Plug for LR memory reviews

Post by **Illuminati** » Thu Apr 14, 2005 12:23 pm

I'm usually not one to brag, or for that matter, I usually don't cut others down either... but for this post, I have to do both...

I was reading Monday's memory review from Anandtech, and was nearly sickened... I don't know if any of our readers saw that article, but I hope not... at least not without seeing this post first. Let me try to quickly explain my issues...

The author of that article claimed to go to all the mainstream memory companies and ask them for a value-market sample OR a product that is under $200. Whether or not the last part of this requirement was stated or not, we will never know... but the result was that all memory companies sent Anandtech their value-segment product for review, except one company... This company sent a sample from their performance line that just happened to be listed as $199 to meet the 'under $200' requirement for this article.. and was $50 more expensive than any of the other product listed in the review. I think this says something about where the price cutoff should have been (under $150). This company received all kinds of praise from Anandtech for the best 'value-market' memory with the best overclocking potential.

Now, I can't ramble too much longer so I'll leave with my impression... "I wonder which company helped determine what the price-cap for 'value-segment' ram should be..." and "who compares value memory with performance memory in a fair comparison?"

Now here's my plug for LR... I really appreciate the time LR takes with its memory reviews and all others... I'm very happy I decided to dedicate my time working with this site and no other.

deadly-app · Post by **deadly-app** » Thu Apr 14, 2005 11:11 pm

Thats kinda disgusting. I mean seriously...Anyone in their right minds would notice straight off the price differences...

infinitevalence · Post by **infinitevalence** » Thu Apr 14, 2005 11:45 pm

no to mention that they say using two differnet motherboards for testing does not effect the comparison ... right the DFI is just as slow as the MSI.

GTX · Post by **GTX** » Fri Apr 15, 2005 6:17 am

Yeah, I thought the High Performance "Ringer" was petty funny.

Seems like they attached the word "VALUE" too much.

Bwall · Post by **Bwall** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 9:57 am

Normally I enjoy the Anandtech articles but I lost a little "love* for Wes because of the reason you pointed out. We had all of this sub- $100-$130 memory and then here is BH-5, coming in at $199. $199 is not considered value to me. The only way it could be considered value is if it were an article comparing to the TCCD that OCZ sells. Even then it's hard to swallow as Mushkin is usually much less pricey on their TCCD's and overclock well.

Also, has anyone noticed they have stayed well away from the TwinMOS TMII/ Speed Premium memory? I've purchased 2GB of the TMII from newegg and haven't payed over $112 per GB. These things do 240MHz 2-2-2-5@ 3.2v. I guess since TwinMOS hasn't sent them samples they are included in reviews.

(yes I do realize that at times they purchase and review from newegg)

Post by **Apoptosis** » Sat Apr 16, 2005 11:01 am

Funny how Value RAM is tradmarked in just about every country and Anandtech used it in reference to OCZ and other brands of memory. Just looking at the naming structure of the roundup alone is enough to make most in the industry sick. I wouldn't be suprised if Kingston and Corsair cut back sending them samples even more after that article.

All the memory in the article wasn't tested at the same timings, so the finding are worthless and a waste of time for anyone to read.

gvblake22 · Post by **gvblake22** » Sun Apr 17, 2005 4:16 pm

Yep, happened to read that article before seeing this post but thought the same thing....

I have seen another thread at another forum about that review and there were quite a few people angry that they did not have the TwinMOS Speed Premium stuff on there!