Sorry for the silly question...

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • paolo.moro
    Member
    • May 2018
    • 77

    #1

    Sorry for the silly question...

    I have a valid, up-to-date license for Burning Test 11.

    I happened to run into some issues with one of the four memory modules installed.

    Just to clarify: is the program that analyzes RAM in BIT identical to MEMTEST86?

    If so: it’s not MEMTEST86 PRO, correct?




    Sorry for the silly question, but I need to figure out whether I should buy the MEMTEST86 PRO version or if I’m doing something wrong in my BIT configuration.




    Thanks


  • Richard (PassMark)
    Administrator
    • May 2010
    • 967

    #2
    Is the program that analyzes RAM in BIT identical to MEMTEST86?
    They are similar but not the same. MemTest86 is a more comprehensive testing suite that has additional tests (e.g. hammer test and DMA testing) as well. MemTest86 should in theory find more RAM errors that BurnInTest.

    The advantage to memory testing in Windows in our opinion is that you can also load the rest of the machine at the same time. When you boot into Windows, at lot of RAM is used by the operating system, services and the disk cache. So, less RAM is available for testing in Windows. If you are experiencing errors when running in BurnInTest, then maybe there is some issue around having the additional load (temperature, EMI) in BurnInTest.

    Comment

    • paolo.moro
      Member
      • May 2018
      • 77

      #3
      Okay. Thanks.

      So does that mean that if BIT reports errors with the RAM, it could be due to other factors?

      In other words, NOT the RAM?

      I can post this question on the BIT-specific forum if necessary.

      Thanks again.

      Comment

      • Richard (PassMark)
        Administrator
        • May 2010
        • 967

        #4
        I would recommend testing with MemTest86 first to see if there are errors. You can use the Free edition of MemTest86 testing. If there are no errors, then possibly the issue lies elsewhere.

        Comment

        Working...