Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 17 to 32 of 38

Thread: Component reliability

  1. #17
    No-one's Fanboi Thorsson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Neverneverland
    Posts
    2,749
    Thanks
    47
    Thanked
    93 times in 92 posts
    • Thorsson's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-V PRO
      • CPU:
      • i5 3570k
      • Memory:
      • 2x8Gb Corsair Vengeance PC1866
      • Storage:
      • 256M4 SSD; 2Tb 7200RPM Barracuda; 2Tb Linkstation
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX970 SC
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX650
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Win10 64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 2515H
      • Internet:
      • Fibre Optic 30Mb

    Re: Component reliability

    It's very difficult to rate RMAs for any company unless you've had recent experiences. A lot of places the first problem is getting an RMA number as they don't answer the phone (often 1 person working 9-5 which is stark contrast to their selling staff).

    The company with the best RMA I've ever seen is Crucial. It's bloody brilliant.

  2. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    394
    Thanks
    10
    Thanked
    9 times in 9 posts
    • dodgybob's system
      • Motherboard:
      • A8N-SLI Premium
      • CPU:
      • Opteron 170 @ 2.7 Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 2x 1GB OCZ Platinum Rev 2
      • Storage:
      • 1x 320GB WD & 1x 1TB Samsung F1
      • Graphics card(s):
      • X1950pro
      • PSU:
      • 500W Seasonic S12-II
      • Case:
      • P182B
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Home Premium
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung SM 2443BW
      • Internet:
      • 8 Mbit

    Re: Component reliability

    Crucial are good for RMA but were a pain with my address last time. Despite updating my details on their site, responding to their email with my new address and including a note in the box they still sent the replacement ram to my old address. Luckily I got on well with my old land lord. Aside from that they were very efficient.

    I have had RMAs with Scan before where they haven't picked up the fault that I sent the product in about. Having said that it's pretty easy to get them to retest stuff if you think there's something that they've missed. I would rate their service as very good.

  3. #19
    Lover & Fighter Blitzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Between Your Mum & Sister
    Posts
    6,310
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked
    382 times in 300 posts
    • Blitzen's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ABIT iX38 QuadGT
      • CPU:
      • Intel Quad Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz : 30 Degrees Idle - 41-46 Degrees Load
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 1GB OCZ Platinum PC6400 @ 4-4-4-12
      • Storage:
      • 2 x 500GB Samsung Spinpoints - RAID 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 285
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU 82+ 625W
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic Q22wb 22" Widescreen - 5ms
      • Internet:
      • O2 premium @ 17mb

    Re: Component reliability

    Crucial, Viewsonic and Logitech have the BEST RMA service i have ever come across.

    Overclockers.co.uk and Dabs have the worst i have come across.

  4. #20
    Mostly Me Lucio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Tring
    Posts
    5,163
    Thanks
    443
    Thanked
    448 times in 351 posts
    • Lucio's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P
      • CPU:
      • AMD FX-6350 with Cooler Master Seldon 240
      • Memory:
      • 2x4GB Corsair DDR3 Vengeance
      • Storage:
      • 128GB Toshiba, 2.5" SSD, 1TB WD Blue WD10EZEX, 500GB Seagate Baracuda 7200.11
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 270X 4GB
      • PSU:
      • 600W Silverstone Strider SST-ST60F
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF XB
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 8.1 64Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 2032BW, 1680 x 1050
      • Internet:
      • 16Mb Plusnet

    Re: Component reliability

    I wonder though, with regards to the OP, isn't it likely that we're simply seeing the result of having to stretch the same amount of resources further and further? After all, companies have to make more profit each year, by selling more product to more customers than ever before. What doesn't pick up so quickly though is the available resources (time, money and energy) to do the work, so things like quality and control testing fall by the wayside.

    (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/) (\___/)
    (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=) (='.'=)
    (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(") (")_(")


    This is bunny and friends. He is fed up waiting for everyone to help him out, and decided to help himself instead!

  5. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    West Wales
    Posts
    484
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked
    18 times in 16 posts
    • Phil_P's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte P35-DS4
      • CPU:
      • Q6600 G0
      • Memory:
      • 4x1GB Crucial
      • Storage:
      • 2 x WD 1TB in RAID1
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gigabyte 7600GS
      • PSU:
      • Etasis 750W
      • Operating System:
      • RHEL5/RHEL6
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 226BW 22" panel
      • Internet:
      • F2S 8mbit

    Re: Component reliability

    I think you only have to look at modern components to see why failure rates are so high. I have an old Gigabyte motherboard (AMD K6-2) from ~10 years ago that's still going strong. The tracks on the board are all about 1-2mm wide with good separation, and it's probably a 2 or 3 layer board. Yet many more recent boards have failed in less than 3 years and they all have tracks the thickness of a human hair that are packed so closely together the tolerances are beyond belief. Modern kit is just so much more advanced, I'm not at all surprised the failure rates are so much higher. That, combined with reduced costs and building down to a price point and I think you have the answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by acro666 View Post
    So please, how do SCAN rate for sending out reliable parts, and how good is their RMA system?

    regards

    acro666
    I had no problems with Scan. Last summer, I received an expensive PSU on which it appeared the warranty sticker had been cut although nothing else was physically wrong with the unit (it tested fine). I contacted Scan and they immediately arranged for a collect and return at no cost. A new unit was shipped (I checked the serials so it wasn't the same unit sent back out), and it was identical with a cut warranty sticker. I contacted Scan again, who checked their stock and found all units were the same. They contacted the supplier who informed them that the seal had been cut at the factory to make a modification. Scan issued me a written warranty by letter acknowledging that the seal was cut and that the warranty would be honoured should it ever be needed (I'm sure they would have offered me a credit or refund had I wanted that instead). Throughout the process I was kept informed by email at all times.

    I really can't fault that level of customer service.

    Oh, and I wouldn't buy any memory other than Crucial - again their returns policy is "no questions asked" and first rate (I've had 2 returns with them out of many purchases).

    One final one that WAS a surprise to me was Microsoft. I had a faulty webcam, and rather than fork out for return shipping to Amazon, I just phoned up Microsoft and after taking the serial no they just sent me a replacement free of charge, plus I must have had at least half a dozen emails from them asking if I was satisfied with the service I received. Like I said, a real surprise and again first rate!

  6. #22
    Senior Amoeba iranu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the dinner table. Blechh!
    Posts
    3,532
    Thanks
    111
    Thanked
    156 times in 106 posts
    • iranu's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Maximus Gene VI
      • CPU:
      • 4670K @4.3Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 8Gb Samsung Green
      • Storage:
      • 1x 256Gb Samsung 830 SSD 2x640gb HGST raid 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI R9 390
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX620W Modular
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master Silencio 352
      • Operating System:
      • Win 7 ultimate 64 bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 23" DELL Ultrasharp U2312HM
      • Internet:
      • 16mb broadband

    Re: Component reliability

    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzen View Post
    Things have changed in the last 5 years.
    The reliability of the components hasnt but the QA/QC procedures have.

    I have been in the electronics industry on/off for the best part of my civilian working life (around 10 years) and here's why things have changed.

    The 'fall-out' in production has nearly always been at around 9%. Not the PCB's or the seperate parts. Its the finished product boxed and ready.

    Thing is, with the Far Eastern markets, they only have a AQL (Acceptable Quality Level) test. This means, depending on the standard followed, that maybe only 1 out of every 30 units is tested in a 500 units batch. This keeps manufacturing costs down but inevitably leads to higher failures in the field.

    THIS is the price you pay for buying abroad.

    In the UK manufacturing the AQL would be, on a 100 batch, usually 15-20 per 100 tested. So, although not fool proof, it will usually spot errors more frequently.
    Unfortunately though, to have any chance of competing with the foreign markets, we too have had to drop our batch testing levels to bring the costs down.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I went to South Korea in 2002 to a VERY well known electronics manufacturer which is based there.
    When i was on the plant tour, the Manufacturing Director told me that they have a 100% pass rate leaving their factory.
    We all know that its impossible to get 1st time right every time.

    This is how they achieved a 100% success rate upon finished goods leaving.........they had a manufacturing floor about 4 times the size of an aircraft hangar and there was faulty units/parts EVERYWHERE.
    The other side of the plant they had another building that was at least 5 times the size of the manufacturing unit.
    Know what it was??????

    The rework station.....all the scrap (mustve been 30-40% of all manufactured product), ended up there to be reworked and shipped.
    Rework is damn expensive because it's labour intensive, however the far east pay peanuts so I guess they can afford to do it. Getting the process right first time is extremely important in the UK because any rework can severely reduce profits. I've seen cases whereby the firm has made a loss on a contract due to requiring rework on a load of cast aluminium gearbox casing because of the huge penalty for being late with the delivery. Damn bean counters chose the cheapest casters and the company paid the price.

    Your quote of 9% "fall-out" reminds me of the issues RR has with their single crystal turbine blade foundry in Bristol. They were getting 9% yield per batch! Yep 91% scrap.
    "Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.

  7. #23
    Admin team peterb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Southampton
    Posts
    19,381
    Thanks
    2,892
    Thanked
    3,403 times in 2,693 posts
    • peterb's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Nascom 2
      • CPU:
      • Z80B
      • Memory:
      • 48K 8 bit memory on separate card
      • Storage:
      • Audio cassette tape - home built 5.25" floppy drive
      • Graphics card(s):
      • text output (composite video)
      • PSU:
      • Home built
      • Case:
      • Home built
      • Operating System:
      • Nas-sys
      • Monitor(s):
      • 12" monocrome composite video input
      • Internet:
      • No networking capability on this machine

    Re: Component reliability

    The Op (Agent) referred to components, but really they are sub-assemblies - but the QC process starts before then at the 'true' component level. The transistors/ICs?resistors/capacitors are all made in their millions, and generally (at that level) the performance of each component in a batch is repeatable - so those components undergo some form of batch testing to ensure the batch has conformaty to the device's specification. Nothing wrong with that, except that there will usually be some devices that fall outside that or will fail prematurely, which batch testing probably won't pick up.

    Those components then go to a sub-assembly - like a computer PSU. These 'commodity items' are generally built down to a price. The design should take into account component tolerances, but anything outside that may cause latent problems later on. Electrolytic capacitors are a relatively common failure item. A component filtering a 12 volt rail must be adequately rated to carry the ripple current and have a voltage rating commensurate with the steady state voltager. For a 12V rail, I'd probably specify a (say) 20V component - but a builder building down to a price might use a 15V rated item. Result - risk of premature failure.

    Fimnally testing - again one of the more expensive parts of the mfr process. A cheap builder might test 10% of a production line output - and that will probably only be a cursory test. The cost of replaceing the odd failure is more than offset by the saving in testing. A more reputable mfr might test every PSU - with some going through an extended test process. Result - they cost more but the product will probably be more reliable. In these case - cheap commodoty items, any failures probably won't be re-worked - as Iranu says, it is very expensive.

    Compare that with an industry where safety is critical - nuclear, perhaps, or aerospace.

    In that case the components that go to make up the PSU will have tighter specifications, and be conservatively rated. They will be more expensive. The final sub assembly - say a PSU - will be individually inspected, and probably soak tested and 'burnt in'. That is they will be run at full load for a period of time - perhaps 24 hours. This will weed out the premature failures on the 'bath tub' curve. Consequently the assembly can be put into service with a high degree of assurance. If goes into store, it may have a shelf life, after which it has to be retested. (Those electrolytic capacitors again!) That again pushes up costs - which is why (in this example) a switched mode PSU for use in an aircraft might cost a several hundred punds, while its ostensibly identical specification counterpart slots into the back of your PC for about £30.

    But which one would you fly with? (and which one would you buy for your PC?)
    (\__/)
    (='.'=)
    (")_(")

    Been helped or just 'Like' a post? Use the Thanks button!
    My broadband speed - 750 Meganibbles/minute

  8. #24
    Senior Member Pob255's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    The land of Brum
    Posts
    9,945
    Thanks
    572
    Thanked
    1,196 times in 1,099 posts
    • Pob255's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus M5A99X EVO
      • CPU:
      • PhenomII x4 955 & CM Hyper 212+
      • Memory:
      • 2x 4gb Corsair Vengence 1600mhz cas9
      • Storage:
      • 250gb SATA Westerndigital + 500gb samsung +1tb Samsung
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus GTX560ti CuII
      • PSU:
      • Be Quiet E9 680w
      • Case:
      • HAF 912+
      • Operating System:
      • W7 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell 21" ips something

    Re: Component reliability

    One other thing is that computers have moved into the consumer market now, with ever increaseing speeds and newer versions to sustain a steady consumer demand.
    where as a few years ago a product could have an expected running life of 5-10 years, now within 3 years it'll be obsolete and would of probably been replaced anyway.
    Also as it moves into the consumer market prices are dropped to sell more units and corners are cut to reduce costs.

    How often do we shop around or sugest alternative suppliers because they are cheaper?

  9. #25
    Lover & Fighter Blitzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Between Your Mum & Sister
    Posts
    6,310
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked
    382 times in 300 posts
    • Blitzen's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ABIT iX38 QuadGT
      • CPU:
      • Intel Quad Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz : 30 Degrees Idle - 41-46 Degrees Load
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 1GB OCZ Platinum PC6400 @ 4-4-4-12
      • Storage:
      • 2 x 500GB Samsung Spinpoints - RAID 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 285
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU 82+ 625W
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic Q22wb 22" Widescreen - 5ms
      • Internet:
      • O2 premium @ 17mb

    Re: Component reliability

    Fimnally testing - again one of the more expensive parts of the mfr process. A cheap builder might test 10% of a production line output - and that will probably only be a cursory test.
    Not always...and not as a rule either.

    All parts manufactured, especiall here, have to be CE marked for approval.
    In order to gain CE Marking it has to be rigorously tested (golden sample usually i grant you).
    THis will also entail a specified AQL for the end manufacturer.

    If the manufacturer changes ANY component this must also be part of a submission to the accreditation body and the part may not be changed until it has been certified.


    I have been involved with this for quite a long time. Not just through CE Approval but also FCC Approval (USA version) and ATEX Approval.
    Although all 3 are slightly different and obviously ATEX is more rigorous.
    (If something is FCC Approved though it is automatically qualified for CE Approval)

  10. #26
    Senior Member GSte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Bolton
    Posts
    1,538
    Thanks
    220
    Thanked
    76 times in 64 posts
    • GSte's system
      • Motherboard:
      • P6T Deluxe
      • CPU:
      • i7 920 @ 4.2GHz / TRUE
      • Memory:
      • 6GB GSkill 1600MHz cas6
      • Storage:
      • 250GB Barracuda, 2 x WD 500GB AAKS, 1TB Caviar Black
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX470
      • PSU:
      • NorthQ Black Magic Flex 850W
      • Case:
      • X-Clio Windtunnel
      • Operating System:
      • XP Home, Vista Home Premium X64, Win7 Home X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 245B
      • Internet:
      • Be Not So Happy

    Re: Component reliability

    Quote Originally Posted by acro666 View Post
    So please, how do SCAN rate for sending out reliable parts, and how good is their RMA system?

    regards

    acro666
    I have been sent quite a lot of dodgy parts by them, but to be fair their RMA service is good, although refunds can sometimes be very slow.

  11. #27
    HEXUS.social member Agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    19,158
    Thanks
    732
    Thanked
    1,604 times in 1,043 posts

    Re: Component reliability

    Quote Originally Posted by Blitzen View Post
    In order to gain CE Marking it has to be rigorously tested (golden sample usually i grant you).
    Problem with the CE mark is that anyone can issue it them self, with no high / governmental body checking up on them
    It's only when people start to complain that issues arise.

    In reality this means that a company (like Q-tec) can CE mark their products, blow up a few systems, and disappear overnight

    Really good write up: HEXUS.net - Review :: HEXUS PSU (Power Supply Unit) Roundup - Taoyuan 2005 : Page - 23/26

    I wish they would do more spot checking on people with CE marks.
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    And by trying to force me to like small pants, they've alienated me.

  12. #28
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    small village in England
    Posts
    89
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3 times in 3 posts
    • acro666's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit Fatal1ty AA8XE
      • CPU:
      • Pen 4 CSU, 775 3.6ghz 2mb cache
      • Memory:
      • 3gb DDR 2
      • Storage:
      • 4 HDs split into 16 individuals
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Gainward GForce 7800TX 256 DDR3
      • PSU:
      • 750 watts
      • Case:
      • Lian Li Brushed Aluminium
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x AOC 17" Flat Panel
      • Internet:
      • aol

    Re: Component reliability

    Please allow me to explain just how reliable SCAN equipment is. I bought my first video-recorder from Scan many years ago, it is the SC-2500. It is still set up in my lounge and is in permanent use, it plays ALL regions and so far has never let me down.

    I hope that I will be renewing my present computer set-up sometime in the near future and will certainly buy from Scan.

    My question in this forum of two days ago was asking about scan was to ensure they are still utterly reliable!

    One further question please, I note that my user name on my previous (two days ago) is now a very bright red. Is this significant, or has my machinery gone loopy?

    regards

    acre666

  13. #29
    Senior Member 2Cold Scorpio's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Greenvile, NC, U.S.A.
    Posts
    802
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked
    13 times in 12 posts
    • 2Cold Scorpio's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Abit IP-35 Pro, Sound Card: Creative X-Fi XtremeGamer
      • CPU:
      • Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 w/ G0 stepping - stock: 2.66 GHz OC'd to 3.6 GHz 1.48v
      • Memory:
      • 4x1GB Patriot PDC24G6400LLQK Extreme Performance PC2-6400 OC'd to 900MHz 5-5-5-18 timings 2.2v
      • Storage:
      • 2TB Samsung Spinpoint F4 5200rpm (main), 2x 250 GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 SATA in RAID 0 (backup)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • eVGA Geforce GTX 460 1GB Superclocked
      • PSU:
      • Antec NeoBlue 650w
      • Case:
      • Raidmax Smilodon Steel ATX
      • Operating System:
      • Microsoft Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Samsung 226BW 22" LCD Widescreen (S-Panel) @ 1680x1050
      • Internet:
      • 15Mb/s Cable, Optical Drives: 1. Lite-On DVD+-R/+-RW/RAM w/ Lightscribe, 2. LiteOn CD-RW 52/32/52x

    Re: Component reliability

    I lucked out with my last build in December (well, my only self-build, actually); everything worked, or worked well enough (I can't get my RAM timings down to the advertised 4-4-4-12, but instead have them at 5-5-5-16), and sometimes Windows doesn't recognise my optical drives properly (or do, but certain functions will be flaky - Vista especially does this) but even many of my games in XP only see the DVD drive, not the CD one. But the components do 'work' (though for the past few days I thought i had a problem with my sound card, but it somehow fixed itself).

    But judging by reviews on NewEgg and such, it does seem like product QA has gone to the crapper...

  14. #30
    HEXUS.social member Agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    19,158
    Thanks
    732
    Thanked
    1,604 times in 1,043 posts

    Re: Component reliability

    Can we keep retailer comments to the retailers section please, it really has nothing to do with QA of parts
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    And by trying to force me to like small pants, they've alienated me.

  15. #31
    Lover & Fighter Blitzen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Between Your Mum & Sister
    Posts
    6,310
    Thanks
    539
    Thanked
    382 times in 300 posts
    • Blitzen's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ABIT iX38 QuadGT
      • CPU:
      • Intel Quad Q6600 @ 3.6Ghz : 30 Degrees Idle - 41-46 Degrees Load
      • Memory:
      • 4 x 1GB OCZ Platinum PC6400 @ 4-4-4-12
      • Storage:
      • 2 x 500GB Samsung Spinpoints - RAID 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 285
      • PSU:
      • Enermax MODU 82+ 625W
      • Case:
      • Antec Nine Hundred
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 7 Ultimate 64Bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic Q22wb 22" Widescreen - 5ms
      • Internet:
      • O2 premium @ 17mb

    Re: Component reliability

    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    Problem with the CE mark is that anyone can issue it them self, with no high / governmental body checking up on them
    It's only when people start to complain that issues arise.

    In reality this means that a company (like Q-tec) can CE mark their products, blow up a few systems, and disappear overnight

    Really good write up: HEXUS.net - Review :: HEXUS PSU (Power Supply Unit) Roundup - Taoyuan 2005 : Page - 23/26

    I wish they would do more spot checking on people with CE marks.
    True.....so very true.

    There was one manufacturer (which shall remain nameless in case they sue me) in 2003 that put 150,000 security devices onto the European market without CE Approval.

    They were fined a 7 figure sum. They actually had the nerve to plead ignorance in court even though they have been manufacturing in the UK (and Europe) for over 24 years.

  16. #32
    HEXUS.social member Agent's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    19,158
    Thanks
    732
    Thanked
    1,604 times in 1,043 posts

    Re: Component reliability

    As much of a git it may make me sound, I have little sympathy for them

    24 years.....ignorance....classic
    Quote Originally Posted by Saracen View Post
    And by trying to force me to like small pants, they've alienated me.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 29-03-2008, 03:36 PM
  2. Looking for monitor to support component, VGA and sound?
    By Craig321 in forum Help! Quick Relief From Tech Headaches
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 19-03-2008, 08:42 PM
  3. Component Splitting
    By fraggie in forum Consumer Electronics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 17-01-2008, 12:35 PM
  4. DVI vs component video
    By jamena in forum Consumer Electronics
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 27-03-2006, 09:50 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •