CNET = Noobs

[Transistor]

This has to be one of the worst hardware reviews I have ever seen. This guy is not objective at all, extremely bias, and it shows almost as brightly as his ignorance. Anand's review is lightyears ahead of this turd of a review. Another fine example of CNET misleading the masses.

http://reviews.cnet.com/ATI_Radeon_X800_XT_Platinum_Edition/4505-3025_7-30871661.html?tag=fr

Every sentence of this review is pure stupidity. Right from the first line.

After years of finishing second to Nvidia in the race for graphics supremacy, ATI has finally handed a defeat to its rival.

Umm... ATI has been in the lead of the graphics race since the 9700 Pro...

Since the vast majority of current PCs have 450-watt power supplies at most, you'll need to drop another $50 to $200 for a 480-watt or greater power supply if you choose the 6800 Ultra card.

I'm tired of hearing about clueless people harping on the power supply requirements. Tom's Hardware actually tested the power drain on the system with the various cards and the 6800 required about 20 more Watts under a heavy gaming load. Yes, it's more, but it's not as extreme as this guy likes to mislead people it is. Saying that the X800 XT can work off of a 300 Watt PS and the NVIDIA needs 480 Watt is very misleading.

Here's another wonderful quote. I really got a kick out of this. It's like some big drama for this guy. He sounds like such a fanatic. It's like some big emotional competition for him. Sort of like the US hockey team defeating the Soviets.

Like many classic dramas, power and greed are at the forefront of this heated competition. When we first spoke to Nvidia about the GeForce 6800 Ultra, we were astounded at the power requirements. A minimum 480-watt power supply? Not one but two power connectors? Unaware of ATI's new specs, we feared these extreme wattage demands represented the beginning of a cumbersome new era in performance computing, one bristling with heat sinks, nitrogen cooling, and minivan-size PC cases.

Umm... Video cards have been "bristling with heat sinks" since the TNT2 and ATI Rage 128 days... Nitrogen cooling? I know he's being sarcastic but his bias really shines through here. I like how he equates NVIDIA with greed because the card needs more power.

Finally, he does four very ATI skewed directx 9 benchmarks. I mean, everyone by this point knows that there is a problem with FarCry and NVIDIA. Yet, he acts like it represents of future of the entire gaming industry. He carefully picks four benchmarks that NVIDIA cards do poorly on to prove his point. How about OpenGL, DirectX8, and DirectX9 without AF? No, he's got his adgenda and he's ready to cash in on his ATI stock.

There's no wondering why nobody has any respect for CNET.

 

[DeeSlanger]

Wow, I wonder what nVidia thinks about this...

 

[Pete]

At least they must be happy that CNet thinks they held the performance crown up til now.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Transistor, i agree with you on most of your points except for the power consumption thing. Cnet was making comments based on the fact that nvidia themselves recommended a 480W PSU. can u run it on a lesser PSU? very likely, yes. but cnet is just commenting on what nvidia has announced as the the PSU requirement

 

[ForceCalibur]

Cnet = Not the place for computer hardware ANYTHING. They actually rate DELL highly.

 

[CrystalBay]

The thing is 90% of the public will buy FUD...

 

[Lonyo]

Average PC's have 450w PSU's?
Since when? I expect thay're more like 300~400w PSU's. Mainly 300 or 350.

 

[ronnn]

Originally posted by: ForceCalibur
Cnet = Not the place for computer hardware ANYTHING. They actually rate DELL highly.

Certainly and dell sells a lot of stuff. So is this an indication of what way Dell is leaning? Many of the gang I work with make good to great money and most of them buy Dell. They seem to feel that they get what they want and it works - is not worth their time to research this stuff. And they have had bad experiences with the local computer shops. This review is aimed at that same clientel. Will run out of the box and not alot of annoying driver issues. So for the informed this review tells nothing and is misleading at best, but for the average Dell customer - this is just the info they want. Works great and is stable.

 

[ponyo]

Originally posted by: ForceCalibur
Cnet = Not the place for computer hardware ANYTHING. They actually rate DELL highly.

Dell is a big advertiser on Cnet. What did you expect?

 

[Regs]

On the board here, at least, I've seen peoples PSU fail with GF4 4200s with AMD 1800's. So I'm going to harp away if you do not mind. And Im sure there are many more with instability issues that may not even know its from inadequate PSU's.

Even so, I think my 430watt antec should be more than plenty for the 6800U. I just don't want to take the chance with a 10x220 overclock. With my ram and video voltage set a little higher than normal.

Other than that, yeah, the article showed a lot of in-experience but a lot of book smarts that amounted to speculation.

 

[ChkSix]

The CNET review is as bad as they come. Although I personally have no respect for HardOCP, at least their reporting isn't as delusional as this one. Not only did I laugh hard, but my monitor chuckled so hard as well, it almost fell off the desktop! :laugh:

 

[Rudee]

When you condider that the test PC's that the reviewers used to test the video cards were bare bone systems, the high PSU requirement makes sense. The reviewers didn't have dual hard drives, DVD burners, multiple cooling fans, etc. They built bare bones systems, which of course, don't demand the same power supply requirements as a heavy gamer does.

 

[VisableAssassin]

Originally posted by: ChkSix
The CNET review is as bad as they come. Although I personally have no respect for HardOCP, at least their reporting isn't as delusional as this one. Not only did I laugh hard, but my monitor chuckled so hard as well, it almost fell off the desktop! :laugh:

Please explain... HardOCP normally has some of the better reviews put out.

 

[ChkSix]

 

[earthman]

The overall rating of a PSU is irrelevant, its how much it can deliver on each of the legs thats important. Many so-called 450 watt power supplies deliver less amps on the 5 and 12 volt legs seperately than a good 350 will do. Many cheap power supplies can deliver barely more amps on the 5 and 12 volt legs combined than they can on them measured individually, which simply stated means their effective rating is much less than whats stated.

 

[kyparrish]

yeah CNET sucks

 

[modedepe]

Originally posted by: Lonyo
Average PC's have 450w PSU's?
Since when? I expect thay're more like 300~400w PSU's. Mainly 300 or 350.

Yeah, and then there's the fact that most people who read cnet have dells or some other prebuilt pos with a 200w psu. That "review" is the biggest joke ever.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: earthman
The overall rating of a PSU is irrelevant, its how much it can deliver on each of the legs thats important. Many so-called 450 watt power supplies deliver less amps on the 5 and 12 volt legs seperately than a good 350 will do. Many cheap power supplies can deliver barely more amps on the 5 and 12 volt legs combined than they can on them measured individually, which simply stated means their effective rating is much less than whats stated.

Oh no, you've got it completely wrong...the only way you know you have a good computer is if you have a top-of-the-line Dell? Dimension? with Intel Pentium 4© processor and tons of gigahurtz!! Anything else would be stupid.


</noob>

yeah, my Antec 350 does just fine with my system. I might have to upgrade it in a year or two, but it works fine for now. A Deer, on the other hand....(shudder)

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: ChkSix
The CNET review is as bad as they come. Although I personally have no respect for HardOCP, at least their reporting isn't as delusional as this one. Not only did I laugh hard, but my monitor chuckled so hard as well, it almost fell off the desktop! :laugh:

While I am not a fan of testing methods, I do think that more review sites (hint, Anandtech) should adopt the graphical display of the test run as well as the min and max FPS. The average is certainly important, but it's the min that will get ya.

 

[AnnoyedGrunt]

Originally posted by: jagec
yeah, my Antec 350 does just fine with my system. I might have to upgrade it in a year or two, but it works fine for now. A Deer, on the other hand....(shudder)

Oh man, those Deer are terrible. We had some at work (about 5) and every single one of them failed, ususally in a spectacular fasion that involved sparks and smoke. It was exciting though.

-D'oh!

 

[ShinX]

CNET = spyware central

 

[ZombieJesus]

h8 the cnet

 

[otispunkmeyer]

Originally posted by: shady06
Transistor, i agree with you on most of your points except for the power consumption thing. Cnet was making comments based on the fact that nvidia themselves recommended a 480W PSU. can u run it on a lesser PSU? very likely, yes. but cnet is just commenting on what nvidia has announced as the the PSU requirement

if u have a good quality psu like an Antec or thermaltake then yeah i would say so, these psu's use quality componenets inside and are better at keeping voltages n stuff where u want them....if u have a Crap a$$ psu with no name then i think u will need a 480watt