
With reference to the 333+333 links I gave, I would say that the AnAndTech are certainly less biased, esp with their tests.

Obviously it is important to remember that any reviewer wants to make something seem as good or bad as possible in order to create interest (just like the newspapers).

It seems to me that X-Bit are a little over-zealous in their 333+333 praise. If you take a closer look at the benchmarks that matter I think you can see the real picture though. Thoses tests being SysMark2002 and Encoding. Although 640x480x16bit does show the memory throughput clearer, I think you'll agree that it is a bit silly to go to the afore-mentioned time, trouble and expense to achieve 333+333 just to run your games at 640x480x16bit so you can see a difference!

Make up your own mind, that's why I wasn't brief. It's a complex area which does involve time, money and hassle and if I'd simply said,
"Only expect to get about 5% extra perf from 333+333 over 266+266", I think I would have been shot down pretty quickly!

Obviously take all reviews with a pinch of salt, but I was thinking of 333+333 myself but decided it didn't seem worth it.