On Thu, 28 Apr 2011 22:36:02 +0530, vindevienne
> caprus;2331360 Wrote:
>> Of course I don’t know if 66% represents 20 out of 30 or 2 out of 3,
>> but, in either case, if you’ve had more than one Asus board fail in the
>> same or similar PCs then you might want to take a critical look at the
>> other components in your PC. I’m thinking primarily of the Power
>> Before I recently retired I designed and built highly customized PCs,
>> Servers, Industrial PCs for industry and the military, and occasionally
>> for private users. I personally built and maintained warranty service
>> on nearly 20,000 PCs, and I used many, many different brand of
>> motherboards from consumer grade to the most specialized industrial type
>> “single board computers”. I learned that, among the makers of consumer
>> grade boards, there are many makers of poor quaility boards, but Asus is
>> (IMHO) definitely NOT one of them, nor is Intel for that matter. In
>> fact, when an “off the shelf” board would do the job my first choice was
>> either Intel or Asus. Of the thousands of Asus and Intel boards I used
>> I only ever had one bad board! Many failed, but all but one failure was
>> due to some other problem, usually a bad Power supply, poor cooling or
>> (once) a case design that didn’t adequately ground the board.
>> So my suggestion would be to figure out why the 66% failed before
>> throwing another expensive board into that same environment.
> It is 5 boards in 4 entirely separate systems with 3 failures so it is
> not a common problem external to the motherboards. Also a p7p55d-e will
> not work with a 12 year old power supply.
> The p7p55d-e has always had a problem, it is unstable if the reset
> button is connected but now the nic does not work. I accepted that it
> was not worth RMAing the board for the reset problem but after a second
> problem the board needs to be replaced.
> My real problem with ASUS is the warranty. Taking over a month to
> replace the board means for me the 3 year warranty is not worth a lot. I
> can move the data that I need now to another machine but this will work
> for a week or two. I therefor need to replace the motherboard before I
> will get a replacement out of the RMA process. Unfortunatly I am not
> building systems and do not have a supply of boards which I can raid to
> replace the dead board while the dead board is RMAed
> I can’t remember what was the exact problem with the first board . I
> think that it just refused to boot after a few months. The replacement
> board ran for several years before it was dumped due to old age. I have
> a p5k-se on which I am writing this reply. This has been getting more
> and more unstable. This appears to be a memory management problem, not a
> memory problem. It now will not boot if there is memory only in the
> preferred A1, B1 or A1 & B1 slots. If memory is added to A2 or B2 or A2
> & B2 it will boot. If all 4 slots are filled with matching 1G modules
> the entire 4G is seen by the system but the system is a little unstable.
> The system boots and is stable with memory in slots a2 & b2. The system
> neither crashes not finds any problems when running memory tests. I do
> not overclock the systems.
iv’e seen similar things happen, not with motherboards yet but with hard
disks. for a while pretty all samsung HDDs around 200-something GB went
dead within a couple of weeks. replacemant was fast and w/o problems or
hassle, but the replacement disks failed after a couple weeks again. this
didn’t happen only to me, but several people in my area, a rather remote
part of west bengal, india.
in other places on this planet, US, OZ, didn’t ask anybody in europe, this
problem didn’t exist. i think it’s certain batches of hardware, delivered
into certain regions, that are bad. it’s not important enough as it is
with cars, where they are forced to recall their bad products, and i
suspect some areas of the world are more likely to receive sub-standard
products than others.