I accidentally broke a $2500 video card... like an idiot

Thunderdolt said:
Steve is the perfect example of someone who kind of knows what he's doing, but who ultimately is too self-absorbed to realize that he's completely missing the point. His obsession with open fronts on cases illustrates this nicely: he is technically correct that anything in front of the case will reduce airflow through the case, but he completely misses the fact that putting a vented glass panel on a case makes zero difference to how well the machine performs.

Maybe that last bit is the real problem with all of our techtubers: none of it actually matters. They're all testing the same extremely well manufactured pieces of hardware using all of the same tests and they're all getting the same results. The ones doing builds are all sticking the same pieces of kit together as everyone else. Outside of major build screwups or some XOC adventures, the hardware always seems to perform essentially the same. Thus, how can these guys differentiate themselves?
Click to expand...

In some ways I would have to disagree. Not everyone is going to overclock, and if case A gets hotter then case B, it is entirely possible that would affect performance of a GPU and CPU. The GPU specially will throttle its clocked based on temps, and if a case runs hotter, then you will have less performance. The same goes for some CPU's (specially AMD).

So, I for one would never get a case if the temps inside will be 10-15c higher then another case in the same price range. That means lower performance for some parts, which is why I love how Steve calls out companies who make a case that gets too hot, but looks good.

But, I also love overclocking, and I rarely have my GPU/CPU at stock configurations, but 99% of the public doesn't overclock at all.

Anyway my 0.02c.
 
TIMMY JOE is the best because he is the least elitist and he is also one of the more entertaining personalities. He will give you the low down on a range of components low to high level. I like his Roast My Rig skits and also when he pokes fun at all those craiglist ads asking way to much for PC's.
Click to expand...

The only information you should ever take from a grown-assed man that still calls himself Timmy Joe is a quote for getting your gutters cleaned.............seriously this guy is like a pure ripoff of all the people we've discussed above that have actual merit in what they provide, Timmy Joes info is like the tech-channel equivalent to "WE PUT EVERY CAKE MIX TOGETHER!" videos.....
 
Brackle said:
In some ways I would have to disagree. Not everyone is going to overclock, and if case A gets hotter then case B, it is entirely possible that would affect performance of a GPU and CPU.
Click to expand...

Brackle said:
So, I for one would never get a case if the temps inside will be 10-15c higher then another case in the same price range. That means lower performance for some parts, which is why I love how Steve calls out companies who make a case that gets too hot, but looks good.

But, I also love overclocking, and I rarely have my GPU/CPU at stock configurations, but 99% of the public doesn't overclock at all.
Click to expand...

The theory here is 100% correct, but when you run actual benchmarks you start to see that it's a purely theoretical difference (outside of extreme cases of course). Sure, one setup will run hotter than another. Does the cooler system compute faster? No, not in any meaningful way. Why do you think he reports on temps instead of benchmark scores? Probably because the run to run variations on the 10C cooler machine make it indistinguishable from the hot one. That 10C gap covers over half of the cases that he listed in his recent Corsair review.

The other thing about Steve is that he's more opinion than fact despite his monotone "I totes know science" demeanor. The first 10 minutes of his Corsair 220T review are him talking about how much it sucks for cooling. The remaining 14 minutes are him demonstrating that almost everything he said in the first 10 minutes was actually wrong while still insisting he's right.
 
The other tech-heads on youtube come across like employees at CompUSA....while Steve comes off like the eternally-annoyed Manager of the employees at the CompUSA.....
 
Thunderdolt said:
The theory here is 100% correct, but when you run actual benchmarks you start to see that it's a purely theoretical difference (outside of extreme cases of course). Sure, one setup will run hotter than another. Does the cooler system compute faster? No, not in any meaningful way. Why do you think he reports on temps instead of benchmark scores? Probably because the run to run variations on the 10C cooler machine make it indistinguishable from the hot one. That 10C gap covers over half of the cases that he listed in his recent Corsair review.

The other thing about Steve is that he's more opinion than fact despite his monotone "I totes know science" demeanor. The first 10 minutes of his Corsair 220T review are him talking about how much it sucks for cooling. The remaining 14 minutes are him demonstrating that almost everything he said in the first 10 minutes was actually wrong while still insisting he's right.
Click to expand...

Steve was harsh on the 220T because Corsair claimed its a high airflow focused case and yet they made incredibly stupid design decisions that get in the way of it being a high airflow case. When companies market their cases as "high airflow" Steve will rag on them when they're not. The case having middling to average temps is further proof that it isn't "high airflow" focused.
 
Derangel said:
Steve was harsh on the 220T because Corsair claimed its a high airflow focused case and yet they made incredibly stupid design decisions that get in the way of it being a high airflow case. When companies market their cases as "high airflow" Steve will rag on them when they're not. The case having middling to average temps is further proof that it isn't "high airflow" focused.
Click to expand...

What Steve's own testing showed was that none of the decisions were "incredibly stupid." He found that having a filter creates an airflow restriction. Having a removable filter, however, is not an "incredibly stupid" decision - but calling it one is.
 
Thunderdolt said:
The theory here is 100% correct, but when you run actual benchmarks you start to see that it's a purely theoretical difference (outside of extreme cases of course). Sure, one setup will run hotter than another. Does the cooler system compute faster? No, not in any meaningful way. Why do you think he reports on temps instead of benchmark scores? Probably because the run to run variations on the 10C cooler machine make it indistinguishable from the hot one. That 10C gap covers over half of the cases that he listed in his recent Corsair review.

The other thing about Steve is that he's more opinion than fact despite his monotone "I totes know science" demeanor. The first 10 minutes of his Corsair 220T review are him talking about how much it sucks for cooling. The remaining 14 minutes are him demonstrating that almost everything he said in the first 10 minutes was actually wrong while still insisting he's right.
Click to expand...

I mean when Steve or anyone reviews a case, i expect to hear their own opinion on the case. Some people might like case A over case B. But, when performance numbers come in, doesn't matter what he thinks a case looks ike?

And like Derangel said, Corsair did way it was a high airflow focused case when the temps and performance showed differently.
 
Thunderdolt said:
What Steve's own testing showed was that none of the decisions were "incredibly stupid." He found that having a filter creates an airflow restriction. Having a removable filter, however, is not an "incredibly stupid" decision - but calling it one is.
Click to expand...

What's stupid is the fugly (at least in my opinion) metal front panel that clearly restricts airflow. The fact that it has good airflow and cooling for a Corsair case doesn't make it a "high airflow" case. The 220T isn't a bad case, but it's a clear example of Corsair's continued form over function design process.

Edit: And a case marketed as being "high airflow" having middling to average cooling performance is pretty freaking indicative of stupid design decisions.
 
Derangel said:
What's stupid is the fugly (at least in my opinion) metal front panel that clearly restricts airflow. The fact that it has good airflow and cooling for a Corsair case doesn't make it a "high airflow" case. The 220T isn't a bad case, but it's a clear example of Corsair's continued form over function design process.

Edit: And a case marketed as being "high airflow" having middling to average cooling performance is pretty freaking indicative of stupid design decisions.
Click to expand...

I'm waiting for the reply where we debate what "high airflow" actually means.
 
Furious_Styles said:
I'm waiting for the reply where we debate what "high airflow" actually means.
Click to expand...

Like all the dumb marketing things they do. High performance, gaming router, audiophile quality, military grade, aerospace grade aluminum, zero latency, on and on. You know, the stuff we all roll our eyes at and then look at the specs or benchmarks for real info.

I forgot to put quantum or nano in there too, something has to always be quantum nano whatever
 
Derangel said:
What's stupid is the fugly (at least in my opinion) metal front panel that clearly restricts airflow. The fact that it has good airflow and cooling for a Corsair case doesn't make it a "high airflow" case. The 220T isn't a bad case, but it's a clear example of Corsair's continued form over function design process.

Edit: And a case marketed as being "high airflow" having middling to average cooling performance is pretty freaking indicative of stupid design decisions.
Click to expand...

You're not Steve, right? Just figured I'd ask because you're pretty much quoting him verbatim in these posts.

Part of quoting him verbatim means that you're making the exact mistakes and false statements. Steve spent 10 minutes talking about how terribly restrictive the metal front panel is. After the audience fell asleep and then woke up again, Steve was getting ready to present his data. The data he presented showed that this terrible CPU-burning front panel..... actually made almost no difference at all. His testing showed that the restriction was actually the removable filter. But this is classic Steve: even though his own data showed he's wrong, he doesn't let that get in the way of feeling smug and continuing to spread false statements.

Again, where is the performance data? It's clear from his demeanor that Steve struggles with the burden of always being right in a world that is always wrong. It's clearly exhausting for him. So why can't he generate some data to demonstrate how right he is? This should be easy for him. The airflow restrictions in the 220T should have set the machine ablaze.

Despite my build, I'm no Corsair fanboy (the 1000D is a bit of a garbage case, their Commander Pro is garbage, the AX1600i is no better than the equivalent 1600W EVGA, and good lord is iCue a steaming pile). That does not, however, mean I'm a fan of bullshit being paraded about as fact.
 
Thunderdolt said:
You're not Steve, right? Just figured I'd ask because you're pretty much quoting him verbatim in these posts.

Part of quoting him verbatim means that you're making the exact mistakes and false statements. Steve spent 10 minutes talking about how terribly restrictive the metal front panel is. After the audience fell asleep and then woke up again, Steve was getting ready to present his data. The data he presented showed that this terrible CPU-burning front panel..... actually made almost no difference at all. His testing showed that the restriction was actually the removable filter. But this is classic Steve: even though his own data showed he's wrong, he doesn't let that get in the way of feeling smug and continuing to spread false statements.

Again, where is the performance data? It's clear from his demeanor that Steve struggles with the burden of always being right in a world that is always wrong. It's clearly exhausting for him. So why can't he generate some data to demonstrate how right he is? This should be easy for him. The airflow restrictions in the 220T should have set the machine ablaze.

Despite my build, I'm no Corsair fanboy (the 1000D is a bit of a garbage case, their Commander Pro is garbage, the AX1600i is no better than the equivalent 1600W EVGA, and good lord is iCue a steaming pile). That does not, however, mean I'm a fan of bullshit being paraded about as fact.
Click to expand...

I don't take it as him being smug or anything, he just has a tendency to get a bit hyperbolic with some things. As for why I'm repeating his points: Might have something to do with the fact that I agree with him on the specific points I'm mentioning.

The case markets itself as being "high airflow" and it fails at that, miserably. Steve going a tad overboard with his rant on it does not take away from Corsair's blatantly false marketing. Steve engaging in hyperbole is not exclusive to the 220T, you can also see it in any case that claims to be airflow focused while being just kind of average (or kind of bad, in the case of the original Cooler Master H500). Every tech reviewer has their thing that bothers them. For Steve it's cases. It's his "thing" that he is really passionate about and believes should be done in a certain way. Look at the GN video for that DIY case, Steve says several times he wishes tempered glass side panels would go away and we'd go back to solid steel side panels with fan cut-outs in them. He is very much function over form and cases that go for the opposite often get rough treatment from him (see again: The original Cooler Master H500).

Steve's habit of going overboard sometimes is just a thing you have to accept and get used to. It does lead to some excellent content however, like all the H500 stuff, his amusing rants about Nvidia's Turning stock coolers, or that video about the moronic "youtubers are paid to put Nvidia boxes on their shelves" rumor.

If you're not a fan of bullshit being quoted as fact, why are you sticking up for Corsair's 220T marketing? They're clearly lying about it being "high airflow", unless you want to qualify it as "in comparison to most other modern Corsair cases".
 
I know for a lot of the content that we did back in the day, we always considered the marketing message that was being delivered with the product and surely those messages impacted our conclusions. The marketing narrative does matter, at least from many reviewers' perspectives. If you are sampling an computer enthusiast reviewer a product. Expect it to be reviewed from what I would think most enthusiasts would expect.

Edit: There are a lot of reviews that would have had totally different conclusions, had the marketing messaging been different. Words matter.
 
Last edited:
FrgMstr said:
I know for a lot of the content that we did back in the day, we always considered the marketing message that was being delivered with the product and surely those messages impacted our conclusions. The marketing narrative does matter, at least from many reviewers' perspectives.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I recall a few reviews you guys did where you ragged on deceptive marketing from companies. Can't remember examples off hand, but I do recall it happening. Honest marketing is important as people do buy products based on how they're marketed and what claims are made in the marketing.
 
Derangel said:
Yeah. I recall a few reviews you guys did where you ragged on deceptive marketing from companies. Can't remember examples off hand, but I do recall it happening. Honest marketing is important as people do buy products based on how they're marketed and what claims are made in the marketing.
Click to expand...
I did add an edit to that post above to explain a bit better.

To your post: Not necessarily deceptive marketing in all cases, but surely some existed (Intel marketing on "high" core count CPUs being the best "gaming CPU" back in the day comes to mind (and the conclusions that got HardOCP cut off from Intel CPU sampling for years)), but rather marketing that did not ring true with the hardware enthusiasts demographic. More than once we have been declined samples of a product because hardware enthusiasts were truly not the target audience of the product or the messaging. To be honest, you have to like when that happens, so it does not waste our resources. I would have much rather of used our resources to have posted a positive review of a good enthusiast product rather than a "bad" review of a product that was never really meant for enthusiasts to begin with.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top