Announcement

**Thundrchez** · 9 December 2000, 06:29

Tom is very biased in his opinions, and it bleeds over into his articles. He is very much pro-AMD, and anti-Intel. He is very much pro-nVidia.

I am boycotting Anand and Sharky. I generally don't visit Toms. The one hardware site that I do hit fairly often is www.aceshardware.com . Their articles can get pretty technical, and they also cover non-pcs.

**Nuno** · 9 December 2000, 07:03

Actually I find it a very unbiased review. He tells what we knew already, it isn´t a card for gamers (even a G400 is way faster than that) but it kicks ass in multimonitor environments for workstations. It´s designed for that, it´s advertised for that, and what it does, it does fine. And he (the reviewer isn´t actually Tom if someone care) gives it a big thumbs up for that maket.

**Himself** · 9 December 2000, 07:04

Tom is very subjective about what he writes about, he injects his own opinion into things rather than just presenting the facts with explanations and reserving comments for the conclusion. Of course that is going to be biased. He tends to present just one side of any issue he is talking about as well, he organizes his articles to lead up to his conclusions, spending more time talking about the aspects that support his opinion. As for his opinions, if he were a character in 12 angry men, he's be the one that clones the opinion of the last person talking.

**Stringy** · 9 December 2000, 08:43

Tom got his "rep" because of his writting style, it's decidedly european... Very bold, and is opinionated...
I kinda like his reviews because he takes a stand, and states it in the beginning, then logically (well most of the time) proceeds to prove and back up his statements (or disprove depending on the article)...

I get tired of the "everything" is great reviews that some sites put up where the only bad news is mentioned in a small paragraph and they skirt coparisons to other hardware which may accel in said area...

Saying Tom is AMD Bias is quite wrong, and he's by no means Intel Bias either.. He has an opinion of what things should do...
Personally, I didn't like the idea and the route intel took with the RAMBUS and mainboards, he didn't either... I do like how AMD made their architecture specifically to avoid current bottlenecks in intel systems, like the EV6 Bus...

I think he runs a generally good site, but like all sites, you need to look at them rationally, and see if their point of veiw matches yours....

Opinions by...
Craig

------------------
P3-700e cB0 @980Mhz - Watercooled, DangerDen waterblock, Enhiem 1046 pump, 8x6x2 HeaterCore Radiator - Asus P2b Rev. 1.10 /w MSI slocket - 128Mb PC100 - G400 DH 32b SGR - IBM 20Gb 75GXP HDD - InWin A500

[This message has been edited by Stringy (edited 09 December 2000).]

**DentyCracker** · 9 December 2000, 08:43

What Himself said

**Kruzin** · 9 December 2000, 09:25

This article is another example of why I have a low opinion of Tommy boys site. It's so full of mistakes, half truths, and his bias for nVidia.

Lets pick this thing apart starting at page 1...

First of is the title:"Millennium G450: Did Matrox Miss The Market?". Whose market? Tom's teenage gaming market? Seems like Matrox has nailed the market they are aiming for, which is the business professional and OEMs. M has already signed a number deals on G450 that will keep these cards selling for a while.

The picture shown is an SDR model. SDR models are made for bulk OEM. Why is he not testing a retail DDR model here? And why is he so vague about which card he is using? Perhaps he knows the retail DDR card would look just a little better, and he likes to slam M products every chance he gets, so he got the lowest performing model of the card to make it look as bad as he could.

"So, why does Matrox produce and sell such a product? Only some years ago, their cards used to provide the best 2D performance and top notch signal quality. That's still the same today, but the competitors gradually came closer. Today, graphics cards are usually rated by 3D performance and features - something which leaves the Matrox cards behind the times. The performance leader, nVIDIA, releases graphics chips on steadily shortened product cycles, outshining predecessors and outclassing other companies' products."

At least he acknowledges the desktop quality of the G450 here, but not without discounting it by claiming the competitors are coming "closer". Next he goes on to state that 3D speed and features are lacking in G450. Well, as we all know, G450 was not intended to be a speed demon, but you would be hard pressed to find another card as feature rich as G450, but that is downplayed in the face of the mighty FPS. Then, of course, he has to get in a plug about his favorite chip maker with a half truth about how each new nV chip "outshines" the previous, when the fact is they are not new chips every time, and are usually just pumped up, overclocked versions of their previous chips with no real improvements to their technology.

Page 2...

A brief and incomplete explanation of G400, SH vs DH, and brief description of available G450 models, with the statement "Please see the table on the next page for more details."

Page 3...

The a fore mentioned table of comparison does no comparison of the various G450 models as implied on page 2. Instead it compares (quite poorly) several generic points of various cards. He even lies about the price of G450 in the this table, stating $160+ for the 32meg version, when it is plainly listed on Matrox's on-line store at $145.

Later on this same page, he states "The prices for 16 MB bulk versions should level off at approximately $120.". In less than 10 seconds at www.pricewatch.com I was able to find a whole list of 16meg G450s under $80! Did the author of this piece do any research at all??

Every argument he presents about the G450 being overpriced is based on lies.

Page 4...

He starts off by bashing the good ol G400 a little, telling another batch of half-truths like "When the G400 MAX was released in summer 1999, it was definitely fast enough to beat 3Dfx's Voodoo3 cards, but could not top the performance of a TNT2 Ultra.". While G400 was not faster than his favorite makers chip of the time in OGL games like QuakeX, it was faster in most D3D games, which covers most of the game market. But as usual, this site likes to find the weakest point of any non-nV card, and try to exploit it.

Page 5...

This is probably just a typo, but jeez...doesn't anybody proof read this stuff before posting it? "You may either attach two monitors (the first up to 2048x1536x32, the second at max. 1200x1200x32)". That last resolution should read 1600x1200, not 1200x1200.

"There is just one limitation in Windows NT - the resolutions of both monitors have to be the same.". This is true, but what is failed to be mentioned here is that this is an OS limitation, and his pet nV cards with Twinview experience the same limitation. By omitting this important bit of info, he is inferring that this is a G450 limitation.

Page 6...

Wow, nothing much to pick apart here ...but then, it's mostly just screenshots of various PD tabs with brief descriptions of functions.

Page 7...

Again not much here...it's just an outline of the test system used for the upcoming tests...but I did notice he did not clarify which (SDR or DDR) G450 is being used.

Pages 8-10...

A number of benchmarks. However, note that on each of these benchmarks, G450 is listed as being the DDR version, even though the pic on page 1 is the SDR version. Remember this point for Page 11.

Page 11...

"Matrox uses 6 ns SDRAM chips"
AHA.
This seems to indicate that they are using the SDR version (as the pic on page 1 does), when all of their benchmark charts indicate DDR. Well, which is it? It's clear to me which one it is, but it won't be to those who are not as familiar with the hardware.

They go on to try and overclock their G450 using MGATweak, and bash the card for failing to overclock.
DUH!
KJLiew has acknowledged MGATweak is not coded for G450 yet, and does not work on it. There is no public o/c util that claims to work on G450 at this point.
Another example of Tommys lack of research.

I will say that my G450DDR O/Cs like a mofo with the proper software (no, I won't say how far it goes, or with what software...NDA prevents that)

Page 12 "Conclusions"...

Most conclusions on this page are flawed for all reasons given above.

It is stated that G450 is a good choice for business users (true), and maybe not for hard-core gamers (also true), but there is no mention of the home users who want DH, and don't give a toot about FPS. There is also no mention here about the commendible job G450 does with DVD/video streams out to a TV...something Joe Homeuser might very well base a buying decision on. Nor is it mentioned that while G450 is not as fast as hard-core gaming cards, it does play any game out there today at a decent and playable rate.

So, Rimfaxe...now do you see why Tom's site is not highly regaurded around here? His articles are inaccurate, packed with half-truths and flat out lies. His allegence to nVidia is obvious, and shines through in every article. Basically, he is as incapable of presenting an unbiased review as I am of being able to flap my arms and fly.

**Ant** · 9 December 2000, 09:44

Rimfaxe, the common response from the MURC with regard to Tom is not "He doesn’t know anything right"?!? and it never has been, nothing of that sort has ever been posted on the MURC. I'd like you to point out where I have ever said that. Please provide evidence to back up your statement or retract it.

[This message has been edited by Ant (edited 09 December 2000).]

**Gurm** · 9 December 2000, 10:09

We never said he doesn't know anything. We said his opinions are worthless since he was bought several years ago by the crackheads at nVidiot.

- Gurm

------------------
Listen up, you primitive screwheads! See this? This is my BOOMSTICK! Etc. etc.

**The Rock** · 9 December 2000, 10:11

Another point to ponder is that good ole Tommy boy never mentions how bad the 2D quality is on his beloved GeForce cards. I gave up my G400 for a GeForce 2, and the 2D quality is horrible, but HE would never tell you that.

Bart

**rubank** · 9 December 2000, 10:18

Rimfaxe,

if you read carefully you´ll notice that it is indeed the 32 mb DDR sdram version that´s on test.

Not everyone here is in disgust of THG, it´s mostly our freinds on the other side of the ocean (you know that hamburger place). They´re known for having no bias at all, oh noooo.

**Kruzin** · 9 December 2000, 10:48

rubank...if you read my long post above, you will see it is NOT the DDR version being reviewed, even though they want us to think that. The label on the test scores is in error (intentional or not...who knows). The picture is of an SDR, and his description of the RAM on the card is SDR.

**Greebe** · 9 December 2000, 11:09

rubank, they luv to pick on their own... yes Thomas Pabst is from Germany and he is not like what they feel is upto snuff and typical of the accuracy they pride themselves of.

To the unknowledgable, he is impressive and not to those whom know what the real deal is.

The above is proof of that fact.

Thx, Obi Wan Kenobi

**Joel** · 9 December 2000, 11:38

Yeah, Tom is pro-whoever is paying or giving him something.

Joel

**rubank** · 9 December 2000, 12:05

Kruzin, the only thing i see from your, admittedly, long post is that you have but one valid point: the use of MGATweak.
The referral to pricewatch is plain ridiculous, it doesn´t apply in other parts of the world - certainly not in Sweden where a 16 mb G450 is about 140$ (if anyone can deliver).

Greebe (and a lot of others), Tom is the publisher not the author (in this case, as in many other).
If New York Times has a film review that makes you upset, do you blame the owner of hte paper or do you blame (flame) the reviewer?
Should the owner of Washington Post be commended for the Watergate coverage, or should the credit fall upon Bernstein and Woodward (or whatever their names were)?

For years you have been bashing Tom Pabst for things he didn´t write, grow up already.
Bashing the author i quite allright (or rather what he says) if you don´t like the piece or if you have facts to the contrary.

Announcement

Tom's Hardware guide: Matrox G450

Tom's Hardware guide: Matrox G450

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment