I have a couple complaints about the "Best Graphics Cards for the Money" articles. I feel that if they were taken into consideration then it would help many more people and the articles would be more objective as a whole. Plus logical fallacies tend to annoy me, especially when I see potential as I do with these articles.
Meaning of “best card for the money”:
For some reason many people, including the author of the articles, think that the meaning of “best card for the money” is somehow synonymous with price/performance. This is a complete logical fallacy. According to logic, the best card for the money would refer to the best possible card for a specific price point, regardless of price/performance. For instance, if I have $500 to spend on a graphics card I am obviously not interested in bang for buck and interested in THE BEST PERFORMING CARD FOR $500! If there is a $500 card that performs better, even if only 10% better, than a $200 card, then this would be the best card for the price range.
Of course there is a slippery slope. There is no point in recommending a $2000 price point simply because there are VERY FEW users willing to spend that money, but there are many people who want to spend $500+ on a graphics card and the article does not help these people out because of some elitist price/performance ****, something these articles aren’t even supposed to (according to their title) address.
Obviously the most expensive hardware is overpriced and that there are diminishing returns for the best, EVERYONE is well aware of this. It’s still the best and that is what the article is supposed to convey. This is an enthusiast site and this alienates many potential readers. Either change the name of the article to something that means price/performance (in which case you would only really be able to recommend a very few cards) or provide an article that is appropriate to the title.
Also, the argument that a true enthusiast would choose best price/performance and then overclock is just semantics. If that is the case then Tomshardware is not an enthusiast website and more of a “people interested in hardware and its performance” website. I think the word enthusiast is a bit easier to use.
Intended readers:
Who are the intended readers for this article? I assume it wouldn’t be casual readers because I don’t know of any casual PC gamer that even knows what SLI or crossfire is. The chances of them having an SLI or crossfire board are miniscule. Why would anybody recommend a crossfire setup to someone who doesn’t even know what crossfire is?
I can also assume it isn’t for people interested in graphics cards because a decent percentage of people of hardcore gamers like to have the best graphics card and are not interested in price/performance.
If you’re going to mention SLI or crossfire then at least give a single card option to include people without the specific boards and people who don’t want dual card solutions. Even if the single card performs slower than the dual card solution, it is still the best performance for a large amount of people.
Final word:
Although these articles fail to list the best cards for all price points I think the under $200 segments are always well done. I also feel that most complaints are rather pointless such as the desire for recommending PSU wattage and such. However, this is an enthusiast web site which means that a percentage of readers are ENTHUSIASTS and desire to pay a premium for the best card regardless of diminishing returns.
SO PLEASE STOP SAYING that "Best Graphics Cards for the Money" implies best performance/dollar. It doesn’t mean that. This is not just an opinion, it is logic. The English language is very specific, not ambiguous. If this still does not make sense then I would recommend asking someone who went to university for something involving linguistics or the philosophy of logic.
And finally, stop alienating your readers because you have some high and mighty opinion about what people should be spending. If someone wants to spend $500 more for 10% performance then the article SHOULD (again, according to the title) recommend something for these people. This isn’t the inquirer so try to be a bit more objective. If the article was truly best price/performance then there could only be a single card chosen because there are no variables.
Meaning of “best card for the money”:
For some reason many people, including the author of the articles, think that the meaning of “best card for the money” is somehow synonymous with price/performance. This is a complete logical fallacy. According to logic, the best card for the money would refer to the best possible card for a specific price point, regardless of price/performance. For instance, if I have $500 to spend on a graphics card I am obviously not interested in bang for buck and interested in THE BEST PERFORMING CARD FOR $500! If there is a $500 card that performs better, even if only 10% better, than a $200 card, then this would be the best card for the price range.
Of course there is a slippery slope. There is no point in recommending a $2000 price point simply because there are VERY FEW users willing to spend that money, but there are many people who want to spend $500+ on a graphics card and the article does not help these people out because of some elitist price/performance ****, something these articles aren’t even supposed to (according to their title) address.
Obviously the most expensive hardware is overpriced and that there are diminishing returns for the best, EVERYONE is well aware of this. It’s still the best and that is what the article is supposed to convey. This is an enthusiast site and this alienates many potential readers. Either change the name of the article to something that means price/performance (in which case you would only really be able to recommend a very few cards) or provide an article that is appropriate to the title.
Also, the argument that a true enthusiast would choose best price/performance and then overclock is just semantics. If that is the case then Tomshardware is not an enthusiast website and more of a “people interested in hardware and its performance” website. I think the word enthusiast is a bit easier to use.
Intended readers:
Who are the intended readers for this article? I assume it wouldn’t be casual readers because I don’t know of any casual PC gamer that even knows what SLI or crossfire is. The chances of them having an SLI or crossfire board are miniscule. Why would anybody recommend a crossfire setup to someone who doesn’t even know what crossfire is?
I can also assume it isn’t for people interested in graphics cards because a decent percentage of people of hardcore gamers like to have the best graphics card and are not interested in price/performance.
If you’re going to mention SLI or crossfire then at least give a single card option to include people without the specific boards and people who don’t want dual card solutions. Even if the single card performs slower than the dual card solution, it is still the best performance for a large amount of people.
Final word:
Although these articles fail to list the best cards for all price points I think the under $200 segments are always well done. I also feel that most complaints are rather pointless such as the desire for recommending PSU wattage and such. However, this is an enthusiast web site which means that a percentage of readers are ENTHUSIASTS and desire to pay a premium for the best card regardless of diminishing returns.
SO PLEASE STOP SAYING that "Best Graphics Cards for the Money" implies best performance/dollar. It doesn’t mean that. This is not just an opinion, it is logic. The English language is very specific, not ambiguous. If this still does not make sense then I would recommend asking someone who went to university for something involving linguistics or the philosophy of logic.
And finally, stop alienating your readers because you have some high and mighty opinion about what people should be spending. If someone wants to spend $500 more for 10% performance then the article SHOULD (again, according to the title) recommend something for these people. This isn’t the inquirer so try to be a bit more objective. If the article was truly best price/performance then there could only be a single card chosen because there are no variables.