![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
On the contrary, this is the very evolution of the industry. This is where the competition has taken the online computer hardware journal. All print media are in competition. This type of issue is what makes professional journalism.Cleeve said:
bingo13 said:Then why does Kyle rant and rave that everyone is a liar or cronie if they have a different opinion or conclusion about the product?Really, if the product is not reviewed then why is your opinion any better than mine?
(and we'll still love you too)I thought the same thing. Its one thing to have a joke around the forums or offices, but keep that kind of stuff off the front page, especially in the title of a professional article. Well, if you are trying to look professional that is.joegee said:
That comment from the article was missleading because we all know that the Conroe is faster sometimes by a large margin (*when it isnt bottlenecked*) but it is as if the intention is to downplay conroes performance as if there was something wrong with Intel actually having a high performance gaming chip.
Exactly.FlyinBrian said:
Undoubtedly in some of the forthcoming cards/games or someone using Crossfire/SLI will take advantage of Conroe's performance advantage. Let's not forget the pick me up you also get in everything else, not to mention it's ability to clock higher. Good reviews don't involve telling people what they should do... but then all of them do that. You get "five stars!" or "Editor's Choice!" on just about every review out there. Review something that sucks!
joegee said:This is not addressed to any one specific poster in here.
I learned long ago that canned benchmarks are a great way of doing objective comparisons of processors. Processor A shows a 20% increase in raw FPU power over its predecessor, processor C, and 10% over its competitor, processor B. There's a time and a place for that information -- it's in the professional arena. Even so, the real-world benchmarks Anandtech does of server-class processors are incalculably valuable when I make real-world buying decisions for clients.
It's not all about Sandra 2006.
In my personal workspace if all I did was run canned benchmarks all day, or if I only used the narrow set of apps included in most commerical benchmarks then canned benchmark reviews would be perfect for me. On the other hand every day I use my PC for wide a variety of tasks. Since I am the one that needs to work and live with the product I purchase with my money, and because I make a living in the real world and can't continually upgrade whenever the latest greatest comes out from Intel and AMD, real-world reviews are more meaningful to me when decision time comes regarding my personal choices.
Speaking of personal, it's not like HardOCP's reviews don't fully disclose their rationale and their methodology. If you don't trust Kyle and company, that's fine, get your information somewhere else, but if you're going to read through the review anyways and dismiss their findings based on your personal feelings, don't try to back it up with "facts" you're pulling out of your rear end. That's disingenious at best, and at worst it's transparently petty. Be up-front and admit you don't like these people, don't trust them, whatever your personal reason may be, that you do not like their review for that reason, and in the future if you want to avoid getting pissed off, stay away.
Your mileage may vary, my comment is no more worthy than any other in here, but to me in the end arguing the merits of either method over the other is shortsighted, because both techniques have their places in the repertoir of any tech-savant individual.
Dunno if this makes any sense or not. File appropriately.
Peace,
-Joe G.
P.S. Yah, the "squid" thing is a bit immature, but consider the market. Is it really that much of a shock? Nothing to see here folks, move along.
I think they are offended because it brings into question thier credibility as to theirs and HardOCP's demographic. So which is the more credible evaluation?magoo said:Explain how someone can be offended by a generalized statement.
If "they " are that sensitive, maybe they are in the wrong business. Suck it up.
Despite all the hoopla folks there's a very simple point here. Did [H] fabricate any of their tests? No. Were there amazing differences between AMD and Intel in their testing? No. End of story, thats the point of the review. All comments in that review pertain to that review. Keep it focused. Its simply idealism vs. realism. I'll pay for the realism thank you very much. Idealism does me no good because I may never tap that idealistic extra speed product X supposedly has in Y scenario. Windows 64-bit anyone?BarneyGumble said:
JOESKURTU said:
Steve said:I keep seeing this over and over "Kyle called all other websites LIARS". That is not true, what he said was:
If someone took a personal offense to that, I have no idea why.
We do not believe in canned benchmarks and we feel that they do NOT give you the whole story. You press a button, wait a bit and you have your results. We think giving you only frames per second numbers is total BS.
That is our opinion. We think that gaming benchmarks and all out 800x600 FPS runs LIE TO YOU. At 800x600, you are lead to believe "X" brand processor is the greatest when the truth is, when run in real world settings, neither showed an advantage over the other. Again...that is our opinion. We do things different. Not everyone likes it but apparently a ton of people DO or we wouldn't be here, would we?
Somehow that got twisted into "KYLE SAYS EVERY WEBSITE IS LIARS!" Nobody said that and to be totally honest, it literally freaks me out that someone would even think that somehow anything we said would apply to them / their website personally.
If you like our evaluations, great...we love you too.
If you hate our evaluations, great...we love you too.
If you joined the forums in the last 24 hours to call us names, stay a while, there will be TONS of opportunities in the future to call us names again.
GoldenTiger said:
JOESKURTU said:Well, this whole internet thing seems to be getting more and more hostile.
Before people mouth off that web sites are actively trying to decieve their readers, they should think about their Lawyer's kids.
Some people put their Lawayer's kids through college because they are not considerate of others. Who wants to hear this stuff? I come here to find out about next gen hardware, not that someone doesn't like the way they are telling me about it.
Some things need to be said, yes, however, there comes a point where it all just turns hostile and you want to take a vacation from the internet.
jon67 said:Everybody assumed [H] were reviewing Conroe but they weren.t, and suddenly it all turned into an Oprah show. Not necessarily a bad thing
What I do not understand is the rush of getting the "real-world" non-CPU review out in the first place after the NDA was lifted. After all, no other sites did it this way - they all published canned benchmarks those fucking liars - so there was no competition for [H] really. They could have used a few more days and maybe merged the 4 conroe articles into one, who knows, maybe it would have been better received if there had been one (and only one) conclusion taking both "real-world gaming" and "real-world applications" performance into consideration.
And then the [H] mobo review with timedemo gaming benchmarks came a few days after... I don.t get it, why so inconsistent?
jon67 said:Everybody assumed [H] were reviewing Conroe but they weren.t, and suddenly it all turned into an Oprah show. Not necessarily a bad thing
your thinking is backwards, i think. The more sites you visit and more tests you see on any given product, the more informed decision you can and will make.gigantorebirdie said:
GoldenTiger said:
GoldenTiger said:
jon67 said:
.