ConLake Returns - Golden Sample 8700K's.

[humbug]

Posted this here https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterra...rdware_unboxed_cherry_picked_reviewer_sample/

I'm not going to go to much into the background but basically a reviewer by the name of AdoredTV did something that it 'seems to me now' is an unwritten code amongst reviewers not to do, and that is to actually investigate what is on many thinking peoples minds when they watch reviews on hardware, is what they are seeing in this review what they can expect if they buy the same thing off the shelves or is it a case of the hardware vendor having sent out cherry picked samples to show them in the best light?

Most people would conclude they are cherry picked, of course AMD, Intel, nVidia.... would want their stuff shown in the best light and so of course they send reviewers the best stuff. That actually is just something that is accepted and understood without fuss.

AdoredTV found away to prove that, i'll link the video below.

AdoredTV made a bit of a thing about it and its died down again.... with a song and a dance to forward his own channel he confirmed what most of us had suspected anyway but didn't fuss about.

For whatever reason in jumps Hardware Unboxed into an argument that had already died down, what's more Steve goes out of his way to try and prove hardware vendors don't send out cherry picked samples, now that in its self just makes you think "are you f#### serious? is it just you who are that naive or think i am?" His whole entry into this is completely bonkers, not just because now he has restarted an argument that has already died down, he actually made it worse because now we have a stand off between 2 reviewers with one of them treating us like idiots. But also because of the obvious cherry picking of his 10 samples, by his own admission those 10 CPU's are all from the same batch, anyone who bins CPU's knows you get your CPU's from specific batches, some batches are much better than others and to save yourself from going through 100's of CPU's you get maybe 10 from the same batch known to be good and bin the best out of the best batch. And sure enough most of them do 5Ghz or more without even taking the HS off on an AIO cooler, is it that Steve, as a reviewer doesn't understand the binning process himself and that with those 10 CPU's all being from the same batch are in the higher range of quality?

8Pack, Silicon Lottery, Case King............ are all selling 'delided binned chips' at the same speeds he claims are just random Retail chips, did he get extremely lucky with his 10 samples to get the 'same batch' 'best clockers?

I just don't know why Steve decided to reopen this debate, if it was to try and disprove the idea that Hardware Vendors want us to see their products in the best light he has shown himself to be an utter fool because 'in this case' unless you're a raging Intel fanboy its a given, of course they do, we are not stupid and were not bothered about that but some Youtuber who gets all his hardware given to him for free trying to pull the wool over our eyes about what we should expect when we pay for it with our hard earned cash, that's a new low. You should have just let it be, it was no revelation to us which is why the whole thing had died down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pl0we6-ZiQY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRviKkVUAa0

 

[gavinh87]

They are a business, they need money to keep themselves afloat.

The idea that someone looking at reviews might not actually get what the review suggests is not good for nVidia, AMD, Intel... any vendor, or any retailer, it can hurt sales and most importantly trust, so the idea that Vendors sending reviewers cherry picked hardware cannot and must not stand.

AdoredTV was literally 'out of line' when he proved what is actually obvious if it occurs to you to think about.

My respect for Steve and his channel has just gone down the toilet.

Funny how it's Steve slides you post up over and over to prove an AMD argument. Now something you don't like comes along he loses your respect?? Lol don't worry man I'm pretty sure he won't lose any sleep over your thoughts.

 

[humbug]

Funny how it's Steve slides you post up over and over to prove an AMD argument. Now something you don't like comes along he loses your respect?? Lol don't worry man I'm pretty sure he won't lose any sleep over your thoughts.

I post a lot of slides, from all sorts of people, including, yes, Steve.

 

[gavinh87]

I post a lot of slides, from all sorts of people, including, yes, Steve.

My point exactly, he was trustworthy before because it went with your narrative.
Now he goes against it you no longer trust him lol.

 

[humbug]

No, Gavin, he was just one of many reviewers.

 

[gavinh87]

So I guess you will no longer be posting the same regurgitated benchmarks from Steve then?

 

[humbug]

So I guess you will no longer be posting the same regurgitated benchmarks from Steve then?

If you have anything related to this thread to add to it do that, or if you disagree with anything i say then articulate it.

Once again your arguments with me are nothing to do with the subject and any rational i have applied to any relevant subject, your arguments are here again as always with me personally, i am sick to the back teeth of you following me around this forum attacking me as a person.

If you want to debate me on the given subject then do that, otherwise, go away!

Having said that the idea that AMD would also have no interest in their products being reviewed in the best light is equally as bonkers, my arguments as i made clear in them are not about Intel, its about Steve being a fool or treating us as fools.

 

[B1gbeard]

Posted this here https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterra...rdware_unboxed_cherry_picked_reviewer_sample/

You should tell us where it is obvious, to quote you, "obvious cherry picking" with the batch. It's basically your opinion with no foundation because they happen to get 5ghz (which a fair number seem to looking around). Show some evidence. You are coming across as someone believing something from a reviewer when it suits you (AMD positivity), but they are morons when they don't (Intel positivity).

Benching the same batch is not ideal obviously, but there is no evidence to suggest it's cherry picked one, and unless there is some evidence, the video shows retail chips doing very well in comparison to review.

 

[gavinh87]

If you have anything related to this thread to add to it do that, or if you disagree with anything i say then articulate it.

Once again your arguments with me are nothing to do with the subject and any rational i have applied to any relevant subject, your arguments are here again as always with me personally, i am sick to the back teeth of you following me around this forum attacking me as a person.

If you want to debate me on the given subject then do that, otherwise, go away!

Having said that the idea that AMD would also have no interest in their products being reviewed in the best light is equally as bonkers, my arguments as i made clear in them are not about Intel, its about Steve being a fool or treating us as fools.

You are the only one in here posting FUD tbh. Its nothing personal, how can it be? I don't even know you!
You just seem to think everyone is out to hurt AMD. Its either be pro AMD are you are an intel shill.

 

[humbug]

You should tell us where it is obvious, to quote you, "obvious cherry picking" with the batch. It's basically your opinion with no foundation because they happen to get 5ghz (which a fair number seem to looking around). Show some evidence. You are coming across as someone believing something from a reviewer when it suits you (AMD positivity), but they are morons when they don't (Intel positivity).

Benching the same batch is not ideal obviously, but there is no evidence to suggest it's cherry picked one, and unless there is some evidence, the video shows retail chips doing very well in comparison to review.

The proof is in those actually bin CPU's and sell them as binned CPU's, those people cannot get better CPU's then those sent to Steve, certainly not 8 out or 10, if they could they would make a whole lot more money than they do on the ones they already do sell.

So, if it was pure coincidence that they all just happen to be in the same batch then he also got very lucky that this batch just happened to be a very good one. he obviously claims he doesn't see it like that, which is why one might want to reopen the whole debate again.

Despite all of this, Linus Tech Tips appeared to think a sample size of one was enough to debunk the idea that vendors would like their products reviewed in the best light, the reviewing community have been told actually one is not enough, so now Steve appears to think 10 is enough, no.... when golden samples make up 20% 10 CPU's is nothing like enough, when his Intel supplied sample is 1 in 100 then 10 certainly is not enough.

To get an accurate picture you need at least 1000 CPU's, AdoredTV had a sample size of 1000's, i believe his sample size.

BTW, you too can stop trying to make this about the AMD fanboy narrative, i made it very clear right from the start that AMD do this too, as do nVidia, they all want their products portrayed in the best light, my issue is with Steve going out of his way to try and prove they don't.

 

[gavinh87]

The proof is in those actually bin CPU's and sell them as binned CPU's, those people cannot get better CPU's then those sent to Steve, certainly not 8 out or 10, if they could they would make a whole lot more money than they do on the ones they already do sell.

So, if it was pure coincidence that they all just happen to be in the same batch then he also got very lucky that this batch just happened to be a very good one. he obviously claims he doesn't see it like that, which is why one might want to reopen the whole debate again.

Despite all of this, Linus Tech Tips appeared to think a sample size of one was enough to debunk the idea that vendors would like their products reviewed in the best light, the reviewing community have been told actually one is not enough, so now Steve appears to think 10 is enough, no when golden samples make up 20% 10 CPU's is nothing like enough, whe his Intel supplied sample is 1 in 100 then 10 certainly is not enough.

To get an accurate picture you need at least 1000 CPU's, AdoredTV had a sample size of 1000's, i believe his sample size.

BTW, you too can stop trying to make this about the AMD fanboy narrative, i made it very clear right from the start that AMD do this too, as do nVidia, they all want their products portrayed in the best light, my issue is with Steve going out of his way to try and prove they don't.

Far far too many variables using other reviewers results as a sample.
How many of those were stability tested in the same way? How many had the same cooling solutions? Same motherboard etc??

 

[humbug]

Far far too many variables using other reviewers results as a sample.
How many of those were stability tested in the same way? How many had the same cooling solutions? Same motherboard etc??

Yes there are far too many variables, which is why you would use far more than 10, 10 CPU's to debunk the idea that reviewers are sent those in the 2 in 10 to 1 in 100, Steve's is one of those in the 1 in 100 range as a most of the other big mainstream reviewers.

Do you think 10 is a big enough sample size?

Or do you think 1000's is a better sample size?

There certainly aren't enough binned CPU's to go around to everyone, so you concentrate on the most popular, 9 in 10 of those got the top 20% CPU's.

 

[gavinh87]

Yes, which is why you would use far more than 10, 10 CPU's to debunk the idea that reviewers are sent those in the 2 in 10 to 1 in 100, Steve's is one of those in the 1 in 100 range as a most of the other mainstream reviewers.

Do you think 10 is a big enough sample size?

Or do you think 1000's is a better sample size?

None are sufficient imo. 1000 is a good number but needs to be done under the same conditions. Same person, same cooling, same mobo etc etc.
In the grand scheme of things, nobody really gives a damn. Its a very small minority that have an issue with this. Jim just likes to clickbait people.
As I said before his 8400 theories are now debunked but where is the video saying he is wrong? We wont see one, he will just make another nonsensical video that nobody really cares about.

 

[humbug]

None are sufficient imo. 1000 is a good number but needs to be done under the same conditions. Same person, same cooling, same mobo etc etc.
In the grand scheme of things, nobody really gives a damn. Its a very small minority that have an issue with this. Jim just likes to clickbait people.
As I said before his 8400 theories are now debunked but where is the video saying he is wrong? We wont see one, he will just make another nonsensical video that nobody really cares about.

So if you don't think 1000 is a big enough sample size then you too must think Steve with his 10 is way out of line?

 

[B1gbeard]

The proof is in those actually bin CPU's and sell them as binned CPU's, those people cannot get better CPU's then those sent to Steve, certainly not 8 out or 10, if they could they would make a whole lot more money than they do on the ones they already do sell.

So, if it was pure coincidence that they all just happen to be in the same batch then he also got very lucky that this batch just happened to be a very good one. he obviously claims he doesn't see it like that, which is why one might want to reopen the whole debate again.

Despite all of this, Linus Tech Tips appeared to think a sample size of one was enough to debunk the idea that vendors would like their products reviewed in the best light, the reviewing community have been told actually one is not enough, so now Steve appears to think 10 is enough, no when golden samples make up 20% 10 CPU's is nothing like enough, whe his Intel supplied sample is 1 in 100 then 10 certainly is not enough.

To get an accurate picture you need at least 1000 CPU's, AdoredTV had a sample size of 1000's, i believe his sample size.

BTW, you too can stop trying to make this about the AMD fanboy narrative, i made it very clear right from the start that AMD do this too, as do nVidia, they all want their products portrayed in the best light, my issue is with Steve going out of his way to try and prove they don't.

I don't understand your first line. Are you saying Steve was sent binned CPU's? Weren't they sealed and he opened them up. What is it about these CPU's that's a problem? These are retail chips from an Australian retailer right? He also said he bought 3 8700k's previously at various times and all were great. What the video shows to me is that there is a fair chance of getting something that clocks similar to the chips the reviewers got and that's a good thing. If you think he was sent a batch that the retailer was aware were good clockers then again, it's not obvious and you have provided no proof. Steve has seemed very fair to the Ryzen CPU's in the past and I see no reason for him to mislead us here unless his retailer has deceived him.

I image Steve was just doing what he could because of cost. He didn't state it was definitive, in fact at the end of the video he was pretty unsure of it all. It's all being blown way out of proportion.

And I am playing the AMD fanboy card sorry. You would not have made this much fuss about essentially nothing if this was an AMD CPU.

 

[gavinh87]

So if you don't think 1000 is a big enough sample size then you too must think Steve with his 10 is way out of line?

I think this whole subject is BS. Its a meaningless subject.
As @B1gbeard said, this wouldn't have even made it this far had it have been about AMD.

I see Jim conveniently left out Gamer Nexus' 4.9ghz CPU out of the video. (Correct me if I am mistaken)

 

[humbug]

Yes you are mistaken ^^^ he didn't leave it out.

I don't understand your first line. Are you saying Steve was sent binned CPU's? Weren't they sealed and he opened them up. What is it about these CPU's that's a problem? These are retail chips from an Australian retailer right? He also said he bought 3 8700k's previously at various times and all were great. What the video shows to me is that there is a fair chance of getting something that clocks similar to the chips the reviewers got and that's a good thing. If you think he was sent a batch that the retailer was aware were good clockers then again, it's not obvious and you have provided no proof. Steve has seemed very fair to the Ryzen CPU's in the past and I see no reason for him to mislead us here unless his retailer has deceived him.

I image Steve was just doing what he could because of cost. He didn't state it was definitive, in fact at the end of the video he was pretty unsure of it all. It's all being blown way out of proportion.

And I am playing the AMD fanboy card sorry. You would not have made this much fuss about essentially nothing if this was an AMD CPU.

Certain batches are known to yield better CPU's, these batches are known to Intel at least, Intel themselves bin their own CPU's for all sorts of reasons, suppliers and retailers with the right fingers in the right pies also know the bins and they know them by serial code.

8Pack does not trawl though 1000 CPU's to find the few good ones, no he knows what batch to order, he might get 10 or 20 of those and then look for the best from the best batch.

The 10 CPU's Steve was given 'not bought, given to him' are all from the same batch and just as good as those sold as high clocking binned.

 

[B1gbeard]

Certain batches are known to yield better CPU's, these batches are known to Intel at least, Intel themselves bin their own CPU's for all sorts of reasons, suppliers and retailers with the right fingers in the right pies also know the bins and they know them by serial code.

8Pack does not trawl though 1000 CPU's to find the few good ones, no he knows what batch to order, he might get 10 or 20 of those and then look for the best from the best bunch.

The 10 CPU's Steve was given 'not bought, given to him' are all from the same batch and just as good as those sold as high clocking binned.

So you feel Steve or the retailer has misled us? Maybe but that just seems like Paranoia and I'm not even sure what the motive is. To kiss Intel arse? I'm really not sure the biggest PC parts reviewer in Australia needs to do that. This seems like a huge sumfin outa nufin that wouldn't have made the headlines here if it was the other way around.

 

[gavinh87]

So you feel Steve or the retailer has misled us? Maybe but that just seems like Paranoia and I'm not even sure what the motive is. To kiss Intel arse? I'm really not sure the biggest PC parts reviewer in Australia needs to do that. This seems like a huge sumfin outa nufin that wouldn't have made the headlines here if it was the other way around.

+1
CPU's have always had better batch numbers. From as long back as I can remember. This is a lot of fuss over something that has always been the case.
Conlake is also a stupid title for the video, every damn lake is the same.

 

[humbug]

So you feel Steve or the retailer has misled us? Maybe but that just seems like Paranoia and I'm not even sure what the motive is. To kiss Intel arse? I'm really not sure the biggest PC parts reviewer in Australia needs to do that. This seems like a huge sumfin outa nufin that wouldn't have made the headlines here if it was the other way around.

There could be any number of motives, trying to pin down why is impossible and detracts from the meat of the argument.

AMD, Intel, nVidia.... do they want to show off their products in the best light? Yes or no?

That is the question Jim tried to answer, yes they do, was his conclusion, Steve has a counter argument that i think is flawed.