[BHardware] Components returns rates - Page 5

I'm not surprised. I switched from ASUS to ASrock and those numbers dont shock me at all.

I feel it is a fair idea of what people have come to believe.

We all know Corsair stuff is great, and by showing its better than OCZ in such a small sample goes far enough.

I suppose you are correct though, it really does just start a conversation and allows discussion of similar experiences to these numbers. In my experience they match mine.


That shows WD is lower than Seagate currently.

Yeah, but at the time people were complaining about it WD was higher.

Crucial has taken top spot from Intel thanks to a notable increase in Intel’s returns rate. We should say that this time, the Intel sample is only just above the minimum required and that some of the Intel returns are linked to the 8MB bug which has since been resolved. The OCZ rate has got a lot worse, going up to 7%, and only OCZ has models with rates of above 5%:

- 15.58% OCZ Vertex 2 Series SSD 240 GB
- 13.28% OCZ Vertex 2 Series SSD 160 GB
- 11.76% OCZ Vertex 2 Series SSD 80 GB
- 9.52% OCZ Vertex 2 Series SSD 120 GB
- 8.57% OCZ Vertex 3 Series 120 GB
- 7.49% OCZ Vertex 2 Series SSD 60 GB
- 6.61% OCZ Vertex 2 Series 3.5" SSD 120 GB
- 6.37% OCZ Vertex 3 Series 240 GB
- 6.37% OCZ Agility 3 60 GB
- 5.89% OCZ Vertex 2 Series SSD 100 GB

Well i can see ocz has a long bumpy road ahead if they ever want to be good with ssd's ever again. what i dont want to happen though is people seeing these numbers, boycotting ocz, and killing them because then ssd prices would go up, and no one wants that to happen!

ASRock makes excuse of Motherboards, OR theyre a horrible company that says they sent you a replacement and did one of these: Sent back the same Mobo or another broken one

It's funny to see Sin and some other die hard Asrock haters chime in. I'm glad I dumped Asus and I have been better off for doing so. Asus is just not what they used to be back in the late 90s and early 2000s. You don't even need an article like this to see that if you deal with lots of builds. Just read the Asus horror stories here on OCN. We can't be biased with this stuff. Sentiments and feelings should not be involved when choosing hardware.

Hope I don't jinx myself with this 670 hah!

What's the point of paying a premium for "higher" quality components when the end result contains problems and issues? My best friend and avid nerd out of the loop on hardware had me suggest a build around the time I was jumping on to sandy bridge. I recommended an Asrock board because of OCN, but he said he wanted an Asus board. Sure thing no problem, p8p67pro for him and I chose the Asrock p67 extreme 4.

Fast forward to a year and a few months later, and he's had to RMA that board 3 times. Sure sure this is one case I'm sharing, but he was not the only Asus build I've had to rip the board out for rma. Granted they've handled all my customer service needs with excellent service (this matters) but now these stories with OCN members having nightmare rma experiences is making me uneasy. There is just no getting around the fact that Asus needs to step it up and earn back the king of motherboards title. Quite frankly Asrock is after their neck and that title. If they maintain, they may be the next Asus. oCn is already seeing this.

To the moderator who said they don't overclock as well as the Asus boards, I'm quite confused with that statement. I'm pretty sure that because a product isn't used by the ln2 competition guys, that it doesn't make it a worse over clocking board with water or air. The data is right here on OCN.

Facts over feelings. I understand though, it took a lot for me to switch to something other than Asus after using, suggesting and selling them for over 10 years...

Maybe I missed it but are this figured based on returned because of defects or are these numbers just based on pure unfiltered returns? If it's the latter then that would create a false sense of the "quality" of the products and state of their market. That said...if Asrock is indeed better than Asus then Asus is probably regretting it (along with what appears to be an Asus founder "T. H. Tung" and many branches of Asus) "spinning off" in 2002.

My whole point was that the fact that asrock boards aren't really used for records pretty clearly shows that the boards do not clock as high under extreme conditions. And that just means that the components aren't as top notch as with the record breaking brands.

There's really nothing wrong with using an asrock board in a normal every day build with a nice OC but that doesn't mean that the components they use are just as good as with other boards.

For some strange reason I also haven't seen asrock boards really hit the highest 24/7 clocks with nice voltages either with higher TDP CPUs and enthusiast platforms. Sure they do fine with LGA1155 but the SB/IB CPUs are extremely low consumption parts and the OCing potential is almost entirely up to the CPU. I'd really like to see an asrock board from their X79 lineup, or the X58 lineup that's been proven to do really well when it comes to OCing.

Those Asus returns are primarily from their P boards yet people still buy them like crazy.

I personally destroyed my ASRock Extreme 4 Gen 3 after finding out my memory controller/dimm slots were the cause of my many frequent bsods like many other people with that board.

The OCZ SSD and PSU return rates are not shocking as I've had several of their PSU's fail on me; several friends have had their SSD's fail on them as well.

Go Asrock.

And for people who say their boards are'nt for extreme overclockers,then i guess you not seen this:

http://www.overclock.net/t/1281659/legitreviews-asrock-x79-extreme11-motherboard-announced-intel-x79-gets-refresh/100