Burning in Memory

[BD231]

Burn in worked on my Cosair DDR as far as I can tell, actually I think it was just using it for a month that did it. I couldn't break 180mhz at cas 2 and a month later I was able to hit 200+mhz at cas 2 no problem.

 

[RalfHutter]

Originally posted by: BD231
Burn in worked on my Cosair DDR as far as I can tell, actually I think it was just using it for a month that did it. I couldn't break 180mhz at cas 2 and a month later I was able to hit 200+mhz at cas 2 no problem.

I had exactly the same experience last spring with my XMS3200c2. I was trying to run two 512MB sticks @ DDR400 in my P4B533E board. Out of the box it would run about DDR394 MAX, no matter how I tweaked the Vdimm or CAS. I kept testing settings by running Memtest86 and finally gave up after a few days. I let it run at DDR394 for about ten days or so then I decided to try DDR400 again. Bingo! This time it worked. Nothing else in my system had changed during that time. All hardware and software was unchanged as was the system temp.

I never did, and mostly still don't, subscribe to the "burn-in" theory but that does appear to be what happened in this particular case.

 

[ErikaeanLogic]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: ErikaeanLogic

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
3 months later - you made a change that did that 😉
or its colder now.

im always retesting my computer equipment ~ never has anything gone faster 3-6 months later.

and what does breaking in a camshaft have todo with this?

Nope, system/cpu temps are virtually the same, and I have the same settings (maybe different cpu) in the BIOS now that I did 3 months ago😉. So we agree to disagree; me, with nothing but the empirical evidence/experience to back my claim🙂.

I think calling that empirical evidence is a far stretch...The fact is you and we don't know why, but basic physic and the study of electrical components tells us it wasn't burning in....

Lets just call it your experience be it as it may...Not evidence!!!

Do you know how any things it could have been??? It may have always been able to run at that speed but it took one simple bios setting and poof it works...Ram in a different slot...ram settings slightly different...cooling of the northbridge chipset...etc...

You are not burning pathways into the chips like Star Trek...the paths are already there. Either it runs or it doesn't.


I am going to go get that PM response!!!

Duvie: I understand your skepticism, and that there is no presentable white-paper to support my claim (or yours, for that matter) except that I have the data to support my claim. Do you know what the word "empirical" means? It means "relying on or derived from observation or experiment," as defined by Dictionary.com; "evidence" means "a thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment" and that is exactly what I am presenting here. I have already mentioned that the settings have been identical for 3 months for my system and (like you) I know them like the back of my hand because it took a while to get 'em to where they are now. Besides, I write everything down (settings, scores, etc.) when I am benching/optimizing my system. I guess all that chem/physics/bio lab method is coming in handy after all, eh😉?



(Not a flame, just a clarification🙂)

 

[bsr]

Originally posted by: THUGSROOK
burn in is a myth
burn out is more of a possibility

ive never in my time, ever seen anything computer run faster just because you "beat the he!! outta it".
if anything it will run worse.

🙂

Yeah but the cat died about 5 mins after... I dont think this apply's to ram, I get the same benchmarks right out of the package as I get now.


PS: JK about the cat thing (or am I ??? )

 

[LED]

Originally posted by: JJADAMS
Is it nessesary to burn in memory? Just bought Samsug pc2700

Although not necessary Some have found better results with Samsung PC2700 Burn IN

"During testing, i found that Samsung PC2700 doesn't like voltage too just like the Mushkin PC2700 but after a series of progressive burning in, this RAM can remain stable at a VMem of 2.9-3.1V. The results are simply amazing after the burn in and now Samsung PC2700 can remain stable at 209Mhz FSB at 2-2-2-5-1 which is the highest among all memory and hit an ultra high of 220Mhz with auto timings detect by SPD. Samsung PC2700 no doubt is one of the best memory choice for overclockers now along with Corsair and Mushkin but burning in is absolutely required."

 

[pelikan]

I'm a relatively ignorant bastarrrd, but here's what I did.

Progressive and enjoyable burn in for my Samsung pc2700 (DTM's, not the famous CTL's):

Set 166 fsb, 2.8V - play UT2003 1/2 hour

Go up 5 mhz fsb, same voltage, - play UT2003 1/2 hour

Keep going at 5mhz increments until UT2003 crashes, back off to last success and play as long as possible.

Back off voltage to 2.7V and desired fsb.

Run Prime95 overnight to make sure.

This seems to have worked for me. Stable at 200mhz fsb. Cas 2.5, 3, 3, 6 - not the best settings, but good enough for me.

 

[THUGSROOK]

i wouldnt call that burn in ~ id call that normal use 😉 🙂

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Jeff7
Burn in - that seems to have two meanings these days:
1) Burning in - a way of thoroughly testing a system or component for awhile to ensure that they are all working properly.
2) Burning in - a way of getting an overclocked component "used to" a higher voltage and speed.

From what I've seen, definition 1 is valid - making sure a component is working is quite good; running a few passes of Memtest86 on the RAM should be fine to see if it's in good condition.
Method 2 seems to have little evidence of actually doing anything; if it doesn't work at a certain voltage or speed, it probably won't start working after any amount of trying to force it.

The above post covers the original question nicely 🙂 but as some of the posters in this thread have attested to, their results did improve after a period of time, you can call it burn-in, attribute it to the overclock elves (they don't do shoes anymore 😛 ), magic pixie dust, or a multitude of other factors but the fact remains their results did improve. I have had the same experience with various AMD CPUs and Crucial and Samsung memory so my results add to the statistical evidence which suggests that a "burning-in" as defined by option 2 seems to have some validity. In the end analysis, individual results will be the primary influence on which side of this issue you stand and regardless of wether it's factual or the term burn-in is a misnomer of sorts it will remain a self-perpetuating myth. Hell, some dead guy confessed on his death bed that he is responsible for the whole big foot myth and yet people are coming outta the woodwork to emphatically vouche for it's reality, so as you can see myths die hard even in the face of evidence to the contrary 😉

Yeah, Yeah, I know, what does big foot have to do with cats and cam shafts 😛😉

 

[ErikaeanLogic]

Originally posted by: DAPUNISHER

Originally posted by: Jeff7
Burn in - that seems to have two meanings these days:
1) Burning in - a way of thoroughly testing a system or component for awhile to ensure that they are all working properly.
2) Burning in - a way of getting an overclocked component "used to" a higher voltage and speed.

From what I've seen, definition 1 is valid - making sure a component is working is quite good; running a few passes of Memtest86 on the RAM should be fine to see if it's in good condition.
Method 2 seems to have little evidence of actually doing anything; if it doesn't work at a certain voltage or speed, it probably won't start working after any amount of trying to force it.

The above post covers the original question nicely 🙂 but as some of the posters in this thread have attested to, their results did improve after a period of time, you can call it burn-in, attribute it to the overclock elves (they don't do shoes anymore 😛 ), magic pixie dust, or a multitude of other factors but the fact remains their results did improve. I have had the same experience with various AMD CPUs and Crucial and Samsung memory so my results add to the statistical evidence which suggests that a "burning-in" as defined by option 2 seems to have some validity. In the end analysis, individual results will be the primary influence on which side of this issue you stand and regardless of wether it's factual or the term burn-in is a misnomer of sorts it will remain a self-perpetuating myth. Hell, some dead guy confessed on his death bed that he is responsible for the whole big foot myth and yet people are coming outta the woodwork to emphatically vouche for it's reality, so as you can see myths die hard even in the face of evidence to the contrary 😉

Yeah, Yeah, I know, what does big foot have to do with cats and cam shafts 😛😉

werd😉

 

[DAPUNISHER]

OK kids, I saw this posted in the Highly technical forum and one of Anandtech's pre-imminent Intel employees pm makes a rather definitive reply on the topic. link