Tom's Hardware is supposed to be the best of the best at reviews and benchmarks. I come to Toms Hardware every single day and read every article, watch every video. And in the last few months, something is totally clear about Tom's Hardware versus other review sites. Its all in the details. Tom's video card reviews are almost dead last in terms of how complete, informative, etc. This is for the following reasons:

Lets take the HD 3870 card for example. Now here is where Tom's failed.

#1 No crossfire benchmarks? How can you have a ATI video card review without crossfire? its totally absurd at this day and age. Totally unacceptable.
#2 And this made me LOL, and probably everyone else too. What the hell is the point with the dual video card Dx10 2007 http://www23.tomshardware.com/grap [...] &chart=318
what is the point of this nonsense page? I mean games like MS simulator, Doom 3, and Might and Magic?

Are you serious? How about sticking to your review, and including games that matter like perhaps Crysis, ut3, Quake Wars, Orange Box, Hellgate london, and things people actually play in droves?

I don't know who is doing the work for these 2007 VGA charts, or what have you, but it looks like pure laziness to me. Maybe the people doing the reviews are not being supervised like they should and are just playing TF2 all day long while on Tom's dollar. I don't know.

But there has got to be some serious updating to the VGA charts when your including cards like the G92, RV670, crossfire, SLI and all the newest technology.

Not stupid MS flight simulator, might and magic, nonsense!

So here is what I think is worthy of Tom's site.

#1 Full market roundup of all the G92 cards with benches
#2 Full market roundup of all the HD3800 series cards with benches
#3 VGA charts that people actually can learn something from.
#4 Updates of all the cards EACH time a new driver comes out for it.

You do those 4 things, your #1 in the world at hardware video card wise.

That is the key to what makes a good site right? lets not get away from the basics.
#1 thing that makes a successful sight is to generate content people who visit CARE about and WANT to read!

This is where the site is failing in the video card review department.

Now I laid it out right there what people want to see. 1-4 above. If the people getting paid by Tom putting up these video card reviews can't do it, then I think Tom should hire somebody who can do it. Its business, Tom is in this to be the best.

I visit no less than 8 hardware review sites a day reading up on everything, and on video cards and I know what makes a good review.

If your going to review anything new from ATI without crossfire, don't even bother. After all, I think its safe to say most everyone with a X38 wants to know, and X38 is pretty much the dominant platform for the enthusiast market.

Thats my opinions, I hope things get fixed. If they don't or can't get fixed, I will freaking quit my job, go work for Tom and fix it myself. I know exactly what to do, and can do it easily.

LAAkuma

+1


Leave Battlefield 2142 as I play it

+2 i mean how ridiculous is it that i have to use doom 3 to see how much fps my games average on steam games (because some steam games use the doom 3 engine) and yeah how will i know how my 8800gt will fare at playing crysis on 1280 x 1024 should i decide to upgrade?

come on tom's stop being so close-minded.

I think oblivion performance still shows the overall power of any videocard.

But the chart should be updated, it's not that much work.

Yes newer games would definitely be a plus.

Some valid points, but two things that are off base;

No one does #4 anywhere. The closest is the driver reviews from places like TweakTown and such and that's for 1 or 2 cards in limited number of games (mainly 3Dmarks). Also would you use Betas or WHQL only? If using Betas the cards wouldn't be done testing before another one leaked out. And if not you might still go 3-6 months between some driver updates.

As for M$ it belongs in there as much as anything else because it's such a different game, and you want consistency too. 3-4FPS , 2 sims (FSX and a driving one IMO) and 2 MMO / RPGS would give you good balance within a review. Hellgate doesn't belong in a big review, there's just not enough need. You go with the titles that have consistency and are game-engine defining, so Crysis, QET, HL2:E2/TF2 , UT3 all make sense because of their application to other games in general and because of how they strain PCs. If anything I'd put COD4 aheadof Hellgate.

Anywhoo, I think you'll find agreement from most of us here on the VGA charts, but I don't think they're aimed at us, I think they're aimed at the Best Buy "Tell me what to buy" buyer, and while updating the VGA charts would be nice, I'd simply prefer they concentrate on the full reviews instead because charts are for people who don't really look in depth anyways.

D3 engine is still pretty limited compared to the value of the UT3 engine, which will likely power more games than HL2, D3 and Cryengine combined, although it may be close.

HI guys, thanks for the encouragement of the basis of my argument.

GreatApe. I hear you on the driver update thing. Some sites do it. But to say no other sites do it is something I know Tom's doesn't care about, because Tom's is a LEADER.. Leaders don't copy what other people do, they make up their own standard and others follow them.

I think if Tom's wants to be the leader, they have to do what I said. And like I said, if they don;t have the right people to do it, I will do it for them.

I mean Tom's has the capacity to be the worlds best hardware review site. But they can;t do it with the weak hardware reviews they have been doing. I REALLY think there has to be a new rule in effect or something at Tom's studios. Rule #1. No playing any games during working hours whatsoever, or your fired, unless your specifically reviewing that game. It looks like to me a bunch of non-professional gamers are doing these reviews and works.

LAAkuma

I understand what you're saying, but as someone who did the Catalyst forum sticky for just over a year reviewing each release on 1 card in a bunch of games/apps, I can tell you that keeping a list of cards from both IHVs current would be a full time job, which translate to a pretty heafty cost. And you still wouldn't please everyone, because by the time you got the latest batch finished someone would launch Beta driver XXX.xx that negates your work in some people's minds.

The thing is there aren't dedicated studios for this, the reviwers are a collection of people with other jobs, wich is the same for every other site, and true of Thomas Pabst when he started the site. Unfortunately the resources available aren't such that it makes it easy to allow for that kind of depth and detail. Pretty much all sites do what they can and then they do something different from others to diffferentiate themselves.

I'd love to see the VGA charts be more up to date, but I think in the grand scheme of things to me, they're less of a concern than seeing more detailed specifics into the games themselves and into their use in things like HTPCs and non-traditional areas. I prefer the details rather than the charts, but I do agree that if they do exist they must be kept current on at least a quarterly basis.

Does anyone here Know Tom so they can tell him about this growing concern?

LAAkuma

I wanna know why they used a over clocked 8800gt ,was it to make the 3870 look bad? i think they should either use normal ones or use a over clocked 3870

Ahhh I am not sure about this but I think they are gonna bench some new games and add them to the chart. Some of the newer cards were already benched on some of the newer titles so I imagine they could just incorporate that information into the charts and then bench some of the older cards on the newer games....etc........

I agree. TH needs to pull up their socks.

All valid points.
However i do realise that updating these benches with new games is a LOT of work. Like a LOT.

I use them more for comparing which card is better, not really the EXACT fps i can get from what h/ware.