CPU and Memory- Burn-In- Recommend?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

What are the latest recommended programs for burn-in testing of CPUs and
RAM?
I will be running them at stock speeds.

Thanks,
QZ
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 15:07:54 -0400, "QZ" <nothing> wrote:

>What are the latest recommended programs for burn-in testing of CPUs and
>RAM?
>I will be running them at stock speeds.

On a new machine I run memtest86+ www.memtest.org first for a couple of
hours, then the hard drive mfr's full scan. Both of those run without an
OS installed of course. That gives enough confidence to install the OS
after which I run Prime95's Torture Test www.mersenne.org.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message
news:uvphh153ftb325r1l1oud1u74ofpjbe03h@4ax.com...
> On a new machine I run memtest86+ www.memtest.org first for a couple of
> hours, then the hard drive mfr's full scan. Both of those run without an
> OS installed of course. That gives enough confidence to install the OS
> after which I run Prime95's Torture Test www.mersenne.org.

Well, I am using an existing HDD, so that part is optional.

As far as memtest86+ is concerned, last year, I couldn't get it to run.
IIRC, it runs from a floppy. So, I used memtest+ instead. But, I would like
advice on memtest86+.

And I used Prime95.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 14:33:44 -0400, "QZ" <nothing> wrote:

>"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message
>news:uvphh153ftb325r1l1oud1u74ofpjbe03h@4ax.com...
>> On a new machine I run memtest86+ www.memtest.org first for a couple of
>> hours, then the hard drive mfr's full scan. Both of those run without an
>> OS installed of course. That gives enough confidence to install the OS
>> after which I run Prime95's Torture Test www.mersenne.org.
>
>Well, I am using an existing HDD, so that part is optional.

Does a chkdsk show any bad sectors?

>As far as memtest86+ is concerned, last year, I couldn't get it to run.
>IIRC, it runs from a floppy. So, I used memtest+ instead. But, I would like
>advice on memtest86+.

Memtest86+ has run fine for me on recent systems - sometimes it takes them
a couple of goes to get a new memory controller/chipset just right. You can
run it from a floppy, a USB memory key or a CD-R.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

QZ <nothing> wrote:
> I guess since the HDD test is last, these are all tested
> w/o WinXP installed?

You can test with anything installed. The utils are very
small and not dependant on libs, so can be run from floppy
or bootable CD. The HDD test is best run on a disk with
some data on it, but unmounted or mounted read-only in
case it might hit access time.

> This just a Celeron D CPU; is burnK7 still recommended?

No. AFAIK Celeron D is a P7 core and I haven't released an
executable. I'm working the signals so that I can detect
throttling. None of burnP* or burnK* is all that good.
burnMMX C is probably the best, but is still not hottest.

-- Robert author `cpuburn` http://pages.sbcglobal.net/redelm
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

QZ wrote:
> What are the latest recommended programs for burn-in testing of CPUs and
> RAM?

I don't know about CPU testing, but for memory I use both MemTest86
(I've never tried MemTest86+) AND Gold Memory because I've had modules
that passed one but failed the other, most recently a Kingston 512M
PC3200 ValueRAM that always ran fine for several hours with MemTest86
but always showed errors within ten minutes with Gold Memory. The
replacement Kingston tested fine with both. www.realworldtech.com has
two reviews of memory test programs and thought highly of both
diagnostics.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message
news:eek:2mlh1pf7rlg765q2gs3kv5hfm516nmcab@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 14:33:44 -0400, "QZ" <nothing> wrote:
> >Well, I am using an existing HDD, so that part is optional.
>
> Does a chkdsk show any bad sectors?

How do you recommend checking the HDD in WinME?
It appears chkdsk only works in WinXP, which they won't have installed until
the new parts are installed.
It is an IBM Deskstar, I think they are Hitachi now, if they have a utility
would it work?
I guess it is a good idea to check the HDD and CD-ROM, (the latter is only
used for installs), so I could get replacements at the same time, if
necessary.
For CD-ROM (read only) testing, I would assume to just open files from
install CDs.

Thanks,
QZ
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

Bitstring <O-2dnfjB7oGyHbneRVn-ug@comcast.com>, from the wonderful
person QZ <nothing@?.?.invalid> said
>"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message
>news:eek:2mlh1pf7rlg765q2gs3kv5hfm516nmcab@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 14:33:44 -0400, "QZ" <nothing> wrote:
>> >Well, I am using an existing HDD, so that part is optional.
>>
>> Does a chkdsk show any bad sectors?
>
>How do you recommend checking the HDD in WinME?
>It appears chkdsk only works in WinXP, which they won't have installed until
>the new parts are installed.

You run 'scan disc' instead.

>It is an IBM Deskstar, I think they are Hitachi now, if they have a utility
>would it work?

Yes, but only if the drive is attached to an IDE channel which is one of
the two main one on the motherboard. If the drive is on a Promise
(etc.) RAID controller card (or secondary controller on the
motherboard), or (last time I looked) SATA controller, the
IBM^H^H^HHitachi utility won't be any use.

<snip>

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.chips (More info?)

On Sun, 11 Sep 2005 15:06:27 -0400, "QZ" <nothing> wrote:

>"George Macdonald" <fammacd=!SPAM^nothanks@tellurian.com> wrote in message
>news:eek:2mlh1pf7rlg765q2gs3kv5hfm516nmcab@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 14:33:44 -0400, "QZ" <nothing> wrote:
>> >Well, I am using an existing HDD, so that part is optional.
>>
>> Does a chkdsk show any bad sectors?
>
>How do you recommend checking the HDD in WinME?
>It appears chkdsk only works in WinXP, which they won't have installed until
>the new parts are installed.

I've never used WinME but I'd have thought that chkdsk would still be in it
- it's been in every other M$ OS I've seen. Other than that does WinME not
have the ability to create a Startup Disk, like Win98SE, from which you
could run a Scandisk.

>It is an IBM Deskstar, I think they are Hitachi now, if they have a utility
>would it work?

Yes, Hitachi inherited all the IBM utilities, such as DFT (Disk Fitness
Test) which you can download.

--
Rgds, George Macdonald
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom