FragBox 2 Failure Ruffles Falcon Feathers

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, there are more than a few things that Drax does not understand about HardOCP and the industry in general. If all of this existed in a vacuum, would could do everything perfect, but the fact is that it does not.

FNW sold us a computer to play BF2, after a week on the phone with their tech support (which I can argue would have been several weeks for a normal person) the machine still did not do what FNW said it would do. Chris decided to terminate the consumer experience at that point and try to figure out real answers. We will look at this next time before calling it quits.

As for opinions and "bias," that is exactly what we are in the business of publishing. We cover some things in a very subjective manner, and we do that on purpose in order to see things on a consumer-centric level. If you want "objective" testing that gives no analysis or thought process behind it, I highly suggest you do not read HardOCP. You are looking for a site that will run 3dMark, SiSoft Sandra, and SuperPi and declare a winner. Firingsquad is famous for giving you pages and pages of benchmarks graphs with no analysis, I would suggest you maybe start there if you are looking for content void of opinion.
 
Morley said:
Have you not been paying attention? I apologized for coming to a conclusion about an issue that wasn't 100% resolved, regardless of how many people on both sides agreed with said conclusion.

Edit: The [H] Consumer Systems Evaluation Program is designed to mirror the customer experience, period. We decided that, as a consumer, we would have returned the machine.
Why appologize? Your reasons for your decisions were legitimate.

Also, I'm skeptical about the new ATI chipset as well, just like anyone SHOULD be of any unproven, new product. I'll be just as skeptical of the Nforce5 chipset (should one ever exist) until it's proven NOT to suck.

No one who's been around computers for years and years trusts ANY new product until it's proven to work as it should.

If people want to cry about your review, let em. They didn't wait weeks for their shiny new computer to arrive only to spend weeks trying to get the damn thing to work. If I called up tech support and they said "yeah we've had issues with this motherboard, RAM timings, and certain games in the past" I wouldn't then think, "Oh well then obviously the video card is the problem!" No, actually I'd be thinking, "Wow, I just spent $3200 on a turd!"

If I gave Falcon $3200 to build me a CAD workstation and after running the program for 5 hours or less it crashed (consistantly) I'd be pissed off as well. And we're talking about FNW here folks. If they don't know what can and can't run BF2 and how reliable it is on their hardware, they have no business charging people thousands of dollars to make custom gaming rigs. They aren't new at this business.

While returning the system for an RMA would have been nice, they had no requirement to do so. After dealing with tech support for 1 day, let alone a week or more, I'd have returned the system also. (Remember it took 3 weeks to arrive + X amount more troubleshooting.) Why would you RMA something when your "reasonable expectation" would be to receive another system that performed the same way in BF2? (the program is was bought to run) That was EXACTLY the expectation I would've had after dealing with tech support for so long and hearing them tell me of all the problems they were having with this product. Why the hell would I want another one through RMA?

$3200? Yeah, they better get it right the first time for that kind of money. Chris was more than reasonable in his patience and in his conclusion.
 
How valuable is a review of a defective system to someone who is possibly going to purchase the fragbox 2? Not very useful IMO.

Falcon Northwest has warranties against defective systems, and you failed to follow through on this aspect of customer service and instead just gave up. So what the review boils down to is a review of a defective system, coupled with a review of Falcons customer service, which was not followed through on and allowed to provide Hard with a working system.

In addition we have Kyle, yet again, talking smack about other review sites. Let me ask, when was the last time a regular Joe was able to recreate your custom benchmark procedure ? Or comprehend the graphs which look more like the reading on an oscilloscope, under extreme duress?
 
so if you happen to get 1 of those 2% of the systems that is a lemon you convey to the readers that the 2% is representative of the other 98%? it's fine that you would post the original test and all the problems. but if you want to represent the experience of the consumer as you claim then guess what- we don't get to just say "oh i'm reveiwing this and it's broken. take it back and refund my money." we have to go through the RMA process and get it fixed.

and for heaven's sake, this is an OEM system review. why would anyone who knows how to build a system buy an OEM system? for support. your review of the support you get is just as important or more important than what .5% difference in gameplay performance exists between 2 systems.

Morley said:
Again, you just don't understand the goal of what we're trying to do here. It's not my job to make sure we even HAVE a working machine! If I'm not happy with a system, I'm going to return it, and convey to the reader my experiences. This isn't a beta testing lab, it's a consumer evaluations lab.

all of that is somewhat secondary though. the real problem is that you're committing doublespeak on this whole issue. on the one hand you want to say yeah we misdiagnosed it as a mobo issue, but we're leaving this review up as it represents our experience with the product.
Falcon Northwest says that HardOCP is wrong to blame ATI’s chipset for the terrible gaming instabilities we found in the FragBox 2. We accept that and are of course addressing that here.
then out of the other side of your collective mouths, you have this quote from kyle:
I still firmly stand by our opinions of the ATI Radeon Xpress 200 chipset. I would neither use one in my personal system, nor any system that I might build due to the stability issues I have seen with it in the past. The chipset might be fine for email and Web surfing boxes, but it is not a good solution for gamers.

so which is it? was the fault with the video card or with the chipset? drawing upon some vague recollection of past experience to make some rather derogatory comments about the chipset is bull. if you want to make that comment then you need to provide a link to another review of an Xpress 200 system you did where the results showed it sucking. let those results speak for themselves.

again at the very end you commit some more doublespeak, and again devalue your own review with this comment:
We have heard from 3 other FragBox 2 owners that shared the same stability issues, but, overall, the majority of FragBox 2 owners seem to be very happy customers.
since when do you poll the general public to produce scores for your reviews? why only in this one case? and why do you feel it's necessary to point out that 3 people had problems? every product ever made has problems in some percentage. unless you can provide a statistically significant sampling of those owners and show that the percentage of owners who have problems is higher than normal or in comparison to other similar products then adding that line is completely and totally worthless to the discussion. one can only venture a guess that you included the comment out of bias against the product or because you are a poor reviewer who basis your writing on hearsay and conjecture from the very audience you are supposed to be writing for.

what i think is missing here is that you are supposed to be producing an evaluation based on hard data. you make conclusions based on empirical evidence gathered during your testing. it is irresponsible and deceitful to just toss on statements like the ones at the end without providing some evidence to back them up.

in any case, it was a good idea not to take the handpicked system back for retesting. i would like to see an identical system purchased anonymously and restested though. in my opinion on this box hardocp has provided very little useful information to make a purchasing decision on.

i hope find this feedback helpful. i'm trying to be helpful here and point you in a direction . . . like "be a scientist" when you do these things.
 
dworley said:
I recently bought an MSI RS480M2 IL MB for my X-Qpack to build a system primarily for BF2 and experienced hard lockups within 20 minutes of gaming. After days of troubleshooting I finally determined it was being caused by an imcompadibility between my Audigy2 ZS and the MSI RS480M2 MB! When I used onboard sound I did not get any lockups. So, I finally tried a Creative X-fi extreme music audio card and it worked 100% stable with no lockups.

After researching this issue on MSI's forum there are numerous others who have experienced these hard lockups when using an Audigy2 ZS with the MSI RS480M2 IL Motherboard:
MSI Forum Link
See, that was FNWs job. That's what they charge the price premium for... This was an OEM system build, not a DIY. You except potential problems like that when you build your own computer, not when you buy a custom built gaming system.
 
Draax said:
How valuable is a review of a defective system to someone who is possibly going to purchase the fragbox 2? Not very useful IMO.

Falcon Northwest has warranties against defective systems, and you failed to follow through on this aspect of customer service and instead just gave up. So what the review boils down to is a review of a defective system, coupled with a review of Falcons customer service, which was not followed through on and allowed to provide Hard with a working system.

Someone finally gets it. There was no review. A bad video card slipped through testing (shit happens) and instead of just getting FNW to fix it, and THEN doing the review, it turned into a pissing match between Kyle and FNW. How does this help anyone again?

Any causal reader or [H] person will read that, and the end result will be "FNW sucks OMG". The issue is not that [H] did anything wrong per se, but rather that FNW DIDN'T either and now will have no chance to redeem themsevles from a simple hardware defect.

End result: FNW looks like ass, the [H]'s ego and rep for "being stubborn and speaking our minds" gets inflated. How does this help anybody? The rest of us who don't want to sift through the soap-opera drama are left scratching our heads going WTF?

My humble suggstion, shit can the review, and start over. Take FNW at their word that the GPU was the problem, not the chipset. Prove them wrong, or allow them the opportunity to prove themselve right.
 
LyCoS said:
1) understandable
2) logical
3) as long as the problem hadn't been resolved, you can't claim it identified. you should have let falcon finish their evaluations.
4) at least wait for the story to end befor jumping to conclusion and dumping your waste in public.
5) that IS lack of professionalism, the story was not over when you posted the review. You've half-apologised for one thing, but have refused to recognise that your biggest mistake was the premature publishing of the article, regardless of what you can think or say, that's how it turns out, and it could have been avoided by a little patience.


Have you even read the two threads involved here let alone the articles. [H] HAS sad that they were incorrect for publishing the article in the fashion that they have. They have admitted that next time they will follow through with the RAM policy and wrap up everything before (if at all) revealing themselves if there is a problem with other systems. They are not wrong in their statements made about ATI's chipset. Why? BECAUSE IT IS AN OPINION. Opinions are wonderfull because THEY ARE NEVER WRONG. I swear i read some of these post and i can't help but wonder how much, if any, of the reviews or threads people have actually read. People keep rehashing issues and quoteing statement that have already been covered. Read, Think, THEN post. Thank you.
 
opinions are worthless in the context of hardware reviews. that does not mean [H] needs to use the benchmarking tools they've sworn off. that does not mean that they cannot draw conclusions based on their use of a product. but a conclusion drawn without the support of any empirical evidence is an opinion.

and yes, those are useless.
Beniled said:
They are not wrong in their statements made about ATI's chipset. Why? BECAUSE IT IS AN OPINION. Opinions are wonderfull because THEY ARE NEVER WRONG. I swear i read some of these post and i can't help but wonder how much, if any, of the reviews or threads people have actually read.
 
yo draxx, just stop posting. you definitely do not live in the same world we do.I think some of the mods should start to ignore those that seem to be flame baiting and let them wander off to another thread/forum. You guys really should put up a poll, the results should be interesting at least.
 
XamediX said:
yo draxx, just stop posting. you definitely do not live in the same world we do.I think some of the mods should start to ignore those that seem to be flame baiting and let them wander off to another thread/forum. You guys really should put up a poll, the results should be interesting at least.

Oh please :rolleyes: My comments directly related to the issue at hand. Yours on the other hand can be viewed as nothing but flame bait as you add nothing to the conversation and do not discuss the issue at hand, in the slightest. It’s a two way street, and hypocrits do not have the right of way.

Let me repost the OP for your viewing perusal.

The orginal thread on this evaluation can be found HERE. While you can read the full evaluation HERE.

This particular thread is devoted to the discussion of the article posted HERE, entitled FragBox 2 Failure Ruffles Falcon Feathers.
 
Several people seem to be convinced that Kyle/HardOCP just have a grudge against ATI, and are looking for any excuse to bash their products.

Well, that is easily enough answered... Kyle: Yes or No, do you have a grudge against ATI and are you just looking for any excuse to trash them?

Now, I don't think he would just out right lie in response to this, so if he says "no" can we just drop that and move on? If he says yes, then we will all know to take future reviews about ATI with a grain of salt. Even in that case, these guys are just human. Who among us DOESNT have a particular dislike of one company or another for whatever reason? They can't be 100% unbiased, its just not humanly possible!
 
xappie said:
Several people seem to be convinced that Kyle/HardOCP just have a grudge against ATI, and are looking for any excuse to bash their products.

Well, that is easily enough answered... Kyle: Yes or No, do you have a grudge against ATI and are you just looking for any excuse to trash them?

Now, I don't think he would just out right lie in response to this, so if he says "no" can we just drop that and move on? If he says yes, then we will all know to take future reviews about ATI with a grain of salt. Even in that case, these guys are just human. Who among us DOESNT have a particular dislike of one company or another for whatever reason? They can't be 100% unbiased, its just not humanly possible!

I can see why people think that. What alot of people are failing to realize is that Kyle has bagged on ATi about alot of things that were all TRUE. They've had poor availability of Crossfire and X1800XL parts, although the X1800XL availability wasn't there at launch, it was by weeks end. Kyle noted this on his front page post the day that news came out.

Still I don't think you can actually buy a Crossfire setup and get it working today. So the complaints about paper launches are valid. ATi's had a hard time getting their shit together lately. You've got to admit that if you look at the facts. Kyle just called them out on it.

They've bagged on nVidia in the past if you'll remember the FX 5x00 series disaster. They've also bagged on Intel and anyone else who released a sub par or less than impressive product. They call the good and the bad as they experience them. Isn't that what we'd all do?

The thing I like most about the [H] is the fact that when something sucks, they'll tell you that. Good or bad, they'll tell you why they think the product is one way or another.
 
Hi guys,

I just thought I’d offer my two cents, whether you care or not ;)

I hold both Falcon-NW and [H]ardOCP in high regard. Regardless of the situation, I believe that the system had a problem and that’s how the review works. The purpose of this review is to point out the end user experience. One can conclude that there was a hardware problem (not a BF2 problem) simply by reading the Falcon-NW response stating that the video card was bad – and perhaps by reading the review again.

We’ve delivered systems that have, for whatever reason, failed out of the box, but it’s far and few between, and when it does happen we go through all lengths to fix the problem. We cover the shipping both ways, labor, parts, etc. I am pretty sure Falcon does the same, thus the reason they have a great reputation.

The bottom line is you have ONE chance to make a first impression, and if we fail to deliver a fantastic out of box experience, we fail – period. I embed this into my team everyday - we have one chance, and that's it.

So [H]ardOCP is supposed to be buying a machine from us at some point, and we don’t know what to expect. I’m guessing that there will be some good points and bad points about our system from the reviewers’ standpoint and we’re willing to take those bad points and fix them.

Generally speaking, ATi chipsets have indeed been sub-par in the past – and if the technician over the phone suggested to change ram timings it tells me that he was scratching his head as well. Clearly he thought it was a chipset issue, in fact, according to the posts from the reviewer, it’s true – the tech claimed it to be a chipset issue. It would have been my first guess too, considering the machine worked in every other game.

We recommend newer ATi chipsets(RS482) in some of our Media Center machines because they’re slick, they’re fanless, and they perform nicely. I am sure that NVIDIA will be releasing a chipset that’s fanless, with DVI down, and it’s going to kick some serious ass, and we as gamers can appreciate the added tweaks that NVIDIA chipsets offer with their Forceware drivers.

The bottom line is [H]ardOCP is right when they alluded to the fact that this particular ATi chipset may not be the best choice for gaming. It’s not – that’s a fact, and I’m sure when NVIDIA releases some real uATX solutions (which they will) you’ll see a sudden change in many of these SFF systems. The NVIDIA nForce4 team is unstoppable; they do build the best performance chipsets on the market – period. In fact, Intel should be giving the entire nForce4 team backrubs(edited for PG13) all day long for elevating the performance of their desktop CPUs.

Here’s the ultimate test – when ATi finally releases their Crossfire edition x1800 board I can’t wait to test it with an nForce4 vs the latest ATi chipset. Everyone knows Crossfire works with nForce4, and I think we’ll see the difference a chipset makes. I think the fact that ATi designed it to work independently of the chipset is the best feature of Crossfire. We’re currently evaluating Crossfire on nForce4 using 850XT’s (ATi paid us a visit last week), it should be interesting once we get some of the better motherboards in with ATi chipsets.

Anyways, quit accusing [H]ardOCP of writing a bad review, it was a fantastic review and given the fact that we were all told that it would be a one chance only blind evaluation - we should be willing to eat the bullet. Falcon-NW still makes a great system, and this review isn’t going to hurt their business, they should know that. We all have bad hair days once in awhile don't we?

I probably should have just kept my mouth/keyboard shut. :D Feel free to flame me now, you have my email address.

Rahul Sood
aka El Presidente VoodooPC
www.rahulsood.com
 
I own an MSI RS480M2 IL MB (3 months now) with my X-Qpack system primarily for BF2 and UT2004 (and a few others), like i said I've had ZERO issues with this setup. I've been to a few LAN partys (24 hr) and had NO issues, and YES i've done 5+ hours in BF2 NO PROBLEM.
I would like to see [H]ard|OCP do a full review on this board before Knocking down.
Also make sure to compare it to other microATX boards not some Full ATX Nforce 4 board.
It would be nice to see them use the exact same components as the Fragbox 2.

As far as USB 2.0 issues NOT HERE, my Razer copperhead mouse runs just fine at 2000DPI.

My rig
X-Qpack
MSI RS480M2 IL
AMD 3500
Corsair TwinX3200 (4 sticks of 512)
ATI 850XT (256mb)
Soundblaster X-fi
2-Maxtor SATA 250 (500 GB)
8x DL samsung DVD burner
Razer Copperhead 2000 dpi
Logitech G15 keyboard
 
Rahul - thanks for chiming in.

In my days at FNW, and still to this day, there's few "custom-PC" companies I respect more than Voodoo PC.

:)
 
Bar81 said:
I'd still like to get an answer as to why the cheapshots against ATI were added when there was nothing wrong with the chipset per FNW. If Hardocp deemed them reliable enough when they thought it was an ATI chipset issue, why are they no longer reliable enough when it's a BFG/nvidia defective card issue?

ok I am sorry, but do you have a concept of time? When the statements were made about the ATI chipset, the issue of the video card never came up. It was a conclusion that, AT THAT TIME, BOTH [H] AND FNW made. They both throubleshoot the situation and AFTER FNW made comments about the ATI chipset having problems with SS2, they both came to the conclusion that the Mobo's chipset was at fault. It wasn't untill after the article was published that the Video card problem came to light. Jesus man read AND comprehend. You, as well as many others here, have a sever case of selective reading, you pick apart what has been said and make it seem to back up your claims and disregard anything that proves you incorrect. Read for the love of god, read. Kyle and Chris both said that they had high hopes for the ATI chipset. Currently due to their own as well as MANY other people's experiences the chipset is not up to snuf. Your's works, good maybe you got the exception. You are agueing the exact point that you are argueing against. "[H] Is wrong to say that the ATI chipset is bad because they have only used one, but I (who also have only cited one example) have a great mobo with ati's chipset so it is wonderful." So you argue that they have made a statement based on one example and are therefore wrong, yet you only rebuttle with one example.

1. They have based their opinion on the ATI Chipset on their experience AN the experience of many many other people.
2. You say that they are not willing to take the "challenge" and use a system that you swear works. Yet they have stated that they did infact purchase a mobo with the ATI chipset to test and that they are more then willing to get to the bottom of this ATI chipset issue.
3. Your system works flawlessly? Then why can't you use a USB HD? It does come with USB ports right? I think that the inability to use a component that the mobo was designed to use is one hell of a flaw. I don't know about you but I take and make NO exceptions when it comes to my systems or the systems I build for others.
4. Kyle has said that they had great hopes for the Ati chipset. And that they also hope that it's current shortcomings are only caused by the fact that it is new as was the case with the Nvidia NF series chipset, NF1 had it's issues, NF2 had it's issues, hell when it first came out NF4 had some issues that were resolved. What you fail to realize is that it is the opinion of [H] that the current series of the ATI chipset is not mature. And that they hope it will, as do many of us. If/when the ATI chipset is fully matured it will create competition, which will help to lower prices and make this whole game easier for all of us to play.
5. It is the point of reviews to state what the reviewer found and what they feel. You want cold hard stats goto the manufacture's website and base your buying decisions on that, but don't come here and bitch when you do buy something that sucks. You seem to forget that they are providing you the service here.

you know what i am not going to hold your hand. You might read this and i am sure you are going to flame me, boo hoo. Thank you.
 
Razz_mon said:
Also make sure to compare it to other microATX boards not some Full ATX Nforce 4 board.

THIS IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO SAY!

Nobody seems to care to listen when I say that when FNW put together the Fragbox there was only ONE OTHER OPTION besides an ATI Xpress 200 board in the mATX department. The only nForce4 based board was from Foxconn, and may have been worse than the MSI board. We simply dont know, I feel that knocking FNW for their choice of a motherboard in a VERY LIMITED segment is unfair. Its not like they are a motherboard company like Shuttle and can design and produce their own custom boards.

The recent release of the T-force boards gives them more choices but those boards are only very recently released. This is an mATX board people, stop comparing it to ATX.
 
Tawnos said:
*cough* ridiculous *cough* ;)

To throw my thoughts into the ring of personal opinion and perusal, HardOCP handled this as a customer would. Working at a computer shop, I know that customers give us one chance, tops, to fix any problems with an expensive system. The general perception of a consumer about the computer forms within a couple hours of their first game. Falcon was told outright BF2 was the game of choice for this box. Apart from the obvious sound issues (first strike in the customer's mind), there was the need to do "technical work" (such as flashing the BIOS). The average customer would return the box at this point, frustrated that they are expected to fix an issue that existed before their computer left the factory.

Falcon was not granted a third chance, because a customer would not grant them such. Thank you, Chris, from standing on your decision. You gave Falcon the chance a customer would have, and did not extend the extensive leniency of a "tweak-friendly" technician.

Shame on Falcon, ATI, MSI, et al for pointing fingers. The computer did not work. A customer does not care if it's caused by memory timings, bad video cooling, or evil demons. Customers want one thing: out of box simplicity and compatibility.


Beautiful, well said.
 
Erasmus354 said:
THIS IS WHAT I HAVE BEEN TRYING TO SAY!

Nobody seems to care to listen when I say that when FNW put together the Fragbox there was only ONE OTHER OPTION besides an ATI Xpress 200 board in the mATX department. The only nForce4 based board was from Foxconn, and may have been worse than the MSI board. We simply dont know, I feel that knocking FNW for their choice of a motherboard in a VERY LIMITED segment is unfair. Its not like they are a motherboard company like Shuttle and can design and produce their own custom boards.

The recent release of the T-force boards gives them more choices but those boards are only very recently released. This is an mATX board people, stop comparing it to ATX.


I don't think form factor limitations allow for using a low-end chipset solution in a high-end gaming machine.
 
Draax said:
How valuable is a review of a defective system to someone who is possibly going to purchase the fragbox 2? Not very useful IMO.

Falcon Northwest has warranties against defective systems, and you failed to follow through on this aspect of customer service and instead just gave up. So what the review boils down to is a review of a defective system, coupled with a review of Falcons customer service, which was not followed through on and allowed to provide Hard with a working system.

In addition we have Kyle, yet again, talking smack about other review sites. Let me ask, when was the last time a regular Joe was able to recreate your custom benchmark procedure ? Or comprehend the graphs which look more like the reading on an oscilloscope, under extreme duress?

The review is of the total user experience, not the system. I can argue that a review of a "defective system" is a lot more valuable to the consumer than one that works perfectly. In fact a point of our new evaluations will include the RMA prodcedure. So in the future, if there are not problems, we will be faking them. We have fully addressed your other thoughts on this multiple times in this thread so forgive me if I do not regurgitate the statements.

I am not "talking smack." What I just said, is 100% the truth and seems to be the kind of content you are looking for. It is very clear that our evaluation process is not valuable to you. I accept that, but I will not be changing our evaluation philosophy for its current focus. I believe in what we are doing and I think we are doing it "right." Sorry if you do not find benefit in it. There are others that certainly do.
 
That was what I asked earlier. Are there any altneratives in the micro-ATX market. I would say, Kyle, that form factor does in fact have a role to play. Basically, if you knock FNW for using the ATI chipset, but there is no other option based on the form factor rquired, then what is the alternative?

Do you suggest they not make a microATX form factor computer labelled as a gaming machine?

Or, do you recommend they make their own motherboards?


It would seem then, if there is no alternative options in the m-atx form factor, then based on what you are saying, they shoudl simply charge less and not call this a high-end gaming machine.
 
Deam said:
Do you suggest they not make a microATX form factor computer labelled as a gaming machine? Or, do you recommend they make their own motherboards?

Either one works for me.
 
Beniled said:
ok I am sorry, but do you have a concept of time? When the statements were made about the ATI chipset, the issue of the video card never came up. It was a conclusion that, AT THAT TIME, BOTH [H] AND FNW made. They both throubleshoot the situation and AFTER FNW made comments about the ATI chipset having problems with SS2, they both came to the conclusion that the Mobo's chipset was at fault. It wasn't untill after the article was published that the Video card problem came to light. Jesus man read AND comprehend. You, as well as many others here, have a sever case of selective reading, you pick apart what has been said and make it seem to back up your claims and disregard anything that proves you incorrect. Read for the love of god, read. Kyle and Chris both said that they had high hopes for the ATI chipset. Currently due to their own as well as MANY other people's experiences the chipset is not up to snuf. Your's works, good maybe you got the exception. You are agueing the exact point that you are argueing against. "[H] Is wrong to say that the ATI chipset is bad because they have only used one, but I (who also have only cited one example) have a great mobo with ati's chipset so it is wonderful." So you argue that they have made a statement based on one example and are therefore wrong, yet you only rebuttle with one example.

1. They have based their opinion on the ATI Chipset on their experience AN the experience of many many other people.
2. You say that they are not willing to take the "challenge" and use a system that you swear works. Yet they have stated that they did infact purchase a mobo with the ATI chipset to test and that they are more then willing to get to the bottom of this ATI chipset issue.
3. Your system works flawlessly? Then why can't you use a USB HD? It does come with USB ports right? I think that the inability to use a component that the mobo was designed to use is one hell of a flaw. I don't know about you but I take and make NO exceptions when it comes to my systems or the systems I build for others.
4. Kyle has said that they had great hopes for the Ati chipset. And that they also hope that it's current shortcomings are only caused by the fact that it is new as was the case with the Nvidia NF series chipset, NF1 had it's issues, NF2 had it's issues, hell when it first came out NF4 had some issues that were resolved. What you fail to realize is that it is the opinion of [H] that the current series of the ATI chipset is not mature. And that they hope it will, as do many of us. If/when the ATI chipset is fully matured it will create competition, which will help to lower prices and make this whole game easier for all of us to play.
5. It is the point of reviews to state what the reviewer found and what they feel. You want cold hard stats goto the manufacture's website and base your buying decisions on that, but don't come here and bitch when you do buy something that sucks. You seem to forget that they are providing you the service here.

you know what i am not going to hold your hand. You might read this and i am sure you are going to flame me, boo hoo. Thank you.


Wow, you are so clueless I don't know where to start so I won't. Kyle is wrong and won't admit it. He talks with absolutely no clue what he's talking about (again) and won't admit it. He blames ATI and then when it's something else nvidia related he won't admit it. Denial is apparently the theme of this site and most of its posters. It's sad. Then again, it's par for the course.
 
nigerian_businessman said:
I think it's a good review and it was handled well. A lot of hub-bub about bias on here, but the thing about this site that those of you screaming don't seem to get is that there is no bias, only honest opinion. He said "I would not reccomend this mainboard in the future". No pussy footing, no bullshit. And no apologies. Just the way it should be.

When I bought a KT133 MSI board quite a way back, it was a complete turd. I haven't given consideration to them since, and unless they package Jesus Christ with a bottle of Cristal along with whatever they're selling, its not likely that I will. Neither would any of you, at least not right away.

So why expect them to completely ignore that when they review a product? None of these guys are being dishonest. They are giving you an opinion based upon their experiences reviewing products. They come in contact with more products than you or I do, and they base their opinions of companies on those broader experiences so that we don't have to. It's not as though these guys are reviewing ATI stuff and just slamming them across the board. They review it, and they go in to great detail about the good AND the bad. They also throw in a bit about recent trends from whatever company is putting out the product and what they're facing from competition. They do this whether they're talking about ATI, Nvidia, ECS, Falcon Northwest, Dell, EVERYONE. If you didn't notice it, go back and read some reviews of other products besides ones made by ATI or Nvidia. Then come back and apologize for being so rude in the house of [H].

I don't think I'm alone in saying I LIKE that they remind the reader about past experiences with other products based on the same company's product, because those experiences paint a bigger picture than your average review site's cookie cutter intro/benchmark/summary/score review. I want their personal opinion because I trust it. If you don't, then that's unfortunate, but nobody's forcing you to come back here and read it, or worse yet trash it in the forums and stir up a bunch of shit.

So, in summary, great review, keep up the good work, and for those of you that don't like it, feel free to start your own hardware review site or kindly STFU. kthxbye.

Bravo, well said. Man you should take a bow after that. Thank you.
 
When Kyle annouced that HardOCP would do more system reviews I thought - well just another reason not to read [H]. After all I would never buy a pre-configured systems and I thought most who read this site regularly were much to [H]ard for that. :) It turns out that these reviews are some of the most engaging and I look forward to them much more than the average hardware review. Why? Because you get to view a gaming PC through the eyes of a more mainstream consumer (or at least the eyes imagined by the [H] staff) who is actually more important to the PC gaming hardware market than the minority DIY gamers. Thats a unique perspective and the blind purchase lends the review some credibility.

Most DIYers would have slapped in another video card to try to isolate the problem but [H] was taking this journey as a average gamer/consumer/noob and they completed it as such. Obvioulsy the average gamer/consumer/noob might never return to Falcon but I'm sure [H] will if they don't burn any bridges over the next few days. :D I don't see the need for another review. Even if they were to get another rig blind I'm satisfied it would run fine. Unless [H] suspects otherwise they shouldn't bother on another review on that same product. Lets move on to the next victim ... er .. I mean vendor. :D
 
Draax said:
I don't think you have a deep seated hatred towards ATI or MSI, I do however think that hard is being overly stubborn about this, in that they are not willing to review a working system. If you don't have a working system to properly review, you should not be posting the review.

Sometimes manufactoures miss things, and is even hinted at in the article posted:

I remember a review of the 6800 HardOCP did when the 6800 line was being released, in which you guys failed to catch the problems with WMV9. Everyone has a tendancy to miss the little problems, when a product is first released.


I think the point is that this is done from the view of the consumer. When Joe Consumer buys a $400 walmart computer, its almost expected for the manufacturer to 'miss things', but the whole point of spending $3200 on a computer is so that it works as advertised the first time. When you drop that kind of bank on a computer, it's not okay for the company to 'miss things'. It's going to happen sometimes, and it's unfortunate it happened to FNW because by any standard they are a great company according to everyone I know who's dealt with them. However, the review was honest and I don't think it makes them look bad. It just made their choice of hardware quesionable. If anything made them look bad it was the all caps screaming of the president of the company, but I can even understand how one could get excited over trying to make things right knowing that this review wouldn't be positive and being turned down by [H]. It could be viewed as bad, or as a president trying to protect his company and uphold the reputation they've worked hard to build.

As far as giving the company a fair shake, I think they were leniant, had it been my computer I would have demanded a refund within 2-3 days and bought a Voodoo PC or built my own. It would have been interesting to see them cut the tech support in a shorter time and send it back to see what the turnaround would be, or check to see how FNW customer service would react to a refund demand. Hindsight is always 20/20. As it stands, according to the review the box was faulty and FNW customer service tried to make everything right. There isn't much of an issue beyond that, at least for anyone who actually read the whole article instead of the parts that are being taken out of context and singled out for bias.

The overwhelming point I got from the article is that the current fragbox 2 config isn't up to snuff, but that FNW is a great company and their other offerings are top-of-the-line and highly recommended. If you didn't get that, read it again, cause it's in there.
 
BoogerBomb said:
LOL So you are saying that Falcon made the microATX and made a mistake making one using the ATI chipset?

You yourself told me that the microATX arena isnt one that HardOCP wishes to persue as it doesnt fit the profile of HardOCP.

So what S939 Nforce4 microATX motherboard would you recommend for such a system?

I think if you read our content, you will understand exactly what I think.

HardOCP's focus had diversified. We have made this very clear on more than one occasion in the past.

My point is that if the Radeon Xpress 200 is the only solution for that form factor, I don't think I would be building high-end gaming machines with it. I have stated this over and over and over. I am sorry if you cannot understand that I do not think it is a wise move.
 
Deam said:
That was what I asked earlier. Are there any altneratives in the micro-ATX market. I would say, Kyle, that form factor does in fact have a role to play. Basically, if you knock FNW for using the ATI chipset, but there is no other option based on the form factor rquired, then what is the alternative?

Do you suggest they not make a microATX form factor computer labelled as a gaming machine?

Or, do you recommend they make their own motherboards?


It would seem then, if there is no alternative options in the m-atx form factor, then based on what you are saying, they shoudl simply charge less and not call this a high-end gaming machine.

I suggest they don't use a low-end chipset in a high-end machine. If that is their only alternative, that is 100% their decision to either spec it that way or not. But I am not going to change my opinion on a particular peice of technology just because FNW wants to use it for something it was not intended for.
 
the point is not that anyone wants kyle or anyone else to not bust people's balls. there are plenty of times that kyle has busted some balls that needed busting. that's great. and you know why? because there was some fact (like company A is releasing vaporware) and then kyle said hey, that's a bunch of crap. we could correlate the ball-busting directly to the undeniable facts of the situation.

this is not one of those times. facts of the case:
1) kyle has admitted they should have followed through the whole process as an anonymous customer.
2) the 6.5 out of 10 that was awarded was based on a system with a defective video card.
3) hardocp issued a statement in which they claimed to apologize for the situation while simultaneously reinforcing multiple times the statement that "ati xpress 200 is teh su><0rz!!!1111"

the simple fact is there is no review of a falcon NW system on the [H]. there is a big long narrative of one person's experience with a defective system. what is the number one item most discussed in this thread- the chipset. i find it funny that the chipset of the system was a) only 1 tiny piece of what was supposed to be a review of not only an entire system, but of an OEM purchasing experience and b) IT WASN'T EVEN THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEMS THE REVIEWER HAD!!! my god, does this not indicate to some of you that there might be a mistake in what went on here?

listen, when you apologize for something it doesn't count when you say "yeah, but he started it" or "but i still think it's your fault." and that's basically what the [H] apology amounts to.
 
Well imho the H team is going where no man has gone before :eek: This place is called " holding custom builders/ boutique builders accountable". Not one non-individual or organization has ever held custom rig builder's feet to the fire before.

This is toooo simple guys. The darn thing runs as advertised or it does not. When a system runs correctly Morley will tell us and when it does not he will let us know that as well.

In business as in everyday life you take the good with the bad. When you deserve a low score, correct it, learn from it, apologize and move on.

Lets not forget fellow H members. When we purchase custom rigs, we are literally giving a perfect stranger, on the other side of the country $3000.0 with out an instant exchange. in goods or services. So basically we are at their mercy when the system finally shows up.

Lets swap boots for a moment. Lets say FNW or Monarch will ship a super $3000.0 to a gamer 1st and accept payment after delivery(we know they won't but please play along). But now the gamer is only willing to pay $2570.0 or the C/C has insuficient funds. Well do you think that FNW would put up with this?? They would call the cops, FBI, etc...

I do not care how you slice it, for $3000.0 it had better work right and for a long time, if not
the burden falls on the business, just as the burden to pay in full and on time falls on the gamer.

For decades these custom rig companies have been the advertisers paying out the bucks so their butts have been getting kissed. Thanks for holding them accountable.

This part of the H forum will help keep this industry honest.


I wish that this part of the forum was up before I purchased my super rig linked below. Monarch already has my $3400.0 and could give a rats rear about how my rig is doing.

http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=913993&page=4&pp=20&highlight=davidj


http://www.hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=968409&page=2
 
Erasmus354 said:
Then perhaps you should mention that you dont agree with their choice of a mATX form factor alongside the choice of the chipset, since that is really what it boils down to.

You seem to be not reading what I am saying. I don't care what the form factor is, I would not put a low-end chipset in a high-end computer.
 
If that videocard wasn't broken, I think the review would be a very positive one and that tread would have 1 or maximum 2 pages . But no... why?

PS
I also observed that many readers still asociate the memory timming thingy with the chipset, on an Athlon64 machine... Blame AMD for that, not MSI or ATI.

...and excuse my bad english :D
 
big daddy fatsacks said:
the simple fact is there is no review of a falcon NW system on the [H]. there is a big long narrative of one person's experience with a defective system. what is the number one item most discussed in this thread- the chipset. i find it funny that the chipset of the system was a) only 1 tiny piece of what was supposed to be a review of not only an entire system, but of an OEM purchasing experience and b) IT WASN'T EVEN THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEMS THE REVIEWER HAD!!! my god, does this not indicate to some of you that there might be a mistake in what went on here?

The simple fact you seem to be missing is that FNW were the ones that indicated the ATI chipset as being the source of the problems and they only changed their tune after it was known they were dealing with [H].

As a consumer, if you or I bought this system, and FNW told us that the ATI chipset was the source of the problem, and then a friend or family member mentioned that they wanted to get a computer with that chipset, wouldn't we tell our friends and family about our experiences with the chipset? You're a bold faced liar if you're going to sit there and say that after having a negative experience with a mainboard (much less multiple negative experiences), you would turn around and leave those experiences out of any recommendation you made to someone.

After the box was sent back and FNW was told that they were dealing with [H], the box ceased being just another consumer's box and became a box for a hardware review site. There is no way they could possibly be certain that the box wasn't fixed with cherry picked parts. For all they know, the whole box could have been gutted and replaced with the best performing, most stable parts FNW had. Don't you get it? They apologized for not sending it back and letting FNW sort the problem out before letting the cat out of the bag, but their review stands. This is a real simple concept to grasp.

If you would send back a $3200 box and wait for FNW to screw around with it, more power to you, but I think you're talking BS for the sake of supporting your argument. I know I would send it back and go somewhere else. Maybe not everyone would, but a signifigant amount of people would, so the review still has merit. Also, they apologized and said they would go through all the channels in the future to give a better picture of the whole consumer experience. What more do you want?
 
Draax said:
Lets take a look at this quote from the article :

You very clearly indicate your bias with the underlined statement. In addition at this point you decided to return the system and not follow through with locating and fixing the problem. Once again .. how can you offer a fair an unbiased review of a system if you are not even willing to test a working system, that does not have faulty hardware ?

The review should never have been posted, at this point, and the fact it was, and that the conversation with Falcon northwest personnel was posted, just reinforces that this was a minor hardware problem that has been sensationalized and utilized to reinforce the e-thug reputation that HardOCP tries to promote.

ok you did not read the eval process explaination. It is NOT the point to review a working system. It is to review a system period. Any system. One that you or i would get. If they wanted to review a working system they would have called up kelt and said "Hey we are going to review your fragbox2, why don't you get one together and get it out to us." And they would recieve a wonderful, fully working system tweeked to astromical ends, that we would never recieve. And that is not what they wanted here. They wanted to see what companies do when they don't know they are being tested. What the average joe would get from them. And they acted the part. The average joe wouldn't do, or know how to do, indept analysis of all components, or had the resources to change components out until they pinpointed the problem. When BF2 locked up average joe would call the company, when they didn't fix it right away A.J. would have been pissed and sent it back. Whether for repair or refund? Who knows. I know that as a customer I DO NOT give second chances, it works or i go elsewhere. Period. And that is just how it is. This is Business boys and guys, harsh, hard and fast. So suck it up and realize this is not a benchmark review it is a review of how a company preforms in its everyday operations. Now this particular instance is not indicitive of how FNW ussually preforms, as stated in the articles. It was a bad system that happened to be made by a Great company. If this were Dell or HP i dought any of this BS in the forums would have happened. Thank you.
 
Beniled said:
ok you did not read the eval process explaination. It is NOT the point to review a working system. It is to review a system period. Any system. One that you or i would get. If they wanted to review a working system they would have called up kelt and said "Hey we are going to review your fragbox2, why don't you get one together and get it out to us." And they would recieve a wonderful, fully working system tweeked to astromical ends, that we would never recieve. And that is not what they wanted here. They wanted to see what companies do when they don't know they are being tested. What the average joe would get from them. And they acted the part. The average joe wouldn't do, or know how to do, indept analysis of all components, or had the resources to change components out until they pinpointed the problem. When BF2 locked up average joe would call the company, when they didn't fix it right away A.J. would have been pissed and sent it back. Whether for repair or refund? Who knows. I know that as a customer I DO NOT give second chances, it works or i go elsewhere. Period. And that is just how it is. This is Business boys and guys, harsh, hard and fast. So suck it up and realize this is not a benchmark review it is a review of how a company preforms in its everyday operations. Now this particular instance is not indicitive of how FNW ussually preforms, as stated in the articles. It was a bad system that happened to be made by a Great company. If this were Dell or HP i dought any of this BS in the forums would have happened. Thank you.
Well fucking said. :mad: I'm getting tired of hearing all these stupid little arguments. THE SYSTEM WAS BOUGHT TO PLAY BATTLEFIELD 2, FNW KNEW THIS. IT FAILED TO ACCOMPLISH THIS SIMPLE TASK AFTER SPITTING $3,000+ FOR IT. PERIOD. No if's, no but's. Any of us would've been upset and called it quits after fucking around with the system for a whole week with no solution. That's the bottom line. :mad:
 
1c3d0g said:
Well fucking said. :mad: I'm getting tired of hearing all these stupid little arguments. THE SYSTEM WAS BOUGHT TO PLAY BATTLEFIELD 2, FNW KNEW THIS. IT FAILED TO ACCOMPLISH THIS SIMPLE TASK AFTER SPITTING $3,000+ FOR IT. PERIOD. No if's, no but's. Any of us would've been upset and called it quits after fucking around with the system for a whole week with no solution. That's the bottom line. :mad:
Indeed. The rest is irrelevant.
 
Bar81 said:
Wow, you are so clueless I don't know where to start so I won't. Kyle is wrong and won't admit it. He talks with absolutely no clue what he's talking about (again) and won't admit it. He blames ATI and then when it's something else nvidia related he won't admit it. Denial is apparently the theme of this site and most of its posters. It's sad. Then again, it's par for the course.

And par for course you make a general statement then avoid backing it up. "Duh, your wrong" is all i hear. Back your shit up dude, what am i clueless on? Quote me. I dare you.

Come on challenge man, do it. Thank you.
 
1c3d0g said:
Well fucking said. :mad: I'm getting tired of hearing all these stupid little arguments. THE SYSTEM WAS BOUGHT TO PLAY BATTLEFIELD 2, FNW KNEW THIS. IT FAILED TO ACCOMPLISH THIS SIMPLE TASK AFTER SPITTING $3,000+ FOR IT. PERIOD. No if's, no but's. Any of us would've been upset and called it quits after fucking around with the system for a whole week with no solution. That's the bottom line. :mad:

The system was never given a chance to properly play battlefield 2, because the video card was faulty, what's so hard to understand about that? The review would have been entirely different if all the components in the system were working perfectly. How can you review a system if you don't have a working one, which is a fair representation of the product as a whole, and not an exception to the true power of the system ?

I could give a damn about the review, because it is reviewing a faulty product, end of story, it is not a fair assessment of the fragbox 2. I also would not have a problem if the story would have been called an editorial and not a review, and identified from the outset that a defective fragbox 2 was being reviewed, because it certainly is not a fair an unbiased review.

Do people honestly think that the majority of people who purchased the fragbox 2 would have the same performance? or are we talking about a very small percentage who would receive a defective product ? This is not indicative of what the average joe would get, because an average joe would get a working system, or would follow though the RMA process to obtain a working system. The average joe does not throw a temper tantrum and refuse to even deal with the product and/or company, because of one faulty piece of hardware. The average joe would not get in touch with the president of the company, and would certainly not get into a pissing match with the president.

And beniled I am not going to respond, in depth, to your post because it makes my eyes hurt, try paragraphs, and it is chaulk full of back talk and hypocritical statements such as:
This is Business boys and guys, harsh, hard and fast. So suck it up and realize this is not a benchmark review it is a review of how a company preforms in its everyday operations. Now this particular instance is not indicitive of how FNW ussually preforms, as stated in the articles. It was a bad system that happened to be made by a Great company.

Can someone please explain to me what this was a review of ? it was neither a working system nor was the customer service allowed to RMA the product.
 
My .02?

Some people seem to be upset that a bad review was posted (for whatever reason) and that it is not representative of the whole. Question? How do we know it is not a representative of the whole if noone reports the times things don't work?

At least in my field (day job) bad data points are always analyzed (and not hidden away in dark recess's not to see the light of day) to see if in fact there is a trend or not. If we were to simply eliminate data we don't like then we would A) be dishonest and violate numerous ethical standards, and B) miss out on many really important discoveries. So if you get 99 positives and 1 negative you can eliminate the negative as a fluke. If you get 1 positive and 1 negative....you must repeat your evaluation (work or whatever). Since there are very few data points on the Fragbox2 posted it is important to follow up and make the issue known so it can be evalauted.

[H] posted the negative one that occured.....that data is just as valuable as the positive because maybe there is an issue. Maybe FNW should evaluate the batch of cards they got from BFG? Maybe there is an issue beyond one card....but without anyone saying anything noone would have looked. To look and find nothing is a great result.....to not look and miss a problem is a problem.

I'll actually take .01 back since that was probably only worth a penny.
 
Bar81 said:
I'm not trying to put you down, but you obviously don't understand logic. If someone makes a claim that everything is like so and you show that even a SINGLE thing is not like so, then the original assertion is disproved. It only takes one example to disprove a blanket assertion while it takes a representative sample to properly support a blanket assertion.

Wrong. Proof by contradiction proves that something is wrong if the contradiction is correct. Proving a single case FOR does not prove the entire statement. You need to take a class in propositional or first order logic.

a->b
b
you can't say anything about a.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top