issue.

Thanks for the followup; but I think it's safe to declare this one "closed"!

--
Mike Scott
Harlow, England