• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Finding good source

D

dc_128

n00b
Joined
Oct 28, 2004
Messages
2
I was just wondering what are the best sites for hardware reviews and news? I've been into computers for a while now with sites like Tom's Hardware but I'm trying to find like the biggest ones. Anyone has an idea as to wich ones I should be looking out?
 
I don't care much for review sites that cover a broad range of topics because their lack of expertise in some areas is quite evident. It would better serve you if you asked about review sites of certain topics that you want to know more about.
 
I typically find reviews worthless and pointless. The people writing them are usually biased or simply use benchmarks for their opinions/results.

I tend to use message boards like the [H]ard forum to gain other users's opinions on different subject matter. They will always state their opinion (sometimes when we don't like it :) ) but it is much more beneficial in my opinion.
 
Hardocp.com
Anandtech.com
Shacknews.com
Hothardware.com

Are a few of my favs.
 
but what yould be like your top 10 cause I usually like to look at more than one source for like reviews, previes, news articles and so on...
 
 
Carnival Forces said:
....i hope that was a typo....:rolleyes:
THG is incredibly biased; it accepts pay outs from companies like OCZ to favorably review their products...don't go there...for your own good.
Click to expand...

Uh huh, thats why they are the most trafficted hardware site online and rated #1.

And what are they incredibly biased towards? Intel? lol

There was a time when Tomshardware was considered to be totally AMD bias and there was also a time when Toms pointed out flaws in the Pentium 4 architecture and Intel wouldn't even send them products to review. There was also a time when they were ATI bias, and nVidia bias, and Western Digital bias, and Microsoft bias, and Dell bias, and so on and so forth.

Do you ever wonder where these accusations of being bias come from? They come from other hardware forums and its usually the result of someone being offended by their findings.

HardOCP is considered rather bias, especially towards ATI, on quite a few forums out there.

Tomshardware has mistakes in their reviews at times like any other but they still put out alot of good articles.

If you dont like them then thats your opinion but i seriously doubt you have any kind of REAL proof of them accepting money from Intel or OCZ or anyone else.

How do you know other sites like Anandtech, Tech Report, FiringSquad, or even HardOCP hasn't ever received money or some special deal to sway their findings in a review? You dont.

Tomshardware said:
However, the battle for more performance has clearly lost its velocity. Despite being a bit faster, the new P4 Extreme Edition is not able to achieve a significant difference in performance over preceding models. In terms of CPU clock speeds, Intel has admittedly hit a ceiling with the Prescott core. That also applies to the 130 nm Gallatin core, as squeezing out higher clock speeds would likely be hard to accomplish without jeopardizing yield rates.

Therefore, the balance of power between AMD and Intel remains unchanged: when it comes to gaming, Intel has nothing to thwart the dominance of the Athlon64 family in general, and the FX in particular. On the other hand, audio/video encoding tasks and synthetic benchmarks are usually dominated by Intel processors.

The three-level cache architecture of the Extreme Edition processors likely does not benefit very much from the faster FSB speed. The reason is that this design is meant to allow CPU performance to be more independent from memory performance.

Everyone interested in buying an Intel system should now insist on the 925XE chipset. It is the same price as the FSB800 part 925X, and both the 915P and 925X could turn out to be a dead-end when it comes to future processor upgrades.

Finally, we need to comment on the $999 price point that has been common for Intel's Extreme Edition processors. We must emphasize that the performance increase of the EE relative to an ordinary processor is far too little to justify spending that much money on a CPU.
Click to expand...

http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/20041101/925xe-14.html

Can't you just feel that Intel biasness oozing from their every remark? lol
 
Carnival Forces said:
THG is incredibly biased.
Click to expand...
You know, so is [H]ard|OCP. That's what reviews are all about--opinions. Tom's Hardware has done some great reviews lately as well as in the past. While I take issue to the comparisons made in many of their reviews (ex. pitting two uncomparable processors together), and the conclusions made in many reviews, I feel that you can't write off the whole site. Otherwise I would have wrote off [H]ard|OCP and AnandTech a number of times.

But what do I know, I fight a losing battle against the bandwagon of Tom's haters here...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top