Every CPU on Newegg has 5 stars

[futurefields]

http://www.newegg.com/Processors-Des...ategory/ID-343

people lovin their cpu's

can we have some honest reviews please lol

 

[Ken g6]

I'd guess that's because CPUs are thoroughly tested and rarely break. Well, at least, they almost never break at their stock speed and voltage. I find most Newegg reviews are positive unless the product seriously fails.

 

[AnonymouseUser]

There are a few with "only" 4 eggs, mostly Pentiums.

 

[tracerbullet]

Honest review how? I bought it + it works = good rating. How many chips show up not working? Anything without 5 stars is probably user error.

If you want reviews come here, compare Tom's charts, things like that. Newegg *'s are a decent indicator of the likelihood of failure, not much more.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

People read reviews at NewEgg?

 

[Fayd]

I'd guess that's because CPUs are thoroughly tested and rarely break. Well, at least, they almost never break at their stock speed and voltage. I find most Newegg reviews are positive unless the product seriously fails.

exactly.

generally speaking, you would know the performance of the CPU before you bought it. it shows up, gives you performance comparable to what you thought you were gonna get, and doesn't break, why should you downrate it>?

i've never had a CPU doa. same can't be said for any other computer component.

 

[lilrayray69]

Yeah I mean when you buy something like a CPU you probably have some idea what you're getting...If it runs at the advertised stock speed, doesn't fail, and doesn't horrendously overheat and explode then you're probably pretty happy with how it turned out.

I'd rate all the CPUs I've bought off there as 5/5. GPUs maybe not, but there's a lot more variability in the brand of those and the coolers they are equipped with...CPU is usually just either AMD/Intel with the stock cooler. As long as pins aren't bent and it runs as it should, what's there to complain about

 

[Durp]

People research the performance that they need and make a processor purchase. Unlike nearly all other hardware CPUs are almost never sold DOA or break which is the source of most negative reviews.

That and fanboys. Reading some of the bulldozer reviews at launch from people paying $280 made me ashamed of being the same species.

 

[crashtech]

I can't remember ever getting a dead CPU from Newegg. That's the only reason I can really think of to give one a bad review, and it just doesn't happen unless the end user does something bad.

 

[Soulkeeper]

The only DOA cpu I remember getting from newegg was a P4 prescott

 

[jaqie]

I got a single dead cpu from newegg in the ~15 years I have been using them... it was a duron and the core was cracked in two, most likely careless employee. I talked to my contact and he express shipped me a replacement without asking for the original back. It was like this coming out of the box, I always inspect my purchases carefully when I open them.

Being a long time customer that almost never returns things has it's perks.

 

[Tsavo]

Not Newegg's fault. Some people have really weird ways to rip off other people:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/03/05/newegg_selling_fake_intel_cpus

 

[VirtualLarry]

Not Newegg's fault. Some people have really weird ways to rip off other people:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2010/03/05/newegg_selling_fake_intel_cpus

That reminds me, I wonder if HardForum still discriminates against people with netzero e-mails, yet allows people with AOL e-mails. I tried signing up for their forums with my primary e-mail, and I was told by Kyle that he didn't want people with "disposable" e-mails signing up for their forums. Yet, by the same token, it was OK to have an @AOL.com e-mail.

I've had the same netzero e-mail since I signed up with AT Forums back in 2001.

It's basically "domain prejudice" on the part of Kyle B., except with e-mails instead of skin color.

Instead of reflecting poorly upon me, for my choice of e-mail providers (I get pretty-much NO spam), I think it reflects poorly on Kyle B. and his site, for his prejudices.

 

[2is]

Racism? Really? Your definition of racism is so broad that it completely loses it's meaning. That's like accusing someone of raping you because they shook your hand.

 

[sourn]

How my newegg reviews work (I wait awhile). Did it work-yes, Does it do what it says it does-yes, has it been dependable-yes. That warrants a 5 star in book. And in my experience cpu's usually do just that amd/intel.

 

[alcoholbob]

That reminds me, I wonder if HardForum still discriminates against people with netzero e-mails, yet allows people with AOL e-mails. I tried signing up for their forums with my primary e-mail, and I was told by Kyle that he didn't want people with "disposable" e-mails signing up for their forums. Yet, by the same token, it was OK to have an @AOL.com e-mail.

I've had the same netzero e-mail since I signed up with AT Forums back in 2001.

It's basically racism on the part of Kyle B., except with e-mails instead of skin color.

Instead of reflecting poorly upon me, for my choice of e-mail providers (I get pretty-much NO spam), I think it reflects poorly on Kyle B. and his site, for his prejudices.

My first account was banned basically immediately after creating it--all I did was log in and didn't even post. My normal email wouldn't work so I went and created a new account with some free email provider that I figure Hardforum wouldn't filter out. Apparently I used an email account that started with "chucknorris1234@", and the ban message told me "you are not welcome here, troll", implying someone would only use a chucknorris email account name to troll.

Hardforum is a pretty weird place.

 

[lagokc]

Other than Atom/E-series CPUs how far back in time do you have to go to find a CPU that doesn't feel super fast for 100% of things the average consumer does? 2006 or so?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

it shows up, gives you performance comparable to what you thought you were gonna get, and doesn't break, why should you downrate it>?

So... by default, everything starts with a 5/5?

Hmmm... I can tell you've never done other peoples' performance reviews.

Unofficial guidelines at work are "Everybody starts at 3/5. If they move mountains, they can get a 3.5. Move a mountain range? We'll consider a 4. Nobody gets a 5/5."

I got a 4 once. I was happy for a moment, then realized what I was getting happy about and said screw it.

 

[lagokc]

So... by default, everything starts with a 5/5?

Hmmm... I can tell you've never done other peoples' performance reviews.

Unofficial guidelines at work are "Everybody starts at 3/5. If they move mountains, they can get a 3.5. Move a mountain range? We'll consider a 4. Nobody gets a 5/5."

I got a 4 once. I was happy for a moment, then realized what I was getting happy about and said screw it.

A human is not a CPU and vice versa.

Humans are held to higher standards than CPUs. No that can't be right.

 

[Durvelle27]

A human is not a CPU and vice versa.

Humans are held to higher standards than CPUs. No that can't be right.

:sneaky:

 

[Leyawiin]

Heh - I would gladly give my X4 980 BE three stars if they still sold it. It was average for its time - nothing wrong with that.

It's basically racism on the part of Kyle B., except with e-mails instead of skin color.

Prejudice? Discrimination? Bias? There are words that are appropriate.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Heh - I would gladly give my X4 980 BE three stars if they still sold it. It was average for its time - nothing wrong with that.



Prejudice? Discrimination? Bias? There are words that are appropriate.

Isn't the word racism equivalent to prejudice or discrimination?

e-mail domains are like the nation-states of the internet. When one discriminates against them, it is wholly equivalent to those "help wanted - irishman need not apply" signs.

 

[tweakboy]

I smell something very fishy going on.

 

[crashtech]

Isn't the word racism equivalent to prejudice or discrimination?

No, it's not. Racism denotes a specific, especially odious form of discrimination, and the overuse of the term for name-calling has diluted its true meaning.

Discrimination against random users of certain domain names can be called prejudice, discrimination, or just plain stupidity, but not racism.

I can't believe this actually has to be explained, maybe you are kidding?

 

[VirtualLarry]

No, it's not. Racism denotes a specific, especially odious form of discrimination, and the overuse of the term for name-calling has diluted its true meaning.

Discrimination against random users of certain domain names can be called prejudice, discrimination, or just plain stupidity, but not racism.

I can't believe this actually has to be explained, maybe you are kidding?

What's a good term to use then? Since it's not quite racism, but very similar, but instead of skin color, it's e-mail domains. E-racism? Email racism? Domain prejudice?