• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

OCZ DDRAM! Be aware...!

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

scrappydog

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2002
Location
Denver, CO, USA
CyberFed said:
OCZ has always made crummy memory IMHO

My girlfriend's system is getting 3238/3232 from her OCZ PC3000 512MB stick. I don't think those numbers suck.

BTW, she has a P4 1.6A & Asus P4S533 mobo. 152FSB @ 1.6V, 4:6 divider, no volt mods, normal settings. Stable as a rock.

I also use an Asus/OCZ combo and haven't had problems.
 
Last edited:

BrianH2O

Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2002
I also have had good success with OCZ. Here in Canada, Corsair is very hard to find. I was running OCZ PC2700 @ 186mhz (p4 [email protected] 140Mhz). This was the limit for this ram. Not bad for an early PC2700 stick. They were just coming out then.

I purchased a 2.66 and o/c'ed it to 155. On my P4B533E, that means 406mHz. Most PC2700 will not do that.

Got some PC3500 EL CS2 OCZ. Happily run at 406 with 2325 timing and getting 3100+ on SiSoft. I am happy with this.

Yes Corsair would probably run @ 2225, but the difference would be marginally at best.

Again just my opinion that some one probably did get screwed by OCZ and happened to yell very loadly about it. It is probably no better or worst that most name brand ram out there.
 

scrappydog

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2002
Location
Denver, CO, USA
BrianH2O said:
I also have had good success with OCZ...Again just my opinion that some one probably did get screwed by OCZ and happened to yell very loadly about it. It is probably no better or worst that most name brand ram out there.

Nice numbers! I'm jealous!

There was an expose on OCZ and there were allegations that OCZ was a scam. I think they got slammed publicly after that. Nevertheless, I had bought my RAM and I haven't had any problems, so I'm not complaining. Also, my girlfriend's Sandra numbers suggest that her stick is not just adequate, but comparatively awesome by ANY standard.
 
OP
@crilicM@n

@[email protected]

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2000
Location
Chapecó-SC
I´m usinc Ocz sdram pc166 inthe TUSL2c without problems, but i´m on 111fSB with my celeron600... But I tested it 150 cas2 4w Interleaving Ok on my last board... But I do saw many people on that forum telling bad things... Maybe aspecific batch of their memory... And, listened that they had closed... Anyway... I´d not buy a ddram from them now.... Even having a good OCZ microBga sdram stick...

scrappydog, what dog is that!!! :)
 

LocutusofBorg

Disabled
Joined
May 17, 2002
Location
Arlington Ma
i went thru 3 types of ddr333
Crucial
Corsair XMS
and Geil
none of the above would run at 2-2-5-2-1t
on my AT7
I got some OCZ rev 3.2 pc2700
and it rocks
 

MDA

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2001
Location
In the Dark!!
Against peoples recomendations i picked up some OCZ 3500 and have got it running at 200fsb so far!!, although i think my graphics card is having a hard time of it!!

MDA.
 

scrappydog

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2002
Location
Denver, CO, USA
MDA said:
Against peoples recomendations i picked up some OCZ 3500 and have got it running at 200fsb so far!!, although i think my graphics card is having a hard time of it!!

MDA.

I can't read the numbers (1600x1200 resolution). What are they? Also, how does your OCZ compare to other sticks you've had?
 
OP
@crilicM@n

@[email protected]

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2000
Location
Chapecó-SC
Ok Frag man!!!

That picture is really small and hard to see... the 300 pixels size limit restricted too much out view... i think at least 320x240 could be better becouse it´s a multiple proportional of the higher resolutions, so when shrinking the image, it stays better quality...
 

scrappydog

Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2002
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Ok Frag man!!!

That picture is really small and hard to see... the 300 pixels size limit restricted too much out view... i think at least 320x240 could be better becouse it´s a multiple proportional of the higher resolutions, so when shrinking the image, it stays better quality...

In another thread, someone noted that you can upload graphics on another site, and paste the URL in your message to display a graphic larger than 300x300. Check out this URL:

http://www.theforumisdown.com/

Use the IMG tag.
 

MDA

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2001
Location
In the Dark!!
.
That picture is really small and hard to see... the 300 pixels size limit restricted too much out view... i think at least 320x240 could be better becouse it´s a multiple proportional of the higher resolutions, so when shrinking the image, it stays better quality...


Sorry about the image quality, yeah the 300x300 rule sucks! anyway heres a link to a hopefully better image of my memory scores.

MDA.
 

MDA

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2001
Location
In the Dark!!

I know wot your thinking and i can assure you im genuine! The image turned out crap cos i turned down the quality of the jpeg! as it turns out i didnt need to. So here is the full quality version!

Appologies for any dought i might have caused. oh and here is my wcpuid screeny.

MDA!:mad:
 
OP
@crilicM@n

@[email protected]

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2000
Location
Chapecó-SC
Great Numbers

MDA said:


I know wot your thinking and i can assure you im genuine! The image turned out crap cos i turned down the quality of the jpeg! as it turns out i didnt need to. So here is the full quality version!

Appologies for any dought i might have caused. oh and here is my wcpuid screeny.

MDA!:mad:

:eek: Nooo imagine.... I said Hmmmm becouse I found them good numbers!!! Good results are always welcome to be apreciated and discussed considering a way of building better hardware combinations... I´m not the kind of guy that enters sucha discussions... I know how easy it is to fake numbers... but this is not the case. Sorry for making you the work of double posting MDA!
If someday doubt something I´ll write: "I doubt it", be shure ;)
 

MDA

Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2001
Location
In the Dark!!
Nooo imagine.... I said Hmmmm becouse I found them good numbers!!! Good results are always welcome to be apreciated and discussed considering a way of building better hardware combinations... I´m not the kind of guy that enters sucha discussions... I know how easy it is to fake numbers... but this is not the case. Sorry for making you the work of double posting MDA!

Sorry about [email protected] misunderstanding, just didn't want to get the wrong reputation in the forums, people who create numbers should, and are, "%&* apon...........all they serve to do is to make it harder for genuine people.

MDA.