Determining the type of Heatware feedback

Status
Not open for further replies.

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
Hello,

I'm not sure this should be in Off Topic, but I saw similar questions of this nature in this forum, so I put it here.

I recently bought some RAM on the FS/FT board. It's this RAM:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231145

Here's a summary:

I asked the seller if he had memtested the RAM, and he said it was working but did not have a DDR2 system to test it in -- the RAM was not sold AS-IS. I said we'll go ahead and give it a try.

The RAM arrived on saturday, and I began using memtest86+ to test its condition; all testing was done at the specified RAM timings (DDR2-1000 5-5-5-15) and voltage (2.1) and stock CPU/FSB unless otherwise mentioned. I did get an error on pass 2, test 8.

I did some googling to find that a couple of the other timings (i.e. not the primary 5-5-5-15) should not be left on auto, as the motherboard may be too aggressive in selecting these. This fixed the issue in single channel mode for memtest, but I was getting page faults in ubuntu. The ram will not POST at all in dual channel mode at its specified speed of DDR2-1000. I ran a barrage of tests in different slots and configurations, but I could not get it to run at it's specified settings.

I decided to boot the RAM at my normal settings of 333 FSB, and since I cannot use 1000, I used 887 for the RAM in dual channel mode. This seems to work fine. I ran some games in windows, ran memtest throughout the night, and haven't seen any odd behaviour.

I informed the seller, and I said we could either fully return it, or he could just knock off $10 from the price (45 was the sale price) and I'll keep it as is. He said to return it, so I asked if he'd pay return shipping. He doesn't believe he should, and I'm not going to say either of us is right. It may simply be the difference between what I consider good "customer service" and just doing the required amount. In either case, it's subjective.

His view (obviously, I'm not him, so I'm only going by his PMs), is that it works and he said he couldn't test it, so it should be on me. My view is that it's the same as if I bought a CPU that is sold as working whose stock speed was 2.4ghz but wouldn't run at anything above 2ghz: it means the product isn't "working" -- that's an AS-IS sale to me. The packaging wasn't excellent (one of those yellow envelopes with the memory in anti-static bag then wrapped in a piece of bubble wrap), but I cannot say for certain that it had any bearing on its performance after being received, as he couldn't test it prior to being shipped.

So that's a basic summary of what happened. I've decided to just RMA to G.Skill, since if I have to pay return shipping, I might as well ship to them and get a good product back rather than return to him and then find another seller and buy more RAM (which has more shipping costs in the price somewhere).

We both agree to disagree, and as far as I'm concerned the matter is finished aside from what to leave in the heat. I believe the details of the transaction are more important, but should it be positive or neutral? I certainly wouldn't say it's negative, as he has offered to accept it back if I pay return shipping; this may be the minimum required in this situation, so perhaps that's enough for it to be considered positive. Perhaps the fact that we couldn't come to an agreed upon solution is enough for it to be considered neutral, unless I'm being unreasonable by wanting him to pay for the shipping.

It is up to me, and at least partially subjective (which perhaps makes it entirely subjective). I'm trying to be objective, and I'm on the fence. It's not a big deal to me at this point -- it's not a large purchase and I should be able to get a good product back from G.Skill.

I notified him that I would be making this post, and I will send him the link so he may add or clarify anything he feels necessary if he chooses to do so.

If this is inappropriate for this forum, or if this is violating an unwritten rule (or some rule I have yet to see), let me know, and I'll remove it. I'm trying to be objective and leave fair and honest feedback.

What are your thoughts?
 

SunnyD

Belgian Waffler
Jan 2, 2001
32,674
146
106
www.neftastic.com
What are your thoughts?

tl;dr.

---

Okay, now I read.

#1 - Did you verify the mobo QVL list that this memory was in fact certified for use on this mobo?
#2 - Did you post on the G.Skill forums to verify whether G.Skill did/did not independently test this memory kit with your mobo?

Basically, did you do your homework before buying?

#3 - Did you have another motherboard to test in barring #1/#2? (Doubt it, otherwise you wouldn't be here)

#4 - You bought an untested piece of hardware. That alone right there merits discussion BEFORE the purchase.

#5 - The seller offered to refund you upon return. Paying return shipping (unless this was gross negligence) is on the buyer imho. Most retail outlets will charge you return shipping and/or a restocking fee.

As far as an eval goes... leave whatever you see fit. Do NOT leave a neg as the seller offered you the option of returning it. A neutral would be a stretch at best, but plausible regarding the circumstances. If communication was good, goods were provided, and the buyer attempted to resolve the situation (which he did), I'd rate the deal somewhere between neutral and positive.
 
Last edited:

DesiPower

Lifer
Nov 22, 2008
15,299
740
126
Hello,

*Snip*

Here's a summary:

I asked the seller if he had memtested the RAM, and he said it was working but did not have a DDR2 system to test it in -- the RAM was not sold AS-IS. I said we'll go ahead and give it a try.

The RAM arrived on saturday, and I began using memtest86+ to test its condition; all testing was done at the specified RAM timings (DDR2-1000 5-5-5-15) and voltage (2.1) and stock CPU/FSB unless otherwise mentioned. I did get an error on pass 2, test 8.

I did some googling to find that a couple of the other timings (i.e. not the primary 5-5-5-15) should not be left on auto, as the motherboard may be too aggressive in selecting these. This fixed the issue in single channel mode for memtest, but I was getting page faults in ubuntu. The ram will not POST at all in dual channel mode at its specified speed of DDR2-1000. I ran a barrage of tests in different slots and configurations, but I could not get it to run at it's specified settings.

I decided to boot the RAM at my normal settings of 333 FSB, and since I cannot use 1000, I used 887 for the RAM in dual channel mode. This seems to work fine. I ran some games in windows, ran memtest throughout the night, and haven't seen any odd behaviour.

I informed the seller, and I said we could either fully return it, or he could just knock off $10 from the price (45 was the sale price) and I'll keep it as is. He said to return it, so I asked if he'd pay return shipping. He doesn't believe he should, and I'm not going to say either of us is right. It may simply be the difference between what I consider good "customer service" and just doing the required amount. In either case, it's subjective.

His view (obviously, I'm not him, so I'm only going by his PMs), is that it works and he said he couldn't test it, so it should be on me. My view is that it's the same as if I bought a CPU that is sold as working whose stock speed was 2.4ghz but wouldn't run at anything above 2ghz: it means the product isn't "working" -- that's an AS-IS sale to me. The packaging wasn't excellent (one of those yellow envelopes with the memory in anti-static bag then wrapped in a piece of bubble wrap), but I cannot say for certain that it had any bearing on its performance after being received, as he couldn't test it prior to being shipped.

So that's a basic summary of what happened. I've decided to just RMA to G.Skill, since if I have to pay return shipping, I might as well ship to them and get a good product back rather than return to him and then find another seller and buy more RAM (which has more shipping costs in the price somewhere).

We both agree to disagree, and as far as I'm concerned the matter is finished aside from what to leave in the heat. I believe the details of the transaction are more important, but should it be positive or neutral? I certainly wouldn't say it's negative, as he has offered to accept it back if I pay return shipping; this may be the minimum required in this situation, so perhaps that's enough for it to be considered positive. Perhaps the fact that we couldn't come to an agreed upon solution is enough for it to be considered neutral, unless I'm being unreasonable by wanting him to pay for the shipping.

It is up to me, and at least partially subjective (which perhaps makes it entirely subjective). I'm trying to be objective, and I'm on the fence. It's not a big deal to me at this point -- it's not a large purchase and I should be able to get a good product back from G.Skill.

I notified him that I would be making this post, and I will send him the link so he may add or clarify anything he feels necessary if he chooses to do so.

If this is inappropriate for this forum, or if this is violating an unwritten rule (or some rule I have yet to see), let me know, and I'll remove it. I'm trying to be objective and leave fair and honest feedback.

What are your thoughts?

o_O

thats TTTldr for a "summary"
 

olds

Elite Member
Mar 3, 2000
50,113
775
126
"I said we'll go ahead and give it a try."
Pay to ship it back.
You didn't buy it from a retail store.

And never, ever buy anything used that might have been overclocked. (Not saying this was)
 

ahenkel

Diamond Member
Jan 11, 2009
5,357
3
81
Just see if he'll cover the cost to ship it to G.Skill for the RMA. I did that once and the buyer was happy.
 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
o_O

thats TTTldr for a "summary"

Why bother posting? I wouldn't be able to get any meaningful responses without providing necessary information. If I did cut out a lot of it, I would imagine people would either give uninformed responses or end up asking questions which would have already been answered had I not cut it out.

"I said we'll go ahead and give it a try."
Pay to ship it back.
You didn't buy it from a retail store.

And never, ever buy anything used that might have been overclocked. (Not saying this was)

I understand this, but I've already decided to just RMA rather than ship back to him (as I said, it's less to ship once, rather than ship to him, then pay for shipping for another purchase).

Just see if he'll cover the cost to ship it to G.Skill for the RMA. I did that once and the buyer was happy.

If he wasn't willing to pay for shipping back to him, why would he pay for shipping to G.Skill?
 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
Okay, now I read.

#1 - Did you verify the mobo QVL list that this memory was in fact certified for use on this mobo?
#2 - Did you post on the G.Skill forums to verify whether G.Skill did/did not independently test this memory kit with your mobo?

Basically, did you do your homework before buying?

#3 - Did you have another motherboard to test in barring #1/#2? (Doubt it, otherwise you wouldn't be here)

#4 - You bought an untested piece of hardware. That alone right there merits discussion BEFORE the purchase.

#5 - The seller offered to refund you upon return. Paying return shipping (unless this was gross negligence) is on the buyer imho. Most retail outlets will charge you return shipping and/or a restocking fee.

As far as an eval goes... leave whatever you see fit. Do NOT leave a neg as the seller offered you the option of returning it. A neutral would be a stretch at best, but plausible regarding the circumstances. If communication was good, goods were provided, and the buyer attempted to resolve the situation (which he did), I'd rate the deal somewhere between neutral and positive.

Thanks, that's the kind of information I was looking for. I agree with you, and think it is somewhere between neutral and positive. Lacking that, I suppose I'll "round up" and give him the positive.
 

frostedflakes

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2005
7,925
1
81
Have you verified that the memory is actually receiving 2.1V? On my mobo for example the 1.8V setting in the BIOS only seems to feed the memory 1.71V according to HWMonitor. You might fire up a temp monitoring program like this to confirm the sticks are getting all the voltage they need. Make sure cooling is adequate as well, higher voltage memory like that can get pretty warm, which could cause instability.

With respect to the transaction, he may not have advertised it as-is, but you basically knew that's what you were getting when you asked him and he said that as far as he knew it was working fine, but he was not able to actually run Memtest to verify this. You bought this fully aware that it was untested. Just my $0.02, though. I still think the seller should probably do a partial refund (cover shipping or something like that) just as a nice gesture, though.
 

KingofFah

Senior member
May 14, 2002
895
0
76
Have you verified that the memory is actually receiving 2.1V? On my mobo for example the 1.8V setting in the BIOS only seems to feed the memory 1.71V according to HWMonitor. You might fire up a temp monitoring program like this to confirm the sticks are getting all the voltage they need. Make sure cooling is adequate as well, higher voltage memory like that can get pretty warm, which could cause instability.

With respect to the transaction, he may not have advertised it as-is, but you basically knew that's what you were getting when you asked him and he said that as far as he knew it was working fine, but he was not able to actually run Memtest to verify this. You bought this fully aware that it was untested. Just my $0.02, though. I still think the seller should probably do a partial refund (cover shipping or something like that) just as a nice gesture, though.

I did verify voltages, which I should have mentioned. I cannot test temperature other than putting my hands on them to say they are warm to the touch during memtest which is highly subjective. However, I considered this and there is a case intake fan blowing almost directly on them alone with an out fan above them. It shouldn't be a cooling issue.

I'd say he's selling it as working condition, not as is, his argument is that it is working, mine is that it's not (my CPU analogy, or perhaps a car with a transmission in fail safe mode which should be sold as is).

To repeat, he has offered to refund, but I would pay the return shipping to him. I believe he should pay, but I'm probably asking too much. If I am going to pay shipping, then I might as well RMA rather than ship it to him, as I noted in the post and response to oldsmoboat.
 

olds

Elite Member
Mar 3, 2000
50,113
775
126
Yet this account is from June 2001....

128970106887017484.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.