"Spend less time talking about the benchmarks and more time analyzing the results and helping the readers to understand whether or not the hardware you're testing is worth purchasing."
I totally agree.Benchmarks are nothing but a pissing contest and do not offically sell me on a product as well as descriptions and actual play testing.I've seen much better run on alot less.
Overall nice job on the article so far.I think everyone who has commented on it has covered what I found wrong with the writing.
One main thing I would comment on in your next set would be the advantages of buying the higher end, not simply from the money standpoint but from the overall user advantage point of view. From the view of the performance without overclocking stance. If you have money to blow and not alot of overclocking experience would buying the more expensive chip, in the real world, make a noticable difference in the sense of buying the chip? And please, please, please don't use 100% benchmarks like most people do. Benchmarks do not show you real world usage. Benchmarks are nice for a short glance and see what's better by the numbers but don't mean anything in the fluidity of the gaming.
Ok rant/suggestions over.Overall you kept me captive to the end. I rather enjoy the semi-first person style writing better than the pure editorial stances. If I wanted that I would buy pc mag. Not look on websites. Keep up the good work.
