Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 08:34:22 01/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
Aaron, For better or for worse, you are absolutly correct imo. In fact, almost all reviewers that are dependant upon early releases, free prototypes etc, are in the same position. In some cases, the reviewers have the exact adcopy as provided by the manufacturer. This is also not limited to CPUs, it applies to all sorts of electronics. There are two things you can usually count - if the reviewer never has bad word about a company - assume he is getting some benefit. If he never has a good word, he is getting squat. There is a chess reviewer (please, no guesses ) out there that raves about Excalibur chess units, typically he never mentions that gets free units. Although when I questioned him, he freely admitted that as fact. IMO, a reviewer should disclose all compensation withr respect to his/her reviews - including free units, early releases, paid links, and in some cases "paid for" reviews. If they do not diclose their relationship voluntary - take their review with a grain of salt and talk to other people before making you're decision. btw - everything that I have seen with respect to Crafty and other top programs - AMD wins hands down over the P4. No contest. The PIII was a different story and did quite well.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.