Inquirer reviews nforce240gb

[Sxotty]

The Epox K8T800 BIOS ran the Athlon 64 at 2010MHz faster then the Athlon 64 CPU spec but we noticed that even Nforce 3 250 Gb was running the CPU at that speed...Sandra reported that memory was working significantly slower on Nforce 3 250 GB at least with this BIOS and that might be the reason for this huge performance difference...Games like Quake 3 and Aquamark 3 were significantly faster on Via's chipset then on Nvidia's but then again Unreal Tournament 2003 was marginally faster on Nforce 3 250 than on Via..

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=15566

I think he meant to have a comma there signifying that it ran it 10Mhz faster and out of spec. Then he goes on to say he is amazed that the via board wins Pretty lame considering they are almost equal in every situation and that furthermore it is obvious that the difference can be attributed to simple things like that. Anyway I just thought it was particularly poorly done, but then it isn't a review site.

 

[digitalwanderer]

I never go to the Inquirerer for facts, just for rumors and innuendo.

 

[Bouncing Zabaglione Bros.]

It's a bad review. It sounds like an engineering sample. For example they point out the SATA ports in a weird place, and then say it will be changed in the next revision which has just been finished. They complain about the speed, and then say they just received a BIOS that claims 100 percent increase, but they don't have time to test it.

If the motherboard isn't ready for review, there is no point reviewing it if you are just going to say "but everything has changed and all our criticisms are being addressed". It's not reviewing the same product you'll be buying is it, thus making the reveiw pretty pointless.

 

[3dilettante]

Jeez, even in their reviews they say everything they've written is going to change. It's not a good habit to have to fall back on that refrain too often.