Unusual RAM Problem - Help???

Ok gang... need some help on this one...

I purchased a 2 GB stick of RAM off Ebay that was listed as new and unopened. I received the item and installed it in my system and checked my specs afterwards using My Computer/Properties. It showed 2.93 GB of RAM, which I thought was odd. So I ran Everest Ultimate and it shows I have one stick of 2GB (which was installed when the system was built) and one stick with 960 MB.

I decided to take the RAM out and inspect it and this is where things go sideways. First of all, the RAM I purchased was K-Byte brand. The RAM I took out of the system was indeed a 2 GB stick of K-Byte but I noticed that there was another manufacturer's sticker under the K-Byte one. So I carefully removed the top sticker to find a sticker for Avant brand RAM. But this sticker reads that it's 2 GB as well.

So what gives? Is it possible for a stick of RAM to somehow lose more than half of it's original size? Any help is appreciated!

 

K-Byte is manufactured by Avant

 

Thanks for that info!

But what about the actual RAM on the stick? Why is only 1 GB showing from a 2 GB stick of RAM?

 

Try pulling the original 2GB stick (the one you know is good) and running Everest again to see if it's some sort of compatibility problem. Also, if your BIOS will show it, check there with only the new stick installed. Lastly, you could run a program like memtest to check it out. Unfortunately though, in my opinion it's probably a bad stick of RAM. If it is bad, you can contact the seller and ask for a refund, if he won't cooperate go through paypal and they'll fix you up.

 

Your motherboard may not be able to support 4GB.
What motherboard do you have?
Or what make and model of machine?

 

I will assume you are using a 32Bit OS and have identified the common problem experienced by many:

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=3...s=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a

Long story short the 32Bit OS can only utilise ~3.25GB of RAM, a portion becomes dedicated to your Video, etc, etc. With Win 7 it becomes even more complicated depending on "how many features" you have turned on:

 

Quick query: this is alleviated with the 64-bit?

 

Wow! Thanks for that info! Seems I've gone a while without learning my "something new every day" and this is a big one! Looks like I owe an apology to an Ebay seller for calling him a scam artist! rolleyes

 

As stated a 64Bit OS can use as much RAM as the motherboard can handle (in some cases 24GB), BUT you need a CPU that can "function" in a 64Bit environment as well. That is be able to process 64Bit instruction sets, a lot of older CPUs cannot and you need to determine this before getting a 64Bit OS.

Here is an old thread I created which discusses what you need to consider for 4Gb or more of RAM:
Before you buy 4Gb: Things you need to know

 

Wait, your old RAM was also a 2GB stick? So you have two 2GB memory sticks and one of them shows as 1GB?

If that's the case, count the number of little black squares on them and let us know how many you have on each. You should have twice as many on one than on the other.

 

Also... it could be that you r new RAM module is high density, which will also cause this sort of issue. Check out this link:

http://www.overclock.net/faqs/113885-info-what-difference-between-low-density.html

Maybe go back to the eBay link that you bougt it from, they will usually identify it as high density on the ad.

 

First of all, that explanation is from August of 2006, which makes it four years old. In an industry that moves as fast as the semi-conductor manufacturing, that makes it obsolete and no longer relevant.

Second, it is incorrect in every way possible. You are not helping anyone by spreading that kind of misinformation here.

 

I myself have made that mistake.
Contacted the seller with my machine specs and was found to be incompatable.
They exchanged for the correct type I needed for free.

 

With all due respect Mimsy, I''m not sure it is misinformation. Yes... the post I used as a reference is older, but is the information irrelevant? I have seen inexpensive RAM stick bought off of eBay and advertised as 'high-density' display this exact same symptom. If I am somehow incorrect (which is always a possibility), could you explain why? This way, I know for future reference.

 

The information is irrelevant primarily because of its age. It's obsolete. You're looking at the manual for the first ever Ford and trying to apply that info to this year's model. It's also irrelevant because it doesn't distinguish between component organization and density, and because it doesn't even have the courtesy to spell out that what applies to DDR does not apply to DDR2 or DDR3.

The phrase "high density 1GB modules are mainly manufacturing process rejects/seconds that cannot be made as a low density modules" is complete and total fantasy. Rejects are not sold, since manufacturers like to stay in business, and intentionally selling Kingston, Corsair, or Crucial components that don't work when they test them makes these companies angry, and they won't buy from you anymore. Result: Bankruptcy. So they're not rejects, since rejects are scrapped.

The second-rate parts are sold to no-brand RAM brands/companies who want cheap parts and don't want as large volumes as one of the three I just mention. Kingston, Corsair, and Crucial get the good stuff because they are well established and not about to go out of business any time soon, so the manufacturers are willing to extend them better credit. They can afford to pay for the first-rate components, so that's what they get, of whichever density the manufacturer can offer. The company No-Name Anonymous Brand can't afford that, so they get the lower left-overs. Not all RAM is created equal.

The statement "HIGH DENSITY modules only have 10% compatibility and are VERY SLOW." is grossly misleading, at best. Cheap memory has compatibility problems and performance issues, for reasons I just outlined. High density modules work just fine on any chipset that can handle them, and how large a majority of systems that is once again varies if we're talking about DDR, DDR2, or DDR3. As far as "faster" that has more to do with other specs of the RAM, though typically a high density module will use a little bit less power and emanate a little bit less heat, simply by virtue of having fewer ICs soldered to the PCB.

I'm not going to go through and break that thing down line for line and spell out all its mistakes because that would take me all day, these two examples will have to do. Just take my word for it, things have changed considerably in the semi-conductor business in the past four years, and a quick trip to google will tell you that the internet has not caught up. All information you can find out there is years old, and what little of it is correct, no longer applies to DDR2 and DDR3. Don't even get me started on the wikipedia article!

By the way, if OP has 2GB modules in a desktop computer taking unbuffered non-ECC, he most likely has a DDR2 system, and that in itself another clue as to why that post doesn't apply, since it only addresses DDR. When a DDR2 computer (or one that uses DDR3) has component density problems, it has nothing to do with how much you paid for the RAM or where you bought it. For DDR2 it has to do with whether the chipset on the motherboard can handle 1Gb ICs or if it's stuck on using only 512Mb ones, and if it can use either one, can it mix them or do you have to pick one and stick with it?

Symptoms of density problems include but are not limited to, the motherboard disabling the slot with the incompatible density installed, registering the higher density module as half of what's printed on the label (i.e. seeing a 2GB modules as 1GB), or failing to POST.

 

Thanks for the info. In reading what you said, this quote here in particular makes alot of sense:

"The phrase "high density 1GB modules are mainly manufacturing process rejects/seconds that cannot be made as a low density modules" is complete and total fantasy. Rejects are not sold, since manufacturers like to stay in business, and intentionally selling Kingston, Corsair, or Crucial components that don't work when they test them makes these companies angry, and they won't buy from you anymore. Result: Bankruptcy. So they're not rejects, since rejects are scrapped."

I neglected to take into account that the RAM is manufactured by Avant and not a no-name brand. Your information makes alot of sense. Thank you for taking the time to clarify the issue. I was simply trying to address one of many possibilities for the problem.

 

Not so fast ^^ have you checked that the new RAM on it's own, reads as 2GB within Windows?

 

In fairness, when DDR was new component density was a considerable problem and one that a lot of the involved companies tried their best to completely deny, while blaming everything on each other. End result of that was that the consumers who just wanted to upgrade their computers got stuck in the middle, with incompatible parts and no explanation, and were forced to do their own research. Unfortunately that was made very difficult by the fact that said involved companies absolutely refused to share any information at all about the issue, and as a result, empty and often uninformed speculation was mistaken for facts and to this day continues to be treated as fact. It doesn't make it any easier to do your own research now that the various manufacturers, wise from their past mistakes, are starting to be more forthcoming with these things.

And while I personally would rather purchase Corsair than Avant, I agree that they're certainly not a no-brand garbage RAM company in any way. They make a very solid product, especially considering the price tag.

I apologize if my tone was a bit harsh earlier, by the way. I spend 40 hours a week explaining things like these to people who not only are ignorant, but convinced that they are in fact very well informed and that I am either stupid or lying to them, and as a result I tend to get frustrated and short-tempered when I find myself doing RAM support for free on my own time as well... so I'm sorry if I was a bit sharp about this, and I appreciate that you didn't take it personally.

 

Mimsy,

Being that you work in the industry, how about explaining the difference between single sided and doubled sided memory chips. I'm curious! Thanks!

 

One has ICs on both sides of the PCB, the other has ICs on only one side.

I know that's not helpful, but the question is far too vague to be answered conclusively. Are we talking DDR or DDR2? Are we talking performance or are we talking compatibility? What capacity? DIMM or SODIMM?

Simply asking about single-sided as compared to double-sided is unfortunately about as vague as asking what the difference is between a Ford and a Toyota. It's impossible to answer unless you give more detail, not to mention that if you're interested in gas mileage, the name of the car brand has no impact whatsoever on that number.

 

Sorry for being vague! I was only asking about compatability issues, and am not concerned with SODIMM, as I generally deal with desktops.

As you mentioned chip count per side of the PCB in your earlier reply, I was curious as to whether this applied to density?

While I have ran into single sided vs double sided memory chip problems with the PC 100/133 memory, so far I haven't with the later newest types.

Only asking to further what little knowledge that I have!

 

Chip count and density are related, in that density affects chip count.

I'm guessing that your problems were with a single-sided 256MB module when combined with a double-sided 256MB module... yes or no? If it was, that has to do with mixing component density. (Going to assume non-ECC since you said you deal with desktops, not servers.)

A single-sided 256MB module has 8 ICs on the board. Each of these eight is a 256Mb component, and when added up that comes to a total of 2048Mb. However, since that's megabits and not megabytes, you need to divide it by 8 to get to how many megabytes that is (8bits = 1 byte). 2048Mb divided by 8 is 256MB, making this a single-sided high density 256MB module. If you add eight more 256Mb ICs, you end up with a double-sided high density 512MB module. These two, you should be able to install together, because they both have 256Mb density.

Now, let's look at a double-sided 256MB, with eight ICs on each side of the PCB. Same number of megabytes, but twice the number of ICs. Doing the math again tells us that means it has 128Mb ICs. 128Mb times 16 comes to 2048Mb, and divided by eight to get the number of megabytes that once again ends up with 256MB, in the form of a double-sided low density module. If you try to mix this with either one of the modules from the first example, that's when you can run into problems. The reason you do is because you're trying to use a 128Mb ICs together with 256Mb ICs. You'll notice that the 512MB one from the first example is double-sided, just like our low-density 256MB module, however these two double-sided ones may refuse to work together, since they have different IC density.

Not all early chipsets--all SDR ones count as early, but this also apply to the first chipsets of each new generation, the first DDR ones, the first DDR2 ones, the first DDR3 ones--can handle higher densities, and those that can often have difficulties mixing high with low. In some cases you might get lucky and be able to resolve that by updating the BOIS, but depressingly often you find yourself in a situation where your only choice is to discard the older RAM and buy all new upgrades since very few manufacturers bother making low-density SDR or DDR anymore. The high density modules get you twice as many ICs out of a silicon wafer, it's simply a matter of economics.

Note that the IC density is not spelled out as a part of the modules specifications, since it's not required by the JEDEC standard. It's too expensive to rebuild the label printing machines in the manufacturing plants for a problem that affects only a small portion of the market. Unfortunately, that means the only way for you to find out the density of the ICs on a module you are about to buy is to physically look at it, count the ICs, and do the math.

Does that roughly answer your question?

And if you say "no" I'm going to smack you because that took for-freaking-ever to write up! I hate math... :-D

 

I was recently grappling to understand this concept and ran across this thread in particular that made it all so much clearer.

http://www.techsupportforum.com/har...upport/287320-hi-density-low-density-ram.html

Good Luck

 

Sadly also a very old post, but at least that one looks far more accurate and holds true for DDR. Note that the "more expensive" part for high density is reversed today. Hardly anyone makes the low density modules, so they are far more rare (treated as proprietary, actually), and they are older... not a good combination for pricing of a computer component.

 

Mimsy,

Yes that answered my question! And I don't want to get smacked. Appreciate the time and effort that you put into your reply!

 

Happy to help.

The basic principle of my post also applies to DDR and DDR2, but not to nearly the same extent, and the numbers are different. The 256Mb ICs that are high density for SDR are considered low density for DDR, for example, and 512Mb is high density. Also, today's DDR chipsets barely have density issues anymore. The few that do on the other hand, have severe ones, but that's the subject for a different thread.