I don't know what Cam thinks of me posting this thread, but I'm going to on the thought that we could use more community input on our testing.
I'm reaching out to you guys(and gal). I'm sure everyone at TweakTown would love it if there were suggestions for possibly more benchmarks, removal of others, or a combo of both. Below is a list I compiled of the benchmarks TT uses for different types of reviews. From the list, please give your thoughts on the reliability of these benchmarks and ideas on what new tests could be included. This goes for overclocking and more.
One more thing before I get the list out. Does anyone have any thoughts on the base test systems used on TT? In our reviews do we have enough comparisons (ie. 5950 vs. 9800XT, etc.) so that you can decide which board performs best? Do we provide enough information to help you decide if a product is worth your money? What questions do we leave unanswered?
THE LIST:
VIDEO CARDS:
3DMark03(heading out the door)
Aquamark3
Halo
Unreal Tournament 2003(When '04 comes, should we switch, use both, ideas?)
Quake3
Code Creatures
Comanche4
Jedi Knight 2
- For video cards, we currently use the above. One of the main concerns is whether or not we should continue supporting FutureMark benchmarks. There have been an almost intolerable amount of discrepancies with mostly the 3DMark benchmark and we would like to know how our readers feel about this.
CPU/CHIPSET:
SANDRA2004
PCMark2002(2004?)
3DMark2001SE/2003
Comanche4
Jedi Knight 2
Quake 3
UT2003
- We use a currently almost identical setup for testing Processors/Chipsets at TweakTown. Is this adequate? Would you like to see some more consideration in our benchmarking? Perhaps we could run a Pi Benchmark, memory latency tools, or something? Let us know!
STORAGE:
SANDRA2004
Media Encoding
Transfer Rate/DVD Decryption
- Perhaps we should grab a copy of HDTach? Are our storage reviews lacking enough performance details? Should we have sound testing as well? Would you like audio clips available to you to hear for yourself how loud or quiet a storage device is?
That's all I've got for now, back to the SATA article. Please think through what I've said above and give us some feedback. We want the community to recognize that we need your input to improve our site and make everyone's voice heard at the hardware manufacturers...Thanks everyone for any comments.
I'm reaching out to you guys(and gal). I'm sure everyone at TweakTown would love it if there were suggestions for possibly more benchmarks, removal of others, or a combo of both. Below is a list I compiled of the benchmarks TT uses for different types of reviews. From the list, please give your thoughts on the reliability of these benchmarks and ideas on what new tests could be included. This goes for overclocking and more.
One more thing before I get the list out. Does anyone have any thoughts on the base test systems used on TT? In our reviews do we have enough comparisons (ie. 5950 vs. 9800XT, etc.) so that you can decide which board performs best? Do we provide enough information to help you decide if a product is worth your money? What questions do we leave unanswered?
THE LIST:
VIDEO CARDS:
3DMark03(heading out the door)
Aquamark3
Halo
Unreal Tournament 2003(When '04 comes, should we switch, use both, ideas?)
Quake3
Code Creatures
Comanche4
Jedi Knight 2
- For video cards, we currently use the above. One of the main concerns is whether or not we should continue supporting FutureMark benchmarks. There have been an almost intolerable amount of discrepancies with mostly the 3DMark benchmark and we would like to know how our readers feel about this.
CPU/CHIPSET:
SANDRA2004
PCMark2002(2004?)
3DMark2001SE/2003
Comanche4
Jedi Knight 2
Quake 3
UT2003
- We use a currently almost identical setup for testing Processors/Chipsets at TweakTown. Is this adequate? Would you like to see some more consideration in our benchmarking? Perhaps we could run a Pi Benchmark, memory latency tools, or something? Let us know!
STORAGE:
SANDRA2004
Media Encoding
Transfer Rate/DVD Decryption
- Perhaps we should grab a copy of HDTach? Are our storage reviews lacking enough performance details? Should we have sound testing as well? Would you like audio clips available to you to hear for yourself how loud or quiet a storage device is?
That's all I've got for now, back to the SATA article. Please think through what I've said above and give us some feedback. We want the community to recognize that we need your input to improve our site and make everyone's voice heard at the hardware manufacturers...Thanks everyone for any comments.
Comment