(Statistics) Component Failure Rates

[Deleted]

Once again, the french site hardware.fr has published updated failure (or rather RMA) statistics:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/831-...omposants.html

I'll drag out some of the more interesting ones:

HDDs / SSDs:
3.5% - OCZ (SSD)
3.1% - Hitachi (HDD)
2.7% - Corsair (SSD)
2.0% - Seagate (HDD)
1.9% - Crucial (SSD)
1.8% - Samsung (HDD)
1.5% - Western Digital (HDD)
1.2% - Kingston (SSD)
0.3% - Intel (SSD)

Motherboards:
2.3% - MSI
2.0% - Asrock
1.9% - Asus
1.6% - Gigabyte

Graphics Cards:
10,9% - Radeon HD 5970
5,5% - Radeon HD 5850
5,0% - Radeon HD 5870
4,7% - GeForce GTX 470
3,4% - GeForce GTX 465
3,0% - GeForce GTX 480
2,5% - Radeon HD 5830
2,4% - GeForce GTX 460
2,0% - Radeon HD 5770
1,6% - GeForce GTS 250

Random Access Memory (RAM):
7,1% - OCZ
2,0% - G.Skill
1,6% - Corsair
0,7% - Crucial
0,4% - Kingston

Four specific sets are particularly prominent to failure however:
- 20,2% : Corsair Dominator 2x2 Go DDR2 PC2-8500 CL5 - TWIN2X4096-8500C5D
- 10,6 : OCZ Gold Edition 2x2 Go DDR3 PC3-10666 - OCZ3G1333LV4GK
- 9,6% : Corsair XMS3 DHX 2x2 Go DDR3 PC3-10600 CL9 - TW3X4096-1333C9DHX
- 5,4% : Corsair Dominator 2x1 Go DDR2 PC2-8500 CL5 - TWIN2X2048-8500C5D

Power Supplies:
2.3% - Thermaltake
2.0% - Fortron
1.6% - Enermax
1.6% - Akasa
1.4% - Corsair
1.3% - Seasonic
1.0% - Cooler Master
1.0% - Antec

You should however check out the specific models instead, as its information should prove much more relevant:
http://www.hardware.fr/articles/831-...omposants.html

More detailed information about some specific models (and sometimes manufacturer variations - e.g. on GPUs) on all of the above are available on the link itself.

[chaud]

I am starting to think their numbers are too small to be useful. The highest return rate PSUs on that list are the most popular ones or very unpopular ones, some have 0% return rate, etc. Fun data though, wish Newegg would share!

[Deleted]

I am starting to think their numbers are too small to be useful. The highest return rate PSUs on that list are the most popular ones or very unpopular ones, some have 0% return rate, etc. Fun data though, wish Newegg would share!

There are certainly limits to what you can rely on the data for -but its certainly far from useless. E.g. OCZ not being reliable (comparably) in SSDs and RAM isn't something I'd explain as a lack of quantity from either them or their competitors, as Intel (SSD) and Corsair (RAM) as examples are (or were) much bigger names in those respective areas

Likewise it does give food for thought in the GPU choice, although it unfortunate that the GPUs listed are 'last gen' so the usefulness is at times limited there

[lethargik]

in all the components i have ever bought, i have never ever had to rma something.

[Deleted]

in all the components i have ever bought, i have never ever had to rma something.

Past 12 months, two GPUs (4870 + 9800GTX), one powersupply, and 5 hard drives.

[Herecius]

Past 12 months, two GPUs (4870 + 9800GTX), one powersupply, and 5 different hard drives.

I'd call your own statistics into serious questioning then, because the chances of every one of these failing for you together, going by your statistics, would be astronomically low. Unless you bought hundreds upon hundreds of GPUs, powersupplies, and HDDs, that is.

[Craigadiddle]

Past 12 months,
only needed to replace the COOLIT E.C.O. liquid cooling unit, due to the pump not working
Other than that everything is fine
I have core i7 980X 12GB-1600mhz Corsair VENGEANCE Ram, GTX 465, and it all works fne.

[Deleted]

I'd call your own statistics into serious questioning then, because the chances of every one of these failing for you together, going by your statistics, would be astronomically low. Unless you bought hundreds upon hundreds of GPUs, powersupplies, and HDDs, that is.

Its not unreasonable if you consider the environment I run. Three of the drives failed in a system with a yearly uptime between 99.98% to 99.99%, and was using high capacity drives which are known for much higher rates of failure (but making up a very small share of sales). One of the drives was in a laptop that has traveled more than most people do in a lifetime. GPUs was random bad luck - I've not had other GPU failures I can think of for a long time otherwise. (The 4870 had also behaved as if it would eventually fail for nearly a year, so I saw it coming)

Powersupply, random chance - particularly since it wasn't a stellar high quality supply and its load percentage was rather high.

[haxartus]

It's mos about luck. I've seen components working after +6 years of regular use.
Also the statistic is not very useful because it counts individual problems with specific components. For example there was an entire series of Seagate drivers with a problem in the firmware, but it has been fixed and the newer generation drives don't have it.

[chaud]

OCZ has stated that their failure rate is ~1%, guessing that is further inflated by the 25nm Vertex 2 fiasco.

[georgevonfranken]

The total amount sold and amount that got rma'd would be helpful info also