I have been a devout reader of this site for some time; I have browsed it at least twice a week since the whole celeron 300A overclocking phenom back in the day. I have trusted the hard efforts of the writers and viewed their opinion seriously, but lately I have had second thoughts as to the validity and accuracy of many of their reviews. One glaring example is the Apollo Pro 133A roundup. Basically this review, as well as other reviews of similar motherboards is pointless, entertaining yes, but not a very technical write up. The reason being is that memory bandwith on chipsets running the 133A vary wildy based on tweaking, and I don't mean using H.Oda either; just plain old options available in the bios. Take my motherboard for instance, the Gigabyte GA-6VX-4X, the board is a total dog, but turn on the top performance setting in the bios and mystically the memory bandwith jumps from 332 to 383 as measured in Sisoft Sandra. Set the memory to Cas3 and ouch. I'd rather not even say how low the bandwith drops. Sure displaying key bios setting in reviews would take more time, but you need to ask yourself whats more important: showing pertinant usable information once or twice a week or posting garbage once a day. As a wannabe tech myself i would like to be able to duplicate some of your benchmarks, i'd like to see exactly how my motherboard performs against the ones you tested. Unfortunetly I am not given the variables i need to accomplish this. I have noticed others complaining about the heatsink roundup as well as the linux article. Quite frankly I foolhardily purchased a golden orb thanks to your article, only to later read a contradicting article on toms hardware stating that the intel stock heatsink i replaced it with was a good deal better. Don't get me wrong I have my qualms with toms hardware as well and i'm not saying their review was any more accurate.
I don't mean to be insult any of the hardworking individuals of this site, but at the same time i don't want to see some of the last few good sites out there transformed into what I like to refer to as "tabloid" websites. Posting quantity not quality for the sake of ratings. Most would be "good information sites" are evolving from "PBS" into FOX prime time. We see this all the time: PC world type articles that confuse the public and provide "fuzzy numbers" i suppose for some sites lining their pockets and keeping website hits up is a good thing, but I still believe that deep down the the writers at anadtech providing good journalism is most important.
Thanks for reading this and any thoughtful feedback is welcome.
I don't mean to be insult any of the hardworking individuals of this site, but at the same time i don't want to see some of the last few good sites out there transformed into what I like to refer to as "tabloid" websites. Posting quantity not quality for the sake of ratings. Most would be "good information sites" are evolving from "PBS" into FOX prime time. We see this all the time: PC world type articles that confuse the public and provide "fuzzy numbers" i suppose for some sites lining their pockets and keeping website hits up is a good thing, but I still believe that deep down the the writers at anadtech providing good journalism is most important.
Thanks for reading this and any thoughtful feedback is welcome.
Facebook
Twitter