Response to The Inquirer - The Reviewer's Job
(Page 3 of 4 )
As reviewers, it's not up to us to make decisions for people. We are here to present fact, lay out the numbers, and explain them to the best of our ability. The consumer from there can intelligently base his or her decision on the available information. In the LGA775 roundup singled out in The Inquirer article, I think it's fairly obvious that only the boards for that platform are eligible for any type of award considerations. Those available options were then put in some semblance of order, based on various factors. They should not be compared to another platform, then graded accordingly relative to that. By the time the consumer is looking into specific motherboard options, they've already decided on a platform. And by looking at the numbers presented in the graphics, could easily see if the K8 option is something they should instead be looking at.
I don't believe that sites such as Anandtech have fallen into a daze when it comes to Intel. They've shown repeatedly where the current options from the boys in blue fall rather short. Asus and Intel may use those golden gongs to try and shore up their image, but any consumer who has done any amount of research can see the competition against which those gongs were earned.
So our friend Mario is a raving, drunk lunatic. Either that, or he lives in fantasy land, where an article named "Intel 925X Roundup" is supposed to say "AMD owns you, don't even bother thinking about Intel because you are too stupid to be able to decide for yourself." See, I can also make incredulous statements. Just like how he infers that the Intel 925X platform is "patently inferior," I can also say the same about the A64 one he seems so hooked on.
Next: Benchmarks Don't Tell the Full Story >>
More Opinions Articles
More By DMOS
