News We need your help to shape the future of Tom’s Hardware

[bigdragon]

Paid subscription and exclusive content is a hard no for me. My monthly utility fees jumped 30%, monthly ISP cost climbed 10%, annual home security subscription doubled, bi-annual vehicle registration increased 60%, and food costs seem to keep going up. There's no money left over for Netflix or Walmart or any other subscription service anymore. Any website subscription has even less utility than those services and therefore has zero chance with me.

Love the current benchmarking and reviews Tom's Hardware does on CPUs, GPUs, PSUs, motherboards, and cooling solutions. Also like the 3D printing content. These are the reasons I keep coming back. I find the news that touches on political topics balanced compared to other sites (looking at you, Ars).

 

[rubix_1011]

My unscientific take: a lot of long-time forum participants seem to take issue with a troll one too many times and catch a ban. Or they just see too much trolling and are turned off by it.

I think mods should do a lot more along the lines of coaching and de-escalation. A lot of good people can have a bad day and say something stupid, or maybe are rough around the edges, but can be reformed. It's impossible for the type of enforcement on here not to affect the culture of the forums, and if they don't catch a ban, I think some people just get turned off getting warned a few times, especially when they see the instigators being permitted to keep instigating.

Even with such strict enforcement, there are still a few long-term trolls who create a lot of angst and get people riled up. Yet, because they're clever enough to negotiate the letter of the rules, they live to troll another day.

That's actually a very solid insight.

It is also difficult to have rules in black and white yet the administration of them requires a significant valuation of gray-area observation. Implied vs. direct meaning and intent.

 

[stuff and nonesense]

I’ve been reading THW since it was Tom’s and read PCPlus for many years. In the past there were comparisons between different OEM PCs, OEM GPUs etc.. PCs have converged onto essentially 2 platforms and that content has become kind of dull (except for the flurry of activity at release time).

Storage is probably the least exciting part of a PC and is the only component where there is variation. Sadly it’s hard to fill an article with “it works, it’s X fast, it costs Y amount”

Diversifying into other electronic devices.. maybe, the difficulty there is quantifying something that is subjective - what looks or sounds good to you may be horrendous to another.

Politics - avoid unless there is a direct effect on the parts and devices covered by the site.

There have been too many written word sites falling by the wayside. Would be a sad day if THW went the same way.

 

[stuff and nonesense]

That's actually a very solid insight.

It is also difficult to have rules in black and white yet the administration of them requires a significant valuation of gray-area observation. Implied vs. direct meaning and intent.

Do you guys have a catchall rule… we can see you are trolling, we can see your intent and even if you don’t break the rules.. you are gone!”

 

[Jeremy Kaplan]

My critique: Payed subscriptions are a hard no. Even if it just gives access to bonus content, that content should be free along with standard content. People could easily just move from Tom's Hardware to sites like Techpowerup, with Techpowerup's community being vastly more active along with having the expansive GPU and CPU databases.
I also agree with other people when the say that Tom's should branch out. I'd like to read articles about smart home devices or electric lawn mowers(similar to LTTs home content), or read a guide about networking and IT basics. Other people have mentioned potential branches, so I won't go into that more.
I'll be honest, I love watching people argue in the political themed article comments, that doesn't make it good though. Moderate all comments equally harsh or get more into the technical details of world events rather than the politics.
Adding more widgets would be fun(not AI, unless it's actually smart(but heavily discouraged still)). Creating a more accessible version of the Techpowerup databases would be pretty neat, along with a direct comparison tool similar to Userbenchmark(without bias, of course). I'd love to use a component comparison widget, but none online right now are trustworthy or expansive enough.



I would definitely read those articles. Something like the old Maximum PC magazines would be something i'd kill for. In depth reviews by someone who knows what they're talking about, hell yeah

My critique: Payed subscriptions are a hard no. Even if it just gives access to bonus content, that content should be free along with standard content. People could easily just move from Tom's Hardware to sites like Techpowerup, with Techpowerup's community being vastly more active along with having the expansive GPU and CPU databases.
I also agree with other people when the say that Tom's should branch out. I'd like to read articles about smart home devices or electric lawn mowers(similar to LTTs home content), or read a guide about networking and IT basics. Other people have mentioned potential branches, so I won't go into that more.
I'll be honest, I love watching people argue in the political themed article comments, that doesn't make it good though. Moderate all comments equally harsh or get more into the technical details of world events rather than the politics.
Adding more widgets would be fun(not AI, unless it's actually smart(but heavily discouraged still)). Creating a more accessible version of the Techpowerup databases would be pretty neat, along with a direct comparison tool similar to Userbenchmark(without bias, of course). I'd love to use a component comparison widget, but none online right now are trustworthy or expansive enough.



I would definitely read those articles. Something like the old Maximum PC magazines would be something i'd kill for. In depth reviews by someone who knows what they're talking about, hell yeah

Good feedback, and thank you!

 

[rubix_1011]

Do you guys have a catchall rule… we can see you are trolling, we can see your intent and even if you don’t break the rules.. you are gone!”

This is normally a process of warnings and 1:1 PM discussions as well as any edits to a post that might be necessary.

Of course, it has been quite a while since I was actively moderating, contributing and interacting - the sharp decline of deeply technical resources and enthusiast discussions was a primary reason I am no longer engaged here.

Culture and Content - they have to be built on one another.

 

[apiltch]

Either get rid of staff using AI, and the AI itself altogether. Or train you staff to use AI to augment their writing. NOT REPLACE their writing on top of NOT FACTCHECKING their own writing.

We don't use AI for our writing (or really for anything). We do have an AI chatbot on the home page that people can play with, but we do all of our own writing.

 

[apiltch]

My beef with TH articles is with hardware suggestion ones.
Namely:
https://www.tomshardware.com/best-picks/best-pc-builds-gaming

One CAN NOT suggest crap quality PSU (within $500 build) just because it is cheap.

Many people, who aren't tech-savvy, are trusting the expertise of TH articles and end up buying complete crap. Just to find out days, weeks or months later that their crap quality PSU went "boom" and killed the rest of the PC. Latter is clearly seen in the comments section of said article, where exactly that has happened to many people already.

This kind of bad advice can not be tolerated.

I write that article and I appreciate your feedback. The problem is that we are trying to hit a very low and specific price point. We have to cut corners on a build to get the parts list that low. On a system that underpowered, I don't think you need a Gold or even Bronze class PSU. Would it help? yes. Would it blow the budget? Also true.

 

[Aeacus]

IMO, TH should widen it's scope and not only cater to US audience, but for the whole world.

I view TH as international site. After all, TH started out as tomshardware.co.uk (UK based).
But now, TH mostly caters only for US. Especially the Coupons and Deals section.

E.g i live in Europe and when i'm looking for hardware to buy, i will not even look towards TH since all the deals present, are only for US. Heck, even the current survey award is only for US residents. But there are people outside of US too. A lot actually.


As far as topics to cover, question is if TH should stick to PC hardware and the like or expand to consumer electronics as a whole (e.g fridges, washing machines etc). For the latter, TH forums actually already has subforum for consumer electronics.

Or better yet; question for TH management: is the idea to focus on some specific topic and do it better? Or is the idea to widen the scope of topics?
Since the initial topic about asking what can be done better is vague about it. It only says: offering the best coverage possible.

To offer the best coverage possible, TH needs experts that actually know what they are doing. So that there won't be controversial topics anymore (like the "Just buy it" article or suggesting crap quality PSUs that i talked about in my previous reply).

There are many known industry experts out there. TH used to have Aris to cover PSUs. There's also K|NGP|N who TH could hire to cover MoBos and GPUs. Collab with der8auer, etc etc.

If the idea is to focus on PC hardware and the like, then TH needs to figure out their own way on how to present said info.
Each tech channel has their own identity, what sets them apart from others. And rather than copying what others do, TH should find their own, unique way on how to do things.

 

[apiltch]

Yeah, I miss the old Anandtech charts that you could use to see how one CPU compares with another. It'd be neat (but a lot of work, I know) to have a database with specs like TechPowerUp has, but also integrated with benchmarks to allow for easy comparison.

Maybe an idea for how to do the database cheaply is to make it something forum users could edit, especially if you require a minimum number of posts and minimum forum account age - that should keep out most vandals.

Funny you should mention. As I type this, I'm working in beta on a tool that replicates the Anandtech Bench tool (https://www.anandtech.com/bench), but for Tom's Hardware. I have it working in beta right now. Unclear when and if we'll be able to roll it out and whether it becomes a premium feature. I'd love to show you but it's probably not ready for public consumption. I have been working on it this week.

 

[Frag Maniac]

Well, the spam bot posts that used to plague the forum have been cleaned up nicely, so I have just one pet peeve left.

Quite often the PC Gaming forum primarily consists of people seeking help for problems with performance, bugs, or general PC issues. It tends to squash threads that are meant to share the good times playing games, building gaming PCs, or just talk in general about PC Gaming.

I feel what's needed is a specific sub forum in PC Gaming meant for Performance problems with games, PC building or hardware issues, etc. The main PC Gaming forum should be more about what we love most about games, gaming, advice (not problems with) building a gaming PC, etc. If we lose sight of that it might as well be called the PC Gaming Problems forum.

 

[USAFRet]

Well, the spam bot posts that used to plague the forum have been cleaned up nicely, so I have just one pet peeve left.

That is about 50/50 between software filtering and Moderator killing.

 

[Frag Maniac]

That is about 50/50 between software filtering and Moderator killing.

Who cares, that's splitting hairs, this is supposed to be a thread specifically about suggestions to shape the future of the site, not a discussion about how one praises what's already been cleaned up!

 

[USAFRet]

Who cares, that's splitting hairs, this is supposed to be a thread specifically about suggestions to shape the future of the site, not a discussion about how one praises what's already been cleaned up!

I wasn't going for any 'praise'.

Just explaining how it is currently done.

 

[Jagar123]

I've sent in my survey. I also wanted to add a comment here.

Toms used to be the best place to see CPU and GPU hierarchy charts. But I haven't visited those charts in years. I can only speculate here and give my personal opinion as to why, but it seems like in order to keep SEO high you decided to simply keep a static page for these charts. I know Toms is ad revenue driven so I get that.

But for whatever reason these charts have a forum post attached to them. If I were to go to the forums to talk about the latest GPU or CPU added to the chart I would be greeted with posts from years and years ago. As a consumer that gives me the vibes that these charts are stale, so why would I come back?

Secondly, and this may be my own opinion, but those charts and their methodology haven't been regularly updated in years and years. I go to the TechPowerUp databases for this type of information now.

So yeah, while you may be high up in SEO rankings for your charts, you lost me as a regular viewer for them for the reasons stated above. I guess you (Future) have to weigh if a static article that rates highly for SEO is better than making quality regularly updated charts that can drive organic traffic to your articles. What one brings in more money? As a customer I prefer the later.

 

[Aeacus]

The problem is that we are trying to hit a very low and specific price point.

That i get, but at current day and age, it can not be done safely. All prices increase (inflation), this is given. So must the lowest price point as well.

Cutting corners and suggesting people hazardous hardware, just to save some money, is not something a reputable tech site would do.

On a system that underpowered, I don't think you need a Gold or even Bronze class PSU. Would it help? yes. Would it blow the budget? Also true.

PSU's efficiency has 0 to do with PSU's build quality. And if you look PSUs based solely on their efficiency, sorry, you are misinformed.

Since PSU powers everything, it is the most important component inside the PC!
One can cheap out on every component inside the PC, except the PSU.

The lower the PSU's build quality - the higher the chance of PSU going "pop", releasing magic smoke and frying everything it is connected to.
It has happened countless of times and will happen in the future. Heck, even houses have burned down and lives have been lost due to fires caused by crap quality PSUs.

So, for those poor people, who have saved up for months (if not years) and then, somehow, mange to buy their cheap, entry-level system, for it to blow up in their face, since TH article made them on cheap out on PSU -

It is very disrespectful for the poor people when reputable tech site gives them bad advice that leads into a loss of hardware.

I'd completely remove the $500 build from the article. Desktop PCs are expensive and when one doesn't have enough money for entry-level system, it would be FAR better idea to suggest getting a laptop, rather than a build with crap quality PSU. And with such PSUs, question isn't IF the PSU blows up, but WHEN the PSU blows up.

 

[ravewulf]

Less coverage of Raspberry Pi projects on the front page, more focus on PC components.

More retro PC content would also be very welcome. Retrospectives, history, builds, benchmarks, etc.

 

[Aeacus]

Per Wiki, THW franchise already exists for sites in EU and elsewhere.

German site (http://tomshw.de) now resolves to Igor's Lab (DE).

French site (https://www.tomshardware.fr).

Italian site (https://www.tomshw.it).

Per Perplexity, other THW sites existed in Russia (and elsewhere) but are now defunct.

German/French/Italian versions of TH are in the same language as the site. So, anyone who lives in Europe but doesn't speak German/French/Italian but only English (like yours truly), is stuck using TH main site, that caters for US.

There are A LOT of people worldwide who speak English (since English is trade language). So, it would make sense that global/international site would also cater for the whole world, rather than for one specific country.

 

[philged]

Biggest concerns recently have been.

1. There have been a number of instances where the reviews are never completed. There's a message that says we'll update this, then the updates never seem to happen. As in the 9600X/9700X review. "We are also in the process of re-validating our Ryzen results and testing the chips with an expanded number of titles. We'll update further when the testing is complete."

But that's still listed on the review seven months later with no updates AFAIK.

2. Some content, especially "best of" roundups is just copy pasted from old articles and sometimes include information that is now outdated, making it clear that very little effort was put into these "new" article lists.

3. Occasionally round up content is so overfilled it doesn't even feel like there's any meaningful suggestions. The worst example of this is the thermal paste articles. There's like 20 different categories of "winners". There doesn't appear to be any rhyme or reason why items are selected when premium pastes are less expensive then best performing pastes, there's multiple runner's up with no clear distinction as to why, there's no differentiation between best price to performance and best budget, as the budget paste is more expensive than the price/performance paste. Kind of just feels like a marketing grab rather than a meaningful article.

4. Articles on great "deals" are often either normal market discounts of higher priced items, or are sold out before the article is even posted. Is $30 off MSRP for a 990 EVO a deal? I guess? Is it a better deal than the SN770 m.2 that's still $40 cheaper and Tom's reviewed as 4 stars? Definitely not, but if you get a referral payment from Samsung I'll happily accept that article vs. a sub as long as it doesn't compromise reviews!

5. Benchmark data from reviews is inconsistent. If you look at a product review for say a GPU, the FPS benchmarks on the review page are different from what's on the GPU Hierarchy Chart, which are also different than that GPU's results on the testing pages for newer products. To some extent I guess that's unavoidable in testing variability. But from a hardware recommendation standpoint, especially with the crappier generational margins now, two people can argue different points based on different links from Tom's.

All of this makes sense if you're really stretched for review time and writers and are struggling with your budget to be considering a premium option. I'm not sure what a good solution is at this point with the shifting market landscape. Tom's does have good in-depth reviews in general and the amount of work required for good testing is really underappreciated (so thanks!). It's my go to for references when doing tech builds and giving builder advice, but it wouldn't be something I'd add to my list of already dwindling monthly subs.

 

[Jeremy Kaplan]

Thank you all for the feedback. We are actively discussing, digesting, and aiming to improve, and this type of positive (and sometimes negative) commentary is truly useful. Keep the ideas and thoughts coming!

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

I've sent in my survey. I also wanted to add a comment here.

Toms used to be the best place to see CPU and GPU hierarchy charts. But I haven't visited those charts in years. I can only speculate here and give my personal opinion as to why, but it seems like in order to keep SEO high you decided to simply keep a static page for these charts. I know Toms is ad revenue driven so I get that.

But for whatever reason these charts have a forum post attached to them. If I were to go to the forums to talk about the latest GPU or CPU added to the chart I would be greeted with posts from years and years ago. As a consumer that gives me the vibes that these charts are stale, so why would I come back?

Secondly, and this may be my own opinion, but those charts and their methodology haven't been regularly updated in years and years. I go to the TechPowerUp databases for this type of information now.

So yeah, while you may be high up in SEO rankings for your charts, you lost me as a regular viewer for them for the reasons stated above. I guess you (Future) have to weigh if a static article that rates highly for SEO is better than making quality regularly updated charts that can drive organic traffic to your articles. What one brings in more money? As a customer I prefer the later.

I will say that, as far as the GPU hierarchy and CPU hierarchy not being updated regularly, you're way off base. Right now, I'm busily retesting dozens of GPUs to switch from the old tests (about six months out of date now) to an entirely new suite. But before that, new GPUs (and CPUs from Paul) got added on a regular basis.

Testing everything on a new testbed and test suite is literally months of work, and I don't want to shift to something with only 10 cards initially, but it's in progress. Some time in the next few weeks I anticipate moving the current results to "legacy" status and making a new main page. Do note that not every paragraph gets updated with most of our updates to the hierarchy — it's mostly about the tables, IMO, showing where things rank.

The mods killed off the linked forum thread, unfortunately, partly because it was woefully outdated (the first four pages were for content that was years old). Ideally, I'd like there to be an option to make a new linked thread every month or two, to keep things relevant.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

5. Benchmark data from reviews is inconsistent. If you look at a product review for say a GPU, the FPS benchmarks on the review page are different from what's on the GPU Hierarchy Chart, which are also different than that GPU's results on the testing pages for newer products. To some extent I guess that's unavoidable in testing variability. But from a hardware recommendation standpoint, especially with the crappier generational margins now, two people can argue different points based on different links from Tom's.

We don't retroactively update every review with new test results. That's what the hierarchies are for. So, when in doubt, the hierarchy is 99% of the time the correct data. The reviews are the launch data.

 

[USAFRet]

I will say that, as far as the GPU hierarchy and CPU hierarchy not being updated regularly, you're way off base. Right now, I'm busily retesting dozens of GPUs to switch from the old tests (about six months out of date now) to an entirely new suite. But before that, new GPUs (and CPUs from Paul) got added on a regular basis.

The mods killed off the linked forum thread, unfortunately, partly because it was woefully outdated (the first four pages were for content that was years old). Ideally, I'd like there to be an option to make a new linked thread every month or two, to keep things relevant.

The problem I've seen with those is...
"Best GPUs of 2021!"
And then updated regularly. But the title still calls out 2021. Along with all the original comments from 2021.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

The problem I've seen with those is...
"Best GPUs of 2021!"
And then updated regularly. But the title still calls out 2021. Along with all the original comments from 2021.

The headlines have been updated yearly (and monthly at times) on GPUs and CPUs since I came to TH in 2020. Sometimes old RSS feeds might stick to an original title. I'm not sure about that. But obviously if you look at our best GPUs list (currently out of date due to lack of time and lack of product availability), it says 2025:

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/best-gpus,4380.html

The test and recommendations do get changed over time. But of course, not much happened from maybe March of last year until December. And now everything is out of stock / overpriced, which makes updating a hard thing. What should I recommend now? The 5090 that you can't buy, the overpriced 4090 that you shouldn't buy, or some of the other 50-series cards that are also sold out?

But now that the last of the "new GPUs" are out of my hair, other than an incoming (at some point) 5060 Ti / 5060 and 9060 XT / 9060, I'll be reworking the best GPUs list. Updating rather than rewriting from scratch is generally the only way to rank on Google these days, sadly, but I do understand why we don't have 100 different "Best GPU of [insert date]" articles all still live.

 

[Colif]

Ideally, I'd like there to be an option to make a new linked thread every month or two, to keep things relevant.

That would be a solution. Or just create a new one every year.

I guess Monitors was used as filler in the survey since it shows twice on some pages.
I don't really use the front page so I don't really have any comments (that has been case with most forums I moderate, its not my problem).