What I think about [Hard]ocp!

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think the [H] has the most unbiasesd opinions around. AMD has the faster gaming processor. But did you ever read Kyle's comments on Intel processors? What's in his box? If I remember correctly he uses an Intel processor because he digs the multi-tasking.

The benchmarks are fine. Considering any benchmark I see on the [H] I can duplicate with my system at home. What I see performance wise in the benchmarks and game demos is real close to what I get in those same tests and games.

Biased my ass.
 
I didnt have time to read through all 7 pages so this may have allready been brought up but, some people are saying that they wont know how certain games (EQ2) will run when the video cards are benchmarked using Doom3 and HL2. I am wondering though, how can you tell if you will be able to play a certain game when all you are given is a score like with synthetic benchmarks?
Heres an example, lets say I have an AMD 2000+ cpu with 512megs ram and a ATI 9700 pro (my real specs). Now lets say I go out and get a new generation video card like a geforce 6800GT. If I ran a synthetic benchmark like 3dmark, my score would go up drastically, maybe double, because it weighs heavy on video cards. Now if I take the same setup and run a Doom3 or HL2 benchmark I wouldnt see nearly the difference because my cpu is what is holding back the framerates (I get similar fps in 640x480 as I do 1024x768). Now if I were to base my next purchase on 3dmark I would be buying a video card and I would not see much difference in a game that is bogged down by the cpu. But if I based my next purchase by benchmarking a real game I would see that a new cpu would give me the most benefit. Flame away.
 
What kind of reviews do you want? Do you want Kyle just to post generic reviews with absolutly no real world tests? Do you just want him to say "Damn this new AMD cpu is great" and have that be the end of the review? I read the reviews here with an open mind and form my OWN opinion when I am finished and if Kyle has made things blurry (which rarely happens) I go read more reviews from other sites. I bought my mother board because of this site (Abit IC7-MAX3) and the reviews Kyle gave of it, heck I am an avid reader of MaximumPC magazine and they finally saw the light about the same motherboard Kyle was raving about for months. So if you don't like the reviews here just don't click on the links at the top of the page just scroll on down to the news and if you don't like the news go visit another site. It is obvious you just aren't [H]ard enough for this site..
 
What newspaper do you read thats unbias?

O-M-G.. When a newspaper comes out on it's front page and tells everyone who to vote for.. I mean damn!

Kyle & Co run a Review/News/Editorial site, and that falls under editorial. In general I agree with them also. Synthetic benchmarks lead to drivers designed to give inflated results.

HOWEVER - real world benchmarks are now starting to give questionable results also, with Half Life (Maybe) being designed to give ATI a lift, and other games designed to give Nvidia a boost. Leaves everyone scratching there heads.
 
Cliff Notes: Move General Hardware to the top of the forum listing.
Fans need a way to run the same benchmarks, otherwise we feel left out and can't compare the results.

Agree with maleficarus that the video board gets all the attention. Maybe because it's at the top of the listing. No one seems to use the General Hardware to talk about systems. Maybe they should move General to the top.

Again, I completely understand what Kyle is doing with the benchmarks, but fans can't duplicate them anymore at home.
I ran the HL2 benchmarks on my system and compared numbers. When the SLI benchmarks came out, I again compared numbers, my single 6800 Ultra had a better score than the GT SLI rig, and was told my numbers can't be compared because I'm using the timedemo. So now I'm cut off from running the same benchmarks at home.

Fans want to compare other sites to make sure the numbers are in line, and we want to run our own to show off our e-penis. It's also a good way to make sure our systems are working correctly by comparing numbers to each other. It gets very hard to do that, when each card has a different AA/AF setting, and now the [H] is running an live play thru instead of using a timedemo.
 
Boy alot of [H] !!!!!!s sure are quick to shoot down everything just to hear themselves speak and pretend they have brass balls. The original poster has a number of valid points, it just seems many of you are so closed minded that you wont even consider there may be some validity in his statements, you just tend to revert to primordial bashing.
The author is right that 3dmark uses most of the direct X paths ... therefore it is stressing the DX paths which will be used in games. True it does not use a game engine, but the problem with using a game engine is it tells you only how you card will perform with that engine. 3Dmark is not intended to be the end all ... it is a compilation of major features which game engine utilize therefor giving you an overall rating of your hardware, not for only one game.
The author is totally correct in saying that this site is biased, for AMD. He is correct in saying you will never get an unbias intel review. I dont own an intel proc myself but I do understand what he is saying.
A number of you scream how the reviews are so amazing and fair. Well if they were so amazing why didn't [H]ard find the video processing failure of the nvidia 6800. I would have thought since this is a feature of the card it would have been tested.
How can you compare benchmark numbers with playthrough demos that you cannot recreate at home ? Because that is how [H]ard does most benchmarking. Everyone complains that 3Dmark is not a real world benchmark ... well how is not being able to compare scores, because you can't recreate the demo, real world?

Now with all this being said and before all you !!!!!!s start flaming, I do find this site a great resource for information. The comentary is great and the fact that Kyle and co. choose a side and stick to it, and dont sway is something to respect. The fourms here are usefull and very populated which is always a good thing. The benchmarks are of use but I do have a problem with not being able to compare my system by using the demos they use.

The purpose of my post was to show that [H]ard has its bias' just like most any other site out there. It would be nice if the !!!!!!s actually contemplated posts or information which dare say [H]ard is anything but perfect, before automatically firing off whatever troll they have saved in their back pocket. I wouldn't use only one source for information on hardware and suggest it would be wise for everyone else to do the same.
 
IMO everyone's entitled to their own opinion ... but seriously, if you're going to criticize something, at least spell it correctly, especially if your criticism is going to make it to the front page ;)
 
Now if he wants a site that sucks try out Tom's Hardware!

I find this site a refreshing, fair and balanced site!

The Fox News of Hardware Review Sites!


;)

DM
 
wOOt! fan-boi fight!
If this thread was full of chicks, I'd get a wading pool and a few bottles of vegetable oil and watch the fun!



Hey editorializing is fine...it's their site. My one beef with nearly all hardware sites nowadays is that they have become industry cheerleaders.....every new piece of hardware is totally awesome and must-have.
 
evildre said:
IMO everyone's entitled to their own opinion ... but seriously, if you're going to criticize something, at least spell it correctly, especially if your criticism is going to make it to the front page ;)
Click to expand...

mal's spelling skills are legendary, here's a quote from his old greatest hits (we haven't updated it in a while)

29) Not post that "USA has a deismal education system" without checking spelling/grammar.

:D
 
Ruiner said:
wOOt! fan-boi fight!
If this thread was full of chicks, I'd get a wading pool and a few bottles of vegetable oil and watch the fun!



Hey editorializing is fine...it's their site. My one beef with nearly all hardware sites nowadays is that they have become industry cheerleaders.....every new piece of hardware is totally awesome and must-have.
Click to expand...
haha :D

Yes there are several posts of 'ur a n00b!' nonsense, and it should be a tactic beneath some of the Gawd posters, but oh well!

I think H does an excellent job of being as impartial as possible in their reviews. No opinionated site will be completely impartial, but some will be more honest that others.

That brings me to your second point. Waaaay too many sites do give high 'scores' to any piece of equipment they review, or craptastic software, because it was a freebie:

"Well this case has edges so sharp it cut the head off my poodle, but after the laser LEDs burn your retinas out the 19 eyeballs on the case really DO seem attractive! We give it a 9 out of 10 stars."
 
maleficarus said:
Before mad onion came along the only benchmark that was used was Quake2 from ID. It was an in game demo. You guys consider that "real world?" What happened if you don't play quake2? Can't be real world to you then can it? Also taking a situation within a game (that you might never play) and making it such an extreme situation by DEFAULT makes it not real world at all.

You can't argue with this logic although most of you die hard [H] supporters will like to try. 3dmark is more real world then anything as it’s a benchmark to reflect a year or possibly 2 years down the road into the future. It does in fact use all of Microsoft’s DX9.0 paths and it does try to not allow cheating by restricting certain driver builds. Hey folks that’s "real world".

:eek:
Click to expand...

Dude, you fault using Quake 2 as a benchmark, because not everyone plays Q2. How many people play 3DMark? Also, I think Kyle's main problem with 3DMark is with some video card manufacturers being financially involved with Mad Onion. It makes them look a little "bent." But, you have your opinion, and your right to it. So, you have vented, go back to playing 3DMark on your Cyrix processor (since anything bad said about it is probably from Intel/AMD fans...) and have a nice day.
 
DigitalisAkujin said:
HardOCP isn't what it used to be. Right now the articles and reviews generally seem like they are suck ups to companies just so they would send more free shit.

Also I don't agree with a bias toward AMD. HardOCP is pretty equal when it comes to that. After all they get free samples from Intel too. :)
Click to expand...

I placed a $600 order from Newegg yesterday. :cool:

As for "bad" reviews, there is no doubt that you don't see as many as you used to, but there is good reason for that and I think I can best explain it like this and let's use motherboard reviews for example.

A full motherboard review, the way we do it, including all testing and formatting of the actual review will hammer out to be 40 to 80 man hours depending on the motherboard and a lot of variables. That is a lot of time and money that has to be spent. Say if 10 hours into it, we find that the motherboard is a total hunk of shit that we can't even get to operate stable at stock settings and after working directly with the maker for however we generally shitcan the review and move on.

Now the question here is, do we give some half assed review that is not properly done that rakes the motherboard over the coals, which in many cases may not fair, or do we move on and spend our time telling you about a product that is at the very least "ok" when it comes to operation?

I usually elect to spend our resources telling you about boards that we find to be good/ok/great buys instead of spending weeks of our time to tell you which ones suck. So generally, every motherboard you see reviewed by us now days is at the very least a decent performer when it comes to stable stock operation.

Hope this helps make some sense out of the content.
 
I personally don't care about how [H] conducts their hardware reviews.
Biased ? Are you serious ? Are you that tired when you read tech news that you can't click on 1 of the links that [H] happens to have listed for the same product lauch for comparison?
Next thing you know ppl will be saying that the bible was written biased also :D LOL SARCASM
[H] is however my homepage , because of all the news that i can find posted on here.
I hope this is the last post of this thread because face it guys the guy who started it is a opinionated Idiot and may well be this 13 year old kid.
Who cares anyway?
I know! I know! , here it goes:
I don't like ATI and [H] cause they are red , RED is ugly and not apropriatte for the IT industry!
If you don't like it don't eat it!!!!
 
My main problem with HardOCP is what it decides to review, they don't work to help find the best gaming equipment anymore.
They act as a front for the PR departments, reviewing products with beta drivers that aren't going to be released for months. How does that help the gamers?
The 3 newest articles are on the high of high end parts, two of the reviews are on products you can't even purchase yet :rolleyes:
 
Lord Talibano said:
I personally don't care about how [H] conducts their hardware reviews.
Biased ? Are you serious ? Are you that tired when you read tech news that you can't click on 1 of the links that [H] happens to have listed for the same product lauch for comparison?
Next thing you know ppl will be saying that the bible was written biased also :D LOL SARCASM
[H] is however my homepage , because of all the news that i can find posted on here.
I hope this is the last post of this thread because face it guys the guy who started it is a opinionated Idiot and may well be this 13 year old kid.
Who cares anyway?
I know! I know! , here it goes:
I don't like ATI and [H] cause they are red , RED is ugly and not apropriatte for the IT industry!
If you don't like it don't eat it!!!!
Click to expand...

WOW! calling someone a 13 year old opinionated idiot, sure seems to make your maturity level soar. Im not sure what is bad about having an opinion and sticking to it ... aprently if you have an opinion different then Lord Taliban your an idiot ?

Thats some good logic ....... /sarcasm
 
Postalgeist said:
Dude, you fault using Quake 2 as a benchmark, because not everyone plays Q2. How many people play 3DMark? Also, I think Kyle's main problem with 3DMark is with some video card manufacturers being financially involved with Mad Onion. It makes them look a little "bent." But, you have your opinion, and your right to it. So, you have vented, go back to playing 3DMark on your Cyrix processor (since anything bad said about it is probably from Intel/AMD fans...) and have a nice day.
Click to expand...


Cyrix was the shit back in the day :mad:


(ok...not really, but love for them anyways)
 
I don't necessarily agree with the 1st post, but I will say I don't like the graphs that their using. I understand why they're using them, but they are fairly difficult to read and make any sense off. I'd prefer a line graph. :eek:
 
I don't know about the rest of you but [H] is one of three pages I read every morning (and Tom's isn't one of them :p )

Hey this thread made it to the frontpage! Hooray! :cool:
 
Bitch Moan Complain

Fact is over the years the [H] crew (especially Kyle since he owns the site) has been accused of bias one way or another based on who is the "losing team" at the time. It used to be AMD, then it went to Intel, then back and forth again. Just as well things went with 3dfx, then nVidia, then ATI, and all over the place. At the moment the mantle of gaming performance rests on AMD so they get the crown and most of the kudos. With video cards there is no clear winner however ATI has been able to take the crown with brute force. Something Intel is showing us right now that doesn't always work.

Traditionally the [H] has reported neutrally what's going on in the industry and the fact is right now that Intel has fallen flat on their face (and changed their roadmap to suit), AMD's been looking toward a good future for a while now, and the video card industry is alive with fierce competition.

Seems to me that those of you who bitch about it all are just looking for all or most of the kudos to go to whomever you are a !!!!!! for. :rolleyes:
 
"That would not go over if this was a newspaper as the readers would not tolerate that kind of journalism in a publication."

Never read the NY Times or Washington Post, have you?
 
I'll voice some support for the FRAPs graphs...they are very telling in real world use (especially the troughs) much moreso than timedemo numbers. . They should be posted with identical resolution and AA/AF settings though....that was a major boo-boo in the SLI review.

As for the reviews of hardware that is vapor in the retail channel, you have to make news somehow I suppose.

I vote for more motherboard barbeques and more Asia Carrera.
 
Adisharr said:
I don't know about the rest of you but [H] is one of three pages I read every morning (and Tom's isn't one of them :p )

Hey this thread made it to the frontpage! Hooray! :cool:
Click to expand...

HardOCP, Anandtech and Tomshardware are my three main stops. :D
 
Wolf-R1 said:
Bitch Moan Complain

Fact is over the years the [H] crew (especially Kyle since he owns the site) has been accused of bias one way or another based on who is the "losing team" at the time. It used to be AMD, then it went to Intel, then back and forth again. Just as well things went with 3dfx, then nVidia, then ATI, and all over the place. At the moment the mantle of gaming performance rests on AMD so they get the crown and most of the kudos. With video cards there is no clear winner however ATI has been able to take the crown with brute force. Something Intel is showing us right now that doesn't always work.

Traditionally the [H] has reported neutrally what's going on in the industry and the fact is right now that Intel has fallen flat on their face (and changed their roadmap to suit), AMD's been looking toward a good future for a while now, and the video card industry is alive with fierce competition.

Seems to me that those of you who bitch about it all are just looking for all or most of the kudos to go to whomever you are a !!!!!! for. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I fail to understand that when anyone has a different opinion then the fan boys it is deemed to be complaining or whineing ?
I also dont understand the logic behind people whineing about whiners ?

And yes I am aware of the ironic nature of this post, it is un-avoidable.
 
You can use your computer for more than just gaming !! ;)

Overall i love the [H] and if someone doesnt like it, oh well.....not like i care.


PS: I had many AMDs (A64s) and many Intels (P4s and XEONs) wich were Vapochilled or Watercooled.

The AMDs are faster in gaming acording to numbers. But i have never seen a 3GHz P4 be the biggest problem in games yet. For multitasking and multimedia the Intels rule over AMD. Period.

 
[H}ardOCP is one of the least biased sites I have found on the web. I love the fact that when there is a major release of some hardware, [H] links to the other sites. Some of the linked reviews results conflict with the [H] results, but are still linked to. If this site was biased, they would not link to other sites because other opinions wouldn't matter.


As far as AMD. I am a huge Intel fan, but look what has been put out. AMD has the A64, while Intel is putting out mini-ovens, I mean Prescott core P4. I had to put off my annual upgrade, 'cause Intel has nothing worth upgrading to and I haven't done enough AMD research. (I am an AMD noobie) The [H] is biased to what is the best out there at any point in time.
 
Most if not all reviiew sites do not buy what they review but have it given to them by a company hoping for (expecting) a good review.
 
tillyoubreakit said:
The AMDs are faster in gaming acording to numbers. But i have never seen a 3GHz P4 be the biggest problem in games yet. For multitasking and multimedia the Intels rule over AMD. Period.
Click to expand...

Thats because most all games are GPU intensive. There are a few like HL2 and Morrowind that are alot more CPU intensive but those types of games are few and in-between. When people look at CPU reviews and look at the gaming benchmarks they are like HOLY SHIT that A64 OWNZ that Pentium 4! They just forget to realize their benchmarking at 800x600 or lower most of the time and this is a resolution nobody plays at. And even if you did play at 800x600, your FPS would be through the roof on ither CPU so it wouldn't matter which you had. The video card will continue to be the most important aspect of gaming performance. The A64 is a better gaming CPU because of its on-die memory controller (not its architecture) but the Pentium 4 performs just as well in the majority of games when playing at 1280x1024 or 1600x1200.

It just really gets on my nerves when i look at CPU reviews at places like Anandtech because they simply do not know how to benchmark a CPU at all. They take the CPU and run it through 15 game benchmarks and then 1 or 2 synthetic benchmarks like PCMark. Thats not a CPU review. Thats a video card review.

CPU intensive tasks involve multitasking, compression, encodeing, rendering, compiling and so on.

And i just built me a new Athlon 64 3500+ 90nm rig for gaming myself. I play some really CPU intensive games like Morrowind so it really helps out in fps.
 
bonkrowave said:
Mostly long and sausage shaped, and it vibrates.
Click to expand...

Hehe, you must be quite desprate. How old are you 13?
I must have some old Playboys somewhere for ya. :p


To burningrave101

I agree. I had a A64 3500 too and loved it in gaming. But i sold it since i hate stuttering and i usually have tons of APPs open.

Its a persoanl choice and the [H] just gives their view and its a free world so its up to the reader to decide which he believes.

Cheers
 
I'm really sorry to see some of the opinions here.

From being a longtime [H] reader, I've sent feedback directly to Kyle Bennet from time to time. I've also seen how he responds to alot of feedback on similar issues. The current benchmarking/review format that the [H] lives by is requested by the readers. TONS of people emailed Kyle asking him for more real-world benchmarks, and to shy away from non-applicable environments.

3DMark is a non-applicable environment because everything is in a controlled situation. Every frame is anticipated, every texture, every polygon, is an environment that can be manipulated quite a bit easier than the infinitsemal directions a player can face in-game or what combinations of I/O, rendering, etc can happen in a random real-world event.

Kyle recognized this, and based on feedback from readers, instituted this sort of policy. If you want to see pro-Intel reviews by the way, Intel has to put something killer out. The [H] has a long history regarding Athlon64/Hammer saying "AND IT BETTER NOT SUCK WHEN IT GETS HERE"

A year and a half ago, the comments that [H] was all pro-Intel were rampant, but maybe that's because Intel held the performance crown and was pushing a faster environment than AMD was because they were still on K7??? No, there is a conspiracy about, and Intel must have donated 500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 systems to the [H] in exchange for good reviews. Well AHA, AMD just donated 10,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to trump Intel!!!

Give me a break, I trust the [H]. I asked them for the current review structure, no one else gives a damn.

I'm very sorry that alot of you feel this way about the [H], but if it's such an issue you are not being forced to read their reviews. Go elsewhere.
 
couldn't stand to read 9 pages of replies, so just responding to original post.

you should always look at several different reviews for a product, and take each with a grain of salt. all reviews are biased in some way, even if unintentionally.
 
Opinions are like bungholes, everyone has one. (And sometimes, the people are one.)

Having said that, I think the [H] does a damn good job of testing out the hardware, telling us their results, and matching their opinons with the facts. Why do I feel this way? Simple, I compare what Kyle or Steve says / reviews with other sites. If, on similar hardware, thy both have more-or-less identical results and they have more-or-less identical opinions then I call ti a good day and believe them both. If they don't match up opinions but results are the same then I wonder what the hell is going on. That hasn't happened yet to my knowledge.

On synthetic benchmarks I think that they play a role but not the only role to obey. They tell me things I don't need to know, like Content Creation scores and what not. What I personally care about are things like "How many FPS do I get in Doom 3 at 1600x1200x32 with all the goodies on?" [H] tells me this in spades.

The only problem is envy. I see their scores and wish I had that rig to play on. But that's another story.

Real world benchmarks are great, and as others have already said, they're kind of meaningless to someone who doesn't use that application. I want high FPS in Doom 3, someone else only wants a system that can complile the linux kernel 2.6.9 really fast. These are two valid tests for the things they are testing, but the results will be geared toward what they are catering to, if that makes sense.

I think the benchmarks supplied are pretty valid. Although, I find it a wee bit annoying to see every possible configuration benchmarked. Do we really need to see and resolutions below 800x600 benchmarked anymore? I kinda doubt it. But for those that are forced to play at those low res solutions, and sometimes I fall into that group, I see the benefit. So in a way I'm torn on that issue.

And as an asside, who is going to use a GF6800OC just for Word or Excel? I mean, come on, that's overkill.

We come here to the [H] for a reason, that being: to read the review, to see the benchmarks, and formulate a purchase opinion based on those values. If Kyle or Steve screws up they appologise and fix the results--they don't want to piss off the reader, they want to do them a service. They're trying to help. I appreciate that.

Now I don't consider just their opinion, as I said; I compare with others and make my mind up. Kind of like getting a second opinion from a different doctor.

So, are the [H] guys biased? As far as I can see they are...biased toward the best stuff. If AMD is killing Intel, they tell us; and once the reverse is true the tell us. The BFG6800OC is bad-ass. We know this because they showed us that it is. It's not like they're fudging the results or not running tests because it would make their current darling product look like monkeybutt.

People, we have a brain. Let's use them, ok?
 
Quote "Basically my view is that [Hard]ocp tries to push its views on us readers without being fair and unbiased. That would not go over if this was a newspaper as the readers would not tolerate that kind of journalism in a publication."

I work in Law enforcement and you have no idea how much the media/newspapers are biased and unfair in their reporting!! And whos to tell the truth when they are your only source of info?? I don't watch the news or read the paper because of this. YOU tolerate "that" kind of journalism every time you read a paper or watch the news.
 
I like Hard|OCP for the news. I check this site daily and usually learn a thing or two, and I really enjoy the links to other reviews on the net as you can't make a decision on just reading one site or one review... it always helps to read as many different takes, and look for trends.

I also like to visit this forum sometimes, but am starting to lose interest as there sure are some babbling morons here who can never accept they were wrong or misinformed. Arguments that nobody wins. Sure, its everywhere but I have found some of the most opinionated and stubborn people on this board (maybe I spend too much time in the car section? hah). I even unsubscribe to my own threads here. :(

Things I don't like about Hard|OCP:

- too much drama. If I wanted drama, I would watch a soap opera. (i.e. Phantom console, 3dMark, driver cheating, etc.)

- I don't agree with apples-to-oranges comparisons. Who decides what settings (AA/AF/res) make for fair comparison? Too much control left to the reviewers judgement.

- The reviews are not as scientific as some of the other well-known review sites. i.e. using different driver versions or different memory or overclocked cards to represent stock up-level cards (using oc'd 6800GT as a 6800U)


While I don't consider 3dmark benchmarks to be the end-all-be-all to videocard performance, I believe there is some value to the results, and believe it can be an indicator of video card performance. To completely discredit or disregard this benchmark tool is a mistake and probably an emotional decision by the editors.

Note to Kyle and editors:
Please take the tears out of your stories. Put some of your personal tussles aside so you can focus on the facts. Computer hardware and games don't always have to be scandalous.
 
I have to bitch at this crowd a little bit too:

Why can't some of you people (read: phanboys) accept that there can be TWO competing products that can both be acceptable? Why can't somebody play and enjoy both HL2 and Doom3? Why does it have to be one vs the other?

Both AMD and Intel make CPU's that can get the job done. Sure, you can spend a chunk of your life arguing the little details, or you could just buy the one that better suits your needs. Doesn't always have to be a "right" and "wrong" CPU choice. Same thing for video cards.

If anything, you should be happy that there is competition. If it wasn't for ATI, our nvidia cards wouldn't be nearly as fast as they are today. Same with CPU's, same for video games, cars, etc. Be thankful for your competitors, and the consumer is who benefits.

yeesh, can't we all get along and/or co-exist??? Would the world really be that much better of a place if it were run by monopolies?
 
I agree to that too. Too many people are looking for drama these days. I think this entire Hardware reviewing gets boring. Its the same crap every 6 month. :rolleyes:

Everyone buy what you want. Hell, i switched Pcs every 3 month at least and i had one time the AMD than the Intel....

just choose which one you like more
 
I love how selective perception works. It is always amusing to see someone able to site like two examples which are nebulous at best, and then shit all over peoples integrity cause the article didn't say what they wanted it to. What fucking site in all of internet history is completely unbiased? Just one example will do! Oh no the sky is falling, Brent was sent a free vid card to review. Compare the expense of that to advertising in the hottest mags and TV commercials. It's not a bribe. It is inexpensive advertising. What are they supposed to do? Pay for every piece of hardware they review while no one is willing to pay for the service of using the reviews? (Breaks out whip, I do not care about your children not eating we want those numbers now!) Even if they did, when they said one thing outperformed another, the whining and moaning would begin and we're right back where we started. I've personally witnessed the inefficiency of 3dmark when my brother in laws system benched out waaaayyyy lower than my backup machine due to its inability to run Mother Nature, yet outperformed that backup machine in every game we tested.
Get real.
 
My basic opinions on the modern [H] :

1. I really don't care about whether or not 3dmark will represent real world performance, but I do like running it as a test whenever I get a major new piece of hardware because of the project managing capabilities.

2. These 'maximum possible IQ at a playable framerate' benchmarks annoy the hell out of me considering I normally play at 1152x864 on my poor 'ol monitor.

3. I really don't see any bias in their reviews. I'm running a 2.4C at 3.3 GHz and I realize that intel's doing pretty poor right now when it comes to gaming, and the reviews reflect it. (But as others have mentioned, they also reflect the 'smoothness' of running an Intel CPU compared to an AMD CPU, which is something I enjoy about this processor compared to my past AMD procs.) But, 3.3 GHZ with an 'effective' 1100 MHz FSB has suited me fine for a year and a half and will probably suit me fine for some time to come.
 
Hornswoggler said:
Note to Kyle and editors:
Please take the tears out of your stories. Put some of your personal tussles aside so you can focus on the facts. Computer hardware and games don't always have to be scandalous.
Click to expand...

What fun would any of it be without the scandals? Take that away and it all becomes boring, I say bring it on. Drag out every skeleton, and clean the green pus from every little pusticle or gaping infection. Companies that don't want their scandals aired shouldn't be practicing in such manners anyway.

Again if you don't like reading it, why are you here reading all the scandals??? I take it that, Steve and Kyle forced your head into a vice, and you have NO CHOICE but to look!!!???
 
maleficarus said:
You gotta problem with what I said? And secondly you are the troll here not me. It got alot of responces because its a good topic that (as you can see) alot of people want to talk about. And go crawl back under your rock....
Click to expand...

Dude... You actually claimed that a, BY DEFINITION, "SYNTHETIC" benchmark was a better test or REAL WORLD GAMING than a, BY DEFINITION, "REAL WORLD GAME".

Why should anyone give a flying fark what you have to say after you said that?

The reason you are a troll is because you said something so pattently senseless that the only reason a person over the age of 12 would possibly ever say it is because they were trolling.

The stuff I said actually makes sense and is valid and relevant to something previously posted, and therefore is not trolling.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top