Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Firms Get Away with Selling Untested DRAM

Posted by timothy on from the cheap-n-cheerful dept.

peppytech75 writes "Melanie Hollands in IT Manager's Journal reports that 'In recent months, some Asian DRAM memory manufacturers have been getting away with selling untested ("UTT") DRAMs. Disturbingly, the practice seems to be getting traction at the lower portion of the module business. This is being done mostly by Taiwanese DRAM makers, who are undercutting the tier-1 guys by selling untested and unmarked parts.' What's the solution here? Or is there an actual solution to what amounts to pirate companies issuing counterfeit parts?" (IT Manager's Journal, like Slashdot, is part of OSTG.)

27 of 344 comments (clear)

  1. If you're stuck with one of these... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here is the obligitory Memtest86 post. It's a great program, and chances are that you might already have a copy on your Linux install CD depending on the distro. There are even kernel patches that allow you to avoid the bad bits if they are isolated enough.

    1. Re:If you're stuck with one of these... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Although Memtest86 is absolutely great for detecting memory errors, I perfer Memtest86+.

      It's a more updated version of Memtest86 (which was last updated in November!), from the x86-secret team. It'll do the same thing, just that it will identify all the new procs and chipsets better.

      http://www.memtest.org/

      PS: I find if the RAM has any errors, the Modulo-20 test will nail them. Methinks it's test number 11 in Memtest86+.

    2. Re:If you're stuck with one of these... by Gr8Apes · · Score: 4, Funny

      Because Windows has this interesting habit of loading crap you don't need into RAM, and swapping stuff you do need out into the pagefile. If the DLL that you don't need is loaded into the memory area that's bad, then nothing bad will ever happen, as that particular piece of code will never be attempted to be read.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    3. Re:If you're stuck with one of these... by zakezuke · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm curious why Linux has issues with this... I had bad RAM for a while and didn't even know it running windows. It installed, and ran just fine for weeks. Installed Linux, and Redhat wouldn't even finish the install.. suse installed but then crashed at random times... etc.

      Was windows just getting lucky, or what?

      Are you sure it's a RAM issue. I found Redhat, and other distros hard to install when I had my old HP 2x burner. But when I upgraded to my DVD burner, the problems for the most part disappeared. It was as if the drives I was using didn't like the discs I burned, yet windows had no problem what so ever. I could install from my backup discs, never as much as an error making images, the evidence would suggest it made solid discs. To this day it remains a mystery to me, the fact that those discs still had the same problem, but if I copy those files to a HD from the very same discs, no problem.

      Another example, I thought I had a bad batch of ram. Tested bad, random reboots after being on for a while, crashing with CPU / memory intensive tasks. Drive me absolutely batty till I swapped out motherboard and the problems disappeared, and when I put in a lower speed chip in the same board, the problems also disappeared. I can only assume based on this evidence that the board in question didn't like running at 166mhz despite the fact that both are based on the same chipset, save the smaller north bridge heat sync.

      --
      There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
    4. Re:If you're stuck with one of these... by gravygraphics · · Score: 5, Informative

      Memtest86 finds really bad ram, not good ram. Without having knowledge of how each chip is internally arranged, access to the chip's test modes and the ability to control the temperature, there is no way to finish testing a modern DRAM in our lifetime.

      Just take for example, the internal layout. If you had a 512M chip and you didn't know which cells were adjacent, you would have to write a single bit and read from every other word. We are talking x cells * y reads (*2 for writes). If you read 8 I/O's in parallel (remember I am talking about a chip, not a module) than we have 512M cells * (512/8)*2 = 7.2*10^16 OR 72 megagiga operations. Assuming you can keep about 200MHz worth of useful read/writes (remember most addresses aren't in the same page)than we are talking something like 11 years... for a single test that doesn't cover refresh, voltage/temperature margining.

      Oh one more thing. Tou are really not sure if when you write a 1, the device stores it as a high charge or a low charge. Without knowing this, you will have to redo that same pattern a BUNCH of times.

      Memtest86 is like a pilot walkaround on a plane. It can spot obvious things, but I sure hope I'm not the first one to fire up that jet engine.

  2. unmarked and untested == pirated? by qwertphobia · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't follow this analogy...

    --
    Never ask for directions from a two-headed tourist! -Big Bird
    1. Re:unmarked and untested == pirated? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      It would make sense if it was DD ARRRRRRR RAM.

    2. Re:unmarked and untested == pirated? by yknott · · Score: 5, Informative

      If you RTFA, the author was saying that these unmarked and untested DRAM chips can later be marked as if they came from a Tier 1 manufacturer. These chips can then be sold for a premium, yet still less than the Tier 1 price. In that case unmarked and untested = pirated.

    3. Re:unmarked and untested == pirated? by akadruid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Piracy = buzzword = whatever you want it to mean.

      My neighbour pirated my parking space. That guy pirated my seat on the train. All it means is 'they've got my toys, mummy'.

      In the UK, we have big posters at cinemas which declare 'Piracy funds Terrorism'. Which is beautiful, since its 100% true, and depends completely on people misunderstanding it.

      --
      "Those who cast the votes decide nothing; those who count the votes decide everything." (attrib. Joseph Stalin)
    4. Re:unmarked and untested == pirated? by FidelCatsro · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I was about to say the exact same thing , This is capitalism in action .

      If these chips sell to people under no false pretense about what they are and there is a market for them then what exactly are they doing wrong .
      If they are mislabeling them then yes that is very much illegal , but mostly they make no claim to this , If you want to risk buying these chips then fair enough .
      They are mostly not pirates though and labeling them that because they are undercutting other firms sounds like a dubious marketing ploy.
      The major risk as I see it is a batch of modules gets into a major user (think IBM, H-P, and/or Dell) and fails (probably in Asia). The user goes publicly ballistic over the combination of faulty material and the supplier's inability to control the quality of its material. The press runs with it and the unlucky DRAM supplier's stock gets hammered. Some time afterward, it emerges that all the DRAM suppliers have this risk and then they all go down.
      If this hapens then its the fault of the companys such as IBM ,HP or dell for not testing these products before shipping , i very much doubt that IBM would fail to run a memory test before shipping a server though.

      If as she says they are being sold as tested moduals then this is illegal and the practice can be stoped fairly easily and is no threat to the Semi conductor bussiness .

      --
      The only things certain in war are Propaganda and Death. You can never be sure which is which though
    5. Re:unmarked and untested == pirated? by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You should make up some stickers that say "Ignorance funds Tyranny" and modify their signs a bit!

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
  3. For me, great. by Vo0k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I definitely prefer to go to shop, get the die, plug it in, run a test program for a few hours and have it replaced if I find any errors, than to pay some 80% extra for a sticker saying that some malaysian kid did it for me.

    --
    Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    1. Re:For me, great. by FireFury03 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I definitely prefer to go to shop, get the die, plug it in, run a test program for a few hours and have it replaced if I find any errors, than to pay some 80% extra for a sticker saying that some malaysian kid did it for me.

      Yes, because waiting for my mail order RAM to turn up, finding it's buggered and then having to spend a month trying to convince the supplier to get their finger out doing their slow-as-treacle RMA procedure is such a good use of my time... (Not to mention the very real chanced that the replacement RAM will be just as screwed)

      --
      http://blog.nexusuk.org
  4. Why do people buy cheap ram? by flibble-san · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These days I don't reccomend anyone to buy cheap no-name unbranded RAM. Of all the PC hardware problems I've had over the years, about 80% are down to bad faulty generic RAM. I know only use Crucial or Kingston. They check the RAM, I know the RAM I buy is going to be working. RAM is one of the most important parts of any computer system. Is it really worth saving the £3-£5 by getting cheap unbranded RAM? As the saying goes, you get what you paid for.

    --
    My other sig is crap too
    1. Re:Why do people buy cheap ram? by vadim_t · · Score: 4, Informative

      I just buy ECC RAM.

      Sure it's more expensive, but it's great. If the computer does something strange I know that I can check /proc/ram or /proc/mc/0, see the statistics and instantly find if the memory is seeing errors or not. Here I do see a corrected error or two sometimes, although very infrequently. But it's indeed very nice to know it's been corrected.

      However, even if it's ECC I still wouldn't like at all knowing that it's not been tested. ECC has limits to the corrections it can make, after all.

    2. Re:Why do people buy cheap ram? by jandrese · · Score: 4, Informative

      I was surprised at just how far companies like Kingston have to go to honor their lifetime warentee. I worked for SGI a couple of years ago and I was using a old beat up (8 years obsolete and it still performs decently!) Personal Iris 4D/35 when after a power failure it failed to boot complaining about bad memory. So I pull the thing apart and find that it has an enormous board with 16 SIMM-like slots. I pull out the offending module and notice 2 things:

      1. It is obviously some sort of custom memory module unlike any I had ever seen before, and hasn't been manufactured in years and years.
      2. It has a Kingston Memory sticker on the front.

      So, I decide to see just how good the "lifetime warentee" is. Amazingly enough, they send me an RMA label right away and within days I have a brand new memory module and the system is back up and working perfectly! I was truely amazed that they were still willing to honor their agreement (I've had many bad "lifetime" warentees before where the "lifetime" is defined as 1 year or other BS) without complaint or hesitation.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
  5. So what else is new? by Mad+Hamster · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've heard of a company in the northwestern US which has gotten away with selling untested operating systems for years.

    - Did I make first post?

    --
    Yandelvayasna grldenwi stravenka
  6. You get what you pay for. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Quality really seems to be a thing of the past. Cheaper != Better.

  7. Freemarket by XorNand · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What's the solution here?
    Huh? The freemarket seems like an ideal solution to me. Why do we need an external solution that entails fining/regulating them? If a company makes inferior product, odds are that they'll lose a large percentage of their customers. They'll be forced to either change their practices or go out of business.
    --
    Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
  8. Nothing New. by necrodeep · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The old saying stands true here... You get what you pay for. If you are going to only pay pennies on the dollar for Memory. Well you should expect a high number of failures.

    If your system memory is mission critical, you probably are going to buy top-shelf rather than bargain-basement, aren't you?

  9. Analogy for the world by jason.hall · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe we're slowly becoming a nation (world?) completely driven by prices at the expense of quality. I continuous hear things like "Why did he buy a Lexus for $50,000 when a new Hyundai is $15,000?" "This CD-R is $.10 each, this one is $.09. Why would anyone buy the $0.10 one?" People don't always get there's more to a product's specs than the price.

    1. Re:Analogy for the world by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The hyundai might be more reliable, actually. Lexus/Toyota has done some really stupid things. A car that costs $45,000 should not have ball joints that must be replaced with the entire upper suspension arm... where did all that money go, anyway? We're mostly slaves to advertising. Granted many people are free from that kind of bullshit, but most humans are susceptible.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Simple Solution by mrRay720 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really, it's easy. If they're selling untested, unmarked parts and this is a problem, just don't buy untested, unmarked parts! Let the market sort itself out. If the market decides that the cost saving here isn't worth it, the demand for slightly cheaper untested parts will surely dry up, and the manufacturers will catch on and stop trying to sell them.

    If there are enough people out there though who DO want the cost saving brought on by buying untested crap - let them! Nobody says you have to buy cheap crap if it's on the shelf. You get what you pay for. You want good quality - pay good money. You want bad quality - pay peanuts.

    Basic Economics, really. And it's not as if the likes of Crucial, Corsair, Kingston etc. are doing it.

    Why is this even an issue? I think it's commonly accepted wisdom EVERYWHERE that going for the lowest bidder will give you cheap rubbish. Computer components are no different.

  11. Not necesarily a problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This isn't necessarily a problem. If the yields on the DRAM chips are high enough, then it can make sense to NOT test the individual chips and instead wait to do the testing at the module (DIMM) level. If the chip yields are perhaps 95%, then the chance that a DIMM will be good is 0.95^8, or 66%. That may be high enough to make it worth while to avoid the cost of the chip testing.

    Now, if the chips are not tested AND the DIMMs are not tested, well that's another story...

  12. Big Deal... by jeremy_faller · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The article states that the manufactorers are finding it cheaper to have customers test the RAM, and return it. This has been the case for a number of products for a number of years. Anyone remember Motorola pagers (the POCSAG and FLEX ones)? They sold millions without testing them. It was cheaper for MOT to sell them without testing them, and just accept a number of returns.

  13. The solution is to test it yourself by gotan · · Score: 4, Informative

    Whenever we buy new RAM, mostly as part of new PCs, we run Memtest86. It's easy to do, it takes a while so do it overnight. There's so much that can go wrong with RAM, even with "good" RAM: it might not work together with the board, the SPD-timings might be off, whatever. Every once in a while we find some RAM that doesn't work for us and return it to the shop. We never had any problems at all to get it exchanged.

    For hardware-sellers it's probably more expensive if they have to factor in a certain return-rate (and the overhead for that) so they will look to it that the RAM they buy is ok. That way market forces will work for the benefits of all of us: untested RAM will, in the end, be more expensive than tested RAM. It's much easier and cheaper to do RAMtesting factoryside than having it returned by millions of customers.

    Of course that doesn't work if you buy your PC in a supermarket, but even for cheap PCs it's better to configure them yourself than buying crap. That way you can specify exactly where to save money and if anything breaks you get it fixed much quicker.

    --
    "By the way if anyone here is in advertising or marketing... kill yourself." -- Bill Hicks
  14. Re:Also try Prime95 by gkitty · · Score: 5, Informative
    I agree that memtest86 is useful but not sufficient and that prime95 is much more throrough. Memtest confirms that patterns that have been set hold their state briefly, which is a good test against gross failures (and I have seen these).

    But Prime95 confirms that no bit anywhere in nearly the complete memory space ever spuriously changes. I have seen plenty of memory that passes metest86 that fails prime95.

    Based on my experience, Corsair will replace memory that fails prime95. Mushkin will NOT (despite a "lifetime" warranty); they basically told me that memory can't be expected to be 100% perfect all the time and that prime95 was too strenuous; if it passes memtest86 there will be no replacement. My other modules (from Geil, Samsung, and a few old no-name sticks) have always been perfect. IMO it's unconscionable to sell untested ram given how hard it is to return.