Advanced Overclocking Championship 2008

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
It would be nice if you added the different team’s configurations. And what modifications the teams did. Then we might find some motherboards that are more stable than the rest.
And ones again tomshardware has fallen a bit further from its old days of high quality, technical report. I agree with some of the earlier comments about the “$ per word/pages” (the latest motherboard article). Most of us are technical persons that want short articles with a very high fact value. Preferably a summarized table at the end with the facts.
If you want to type a lot then do so on ONE page, I hate the clicking and load time for a new page just for seeing 4 rows of noting.
 
I find the current tomshardware style quite satisfactory.
You need to entertain as well as inform. Dry information is like taking a ccna (so boring you will eventually suicide just to entertain yourself).
 
[citation][nom]Andreas_Sweden[/nom]It would be nice if you added the different team’s configurations. And what modifications the teams did. [/citation]
Well they listed the configuration on page 3. Just not the modifications.
[citation][nom]Andreas_Sweden[/nom]I agree with some of the earlier comments about the “$ per word/pages”[/citation]
That would be nice if it were true. I'll have to suggest it.
 
[citation][nom]neiroatopelcc[/nom]I find the current tomshardware style quite satisfactory. You need to entertain as well as inform. Dry information is like taking a ccna (so boring you will eventually suicide just to entertain yourself).[/citation]
Well, then skip the # of pages,
[citation][nom]gsteacy[/nom]Well they listed the configuration on page 3. Just not the modifications. [/citation]
Then how come one team used an E8500? An other mobo? Page 13... How many 280 are they using? On page 12 "3-way SLi"...
http://www.asus.com/products.aspx?l1=3&l2=11&l3=709&l4=0&model=2273&modelmenu=1
Nope, dont think so...

 
Andreas if you read the first part of the article carefully again, you'll notice that the first day is reserved for competing with the other teams on hardware provided by the event handlers, and the second day's intended for people to toy with whatever hardware they fancy in order to set world records. And the 3way sli event occurred on the second day as you might've read....

But I see your point now. Too much text, and you seem likely to not read it, or forget/not-care about its meaning. A simple dull list of specs and numbers might be more up your street in that case.
 
Condenser? I only thought you used that in the desert to get water? 😉
Capacitors perhaps? =)
 
Figures please. The point of this competition was clearly to break some records, but you have nowhere in this article specific benchmarks, numbers, configurations, etc. Without these, you're basically posting a glorified photo album.
 
[citation][nom]neiroatopelcc[/nom]I find the current tomshardware style quite satisfactory. You need to entertain as well as inform. Dry information is like taking a ccna (so boring you will eventually suicide just to entertain yourself).[/citation]

WTH. This is not Entertainment Weekly. It's Tech FIRST, then if you've done a good job, add entertainment as a bonus. They are failing the first part, over and over. It's entertaining to a simpleton, but it's maddening to people who actually know what their talking about. The entertainment factor does not make up for the fact that the content providers do such a bad job in the actual meat of the articles.
 
[citation][nom]gsteacy[/nom]Well they listed the configuration on page 3. Just not the modifications. That would be nice if it were true. I'll have to suggest it.[/citation]

It is true. Each page has ads on it, so even though the writer does not see the proceeds, money is generated by multi-page articles.
 
Ditto on the tables and numbers.

You posted the performance numbers from the winner.
what about the rest of the teams? -- just having those who actually placed (2-7) would be better than this. but ideally numbers from ALL teams.

What records were attempted? which ones failed? which ones succeeded?
- you talked about the 3dmark record attempt. thats a good start, but what else?
 
condenser = capacitor ...this is old terminology which some of you are apparently too young to know about
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom