| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 116458 | 2011-03-04 21:16:00 | Latest PCworld Rubbish | wainuitech (129) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1183545 | 2011-03-05 04:09:00 | Here's what I think would be cool Have two PC's One AMD (Crossfire capable mobo) and one Intel (SLI-capable mobo). Both have the same speed RAM Same HDD Same PSU Start with onboard video only Install Windows 7 Install 5-6 common (And maybe a few well-known high-end) games that have benchmark capabilities Ghost each image onto a secondary HDD Then: 1) Install Card #1 into Intel system 2) Latest drivers from manufacturers website 3) Benchmark each game 4) Pull card out of Intel System and install Card #1 into AMD system 5) Latest drivers from manufacturers website 6) Benchmark each game 7) Pull card out of AMD system 8) Ghost both machines 9) Rinse and repeat for another dozen GPUs 10) Happy readers :D In list format for Zara ;) Those machines could be kept for 12-odd months, so as new cards come out or new cards are benchmarked, we can go back over all the old ones and compare and see bang-for-buck as a consumer which would be best. Hell even grab some *older* cards and whack them in there just for comparisons sake. It wouldn't take long, just a few seconds to setup a Benchmark while doing other things during the daytime... |
Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1183546 | 2011-03-05 04:42:00 | Along the lines of what Chill posted; Passmark (www.passmark.com) - has a range of benchmarking and testing programs. If you tested a card for example, then changed the card, you can run a back to back test to see what the results are. One other interesting section on their site is the Video Benchmarks (http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/) - that basically lists A LOT of different graphic Cards,, all tested with their scores. Now assuming they are correct, its easy to see where a certain card can be in the "feeding chain" :D compared to another card. Edited: Just noticed :rolleyes: Passmark also have a security section - just downloaded the latest consumer pdf 16th Feb -- Thats more like a result. It lists many AV's/Security, as well as the actual tests, and the results. This is more real - no One program stands out above the rest. All have their strong and weak points. Mind you still one fact "Lab tests are in a controlled environment" |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 1183547 | 2011-03-05 05:36:00 | Cant the NZ PC world get original up to date articles :groan: The one I'm referring to is the "latest" Security tests. Maybe one of our Mods can explain the reason for the cocked up results, or are their lips sealed under threat of punishment. Personally I still think it's to do with the almighty advertising dollar. It's not only techs on this site that really know the true AV performances. Unfortunately the majority of purchasers are sold the antivirus product which carries the best profit margin by unqualified salespeople i.e Nortons |
BigBadBob (14963) | ||
| 1183548 | 2011-03-05 05:37:00 | What an *awesome* resource!! | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 1183549 | 2011-03-05 05:49:00 | What an *awesome* resource!! X2, excellent response, and also very true since most Toaster shop PC's have either Norton or McAfee installed. I know basically about the Lead times as to when they are written and then published. But what I think is funny, they say the best for 2011 ------- Errrr correct me if I'm wrong, but its still March - So are they saying that nothing is going to improve over the year. :rolleyes: |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 1183550 | 2011-03-05 06:48:00 | Well whatever the magazines say , i still trust what you guys here recommend. Period. Edit: And it helps my knowledge and experience also and makes me look good :) |
Gobe1 (6290) | ||
| 1183551 | 2011-03-05 06:55:00 | When I bought my netbook at Christmas they tried to upsell me Norton. I laughed and told them I would not install that on anything I own and that I would never recommend it to anyone else either, and that is why I could never go and work in a toaster shop | gary67 (56) | ||
| 1183552 | 2011-03-05 22:04:00 | I stopped buying PC mags because they rarely have information that's of any use to me anymore. Yeah it's nice to learn about things but I could also spend a while hunting down such stuff on the internet for $10 cheaper, minus a few MB in bandwidth. PC world was one of the better articles IMO, but for the price you pay it's not THAT good. Netguide I started on in Dec 2003/4 I believe, but that was when it was $3.95 Now it's something like $5 and I don't feel it's really worth the bother. (I don't even think a CD is included anymore?) Especially not with these forums around. On topic too - I myself will lose norton, I think. On my old PC after uninstalling it (it complained about no subscription and it's not connected to the net so no use) it sped up rather alot. Of course, installing Eset would slow it back down a bit, but probably not quite to the extent that norton did. And while I haven't found anything (minus a piece of 'safe' marked adware) that norton has missed, it is beginning to get a little bit beyond my tastes. So now I'm just waiting for my subscription to run out. Just 120 days to go. |
8ftmetalhaed (14526) | ||
| 1183553 | 2011-03-05 22:42:00 | I buy the mag every now & then because I know that is what keeps PressF1 running. There is usually something interesting in each release, but it annoys me when I read misleading information. | Greven (91) | ||
| 1183554 | 2011-03-05 22:50:00 | I used to buy PC World still have a huge pile of cds and mags in the garage. I used to hangout waiting for the mag like a teenager wanting to read a stick book. I stopped buying it when the technical articles got too hard to understand. |
prefect (6291) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | |||||