Norton0108

Linus, I am resurrecting my scarcely used account here just to give some feedback; because I'm pretty baffled and dissatisfied with this response.

I am an LTT/LMG enthusiast and borderline fanboy. I have been watching LTT content since you were doing unboxings in a garage, and have enjoyed watching you become the tech-titan you are today. I think if the vision of Labs comes to fruition it will be an extremely important resource to consumers. I think the products you produce, clothing, screwdriver, backpack etc. are excellent quality with amazing attention to detail. I watch the WAN show every week with my wife, and I watch most main-channel videos. Yet, I can't ignore the feeling LMG content comes across as surface-level and rushed to a point where it is a detriment to the data presented.

This gets more apparent anytime a subject I'm actually familiar with is discussed. I am not as tech-literate as many viewers of LTT (or GN); and even I have noticed inconsistencies and errors in videos. I worry what information I accept as fact on topics I'm less familiar with. You've discussed the struggles with this on the WAN show and have been fairly transparent in trying to figure out a way to improve things. I don't want to discount that. It just comes across as though you're unwilling to do the most simple thing that seems like it would work; TAKE MORE TIME!

I understand (and sympathize with) the time crunch LMG is under in order to produce the colossal amount of videos you release weekly. There's a lot of mouths to feed, and the company keeps growing. Many of your viewers would prefer you to release a smaller number of core videos with a significantly higher attention to detail; as opposed to what we currently get. This isn't to say "UPLOAD LESS, BOTTOM-LINE BE DAMNED!" Instead, I am suggesting you use filler like the AliExpress videos, or Extreme Tech Upgrades to bridge the content gap in between less frequent, but well-refined reviews and coverage of products and larger projects. Your employees have stated they want more time to work on something, your viewers have said things would be more interesting with more time invested to do things correctly; yet you continue at the same pace and (lack of) thoroughness despite all of that. It is a strange dichotomy you've created where you promote Labs as a major (future) resource in consumer research and decision-making, but main channel LTT (using Labs data, no less) takes a "Just slap it together and call it good-enough!" approach. "Just fix it in post" can't be good enough anymore.

You've advocated many times that viewers should seek out multiple reviews of a product in order to make an educated purchasing decision. I agree, but think the onus falls somewhat onto LTT to make sure their data provided is as accurate as realistically possible; because a sizable majority of viewers won't do this. Simply stating "well our conclusions aren't based on a spec sheet" is missing the point. If you are getting something as easy as a spec sheet wrong; what else is wrong due to poor testing methodology and processes? In a perfect world, nothing, but I hope you can see where viewers are coming from when they list it as a real concern. Unfortunately, it isn't nothing because Steve had many examples of data being misrepresentative of products being tested. This is essential you fix if you want labs to succeed in the way you've envisioned. No one would take Rtings.com seriously if every other review they produced had core data completely incorrect.

Understanding the full scope of issues like with Billet Labs is a major disappointment. The handling of it, honestly, has hurt the way I view your integrity and that of LMG. I personally was not outraged by the original video. I understood the feedback given by the audience; but I can't say I disagreed with the premise that an absurdly expensive and impractical water block for a last-gen product is a bad purchase. I don't personally attribute any malice to the sale of the product; clearly there are communication issues internally which need to be addressed and processes put into place to avoid situations like this. I do find your response, especially with the additional context provided by GN today; rather slimy.

First was the weasel wording of "we didn't sell it, we auctioned it".

Auction (noun): a sale of property to the highest bidder.

Giving you the largest benefit of the doubt I possibly can, I pray you used this phrasing in a poorly-worded attempt to distinguish it being auctioned off for charity; vs it being sold for personal gain. Even with that concession, you implying that you'd reached some sort of agreement with Billet Labs appears to be outright dishonesty and a manipulation of your audience. Either that, or both Gamers Nexus AND Billet Labs are distorting the truth with the intention of hurting LTT; something wildly out of character at least, for what we know as viewers about Steve. I'm glad in the wake of GN's video LMG reached out to Billet Labs in an attempt to make things right; but presenting it as though this conversation was well underway when the news broke is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. LMG screwed up and you seem to be trying to diminish the scope of that mistake. This flies in the face of the transparency that LMG has attempted to brand themselves with.

You expressed disappointment that GN didn't contact you behind the scenes to express these concerns. You say you're "continuing to move forward in good faith as part of 'Team Media' When/if he's ready to do so again I'll be ready." and thereby implying that Gamer's Nexus is stabbing you in the back by calling you out. That isn't how a team works; when someone is consistently dropping the ball it is up to the other "team members" to call them out and hold them up to the standard.

Please do better.

Linus, I am resurrecting my scarcely used account here just to give some feedback; because I'm pretty baffled and dissatisfied with this response.

I am an LTT/LMG enthusiast and borderline fanboy. I have been watching LTT content since you were doing unboxings in a garage, and have enjoyed watching you become the tech-titan you are today. I think if the vision of Labs comes to fruition it will be an extremely important resource to consumers. I think the products you produce, clothing, screwdriver, backpack etc. are excellent quality with amazing attention to detail. I watch the WAN show every week with my wife, and I watch most main-channel videos. Yet, I can't ignore the feeling LMG content comes across as surface-level and rushed to a point where it is a detriment to the data presented.

This gets more apparent anytime a subject I'm actually familiar with is discussed. I am not as tech-literate as many viewers of LTT (or GN); and even I have noticed inconsistencies and errors in videos. I worry what information I accept as fact on topics I'm less familiar with. You've discussed the struggles with this on the WAN show and have been fairly transparent in trying to figure out a way to improve things. I don't want to discount that. It just comes across as though you're unwilling to do the most simple thing that seems like it would work; TAKE MORE TIME!

I understand (and sympathize with) the time crunch LMG is under in order to produce the colossal amount of videos you release weekly. There's a lot of mouths to feed, and the company keeps growing. Many of your viewers would prefer you to release a smaller number of core videos with a significantly higher attention to detail; as opposed to what we currently get. This isn't to say "UPLOAD LESS, BOTTOM-LINE BE DAMNED!" Instead, I am suggesting you use filler like the AliExpress videos, or Extreme Tech Upgrades to bridge the content gap in between less frequent, but well-refined reviews and coverage of products and larger projects. Your employees have stated they want more time to work on something, your viewers have said things would be more interesting with more time invested to do things correctly; yet you continue at the same pace and (lack of) thoroughness despite all of that. It is a strange dichotomy you've created where you promote Labs as a major (future) resource in consumer research and decision-making, but main channel LTT (using Labs data, no less) takes a "Just slap it together and call it good-enough!" approach. "Just fix it in post" can't be good enough anymore.

You've advocated many times that viewers should seek out multiple reviews of a product in order to make an educated purchasing decision. I agree, but think the onus falls somewhat onto LTT to make sure their data provided is as accurate as realistically possible; because a sizable majority of viewers won't do this. Simply stating "well our conclusions aren't based on a spec sheet" is missing the point. If you are getting something as easy as a spec sheet wrong; what else is wrong due to poor testing methodology and processes? In a perfect world, nothing, but I hope you can see where viewers are coming from when they list it as a real concern. Unfortunately, it isn't nothing because Steve had many examples of data being misrepresentative of products being tested. This is essential you fix if you want labs to succeed in the way you've envisioned. No one would take Rtings.com seriously if every other review they produced had core data completely incorrect.

Understanding the full scope of issues like with Billet Labs is a major disappointment. The handling of it, honestly, has hurt the way I view your integrity and that of LMG. I personally was not outraged by the original video. I understood the feedback given by the audience; but I can't say I disagreed with the premise that an absurdly expensive and impractical water block for a last-gen product is a bad purchase. I don't personally attribute any malice to the sale of the product; clearly there are communication issues internally which need to be addressed and processes put into place to avoid situations like this. I do find your response, especially with the additional context provided by GN today; rather slimy.

First was the weasel wording of "we didn't sell it, we auctioned it".

Auction (noun): a sale of property to the highest bidder.

Giving you the largest benefit of the doubt I possibly can, I pray you used this phrasing in a poorly-worded attempt to distinguish it being auctioned off for charity; vs it being sold for personal gain. Even with that concession, you implying that you'd reached some sort of agreement with Billet Labs appears to be outright dishonesty and a manipulation of your audience. Either that, or both Gamers Nexus AND Billet Labs are distorting the truth with the intention of hurting LTT; something wildly out of character at least, for what we know as viewers about Steve. I'm glad in the wake of GN's video LMG reached out to Billet Labs in an attempt to make things right; but presenting it as though this conversation was well underway when the news broke is a blatant misrepresentation of the facts. LMG screwed up and you seem to be trying to diminish the scope of that mistake. This flies in the face of the transparency that LMG has attempted to brand themselves with.

You expressed disappointment that GN didn't contact you behind the scenes to express these concerns. You say you're "continuing to move forward in good faith as part of 'Team Media' When/if he's ready to do so again I'll be ready." and thereby implying that Gamer's Nexus is stabbing you in the back by calling you out. That isn't how a team works; when someone is consistently dropping the ball it is up to the other "team members" to call them out and hold them up to the standard.

Please do better.

Literally no one other than you has mentioned temperatures; except me explicitly stating I have not seen temperatures reach a threshold where I would be concerned about the system shutting down to protect itself. The maximum temperature I have observed on any core is ~76°C. Considering AMD's Robert Hallock has specified that temperatures of up to 90°C while under full load are not something to be concerned about; I'm not going to get worked up over 76°.
 
Yes. I am aware of what CFM means. Noctua rates the NF-A15 fans that come with this cooler for 140,2 m³/h. When converted, that comes out to 82.51860338358499 CFM. You stated "as for a fan option, you need 75-120CFM coolers not 68-72CFM." Last I checked, 82.5 DOES IN FACT sit within the threshold of 75-120CFM.
 
If you see something in one of the errors posted or something that suggests heat is the culprit to the shutdowns then please elaborate so I can add that to the list of tests I should perform.
 
If you'd rather just vent about personal biases about my choice of cooler then kindly fuck off and go bother someone else.

Not to be a pain in the ass about the little details Linus -- but I'm going to be a pain in the ass about the little details.

At 5:25 you talk about how 'it doesn't make a difference having a premium certified cable for a digital signal'. This is getting to be less true with high framerate, and HDR 4k content. I work in a store that specializes in Home Theater equipment. One customer of ours was attempting to run video from a 4K Bluray player, through a compatible receiver in the rear of a room -- up to the front where they had mounted their TV on the wall. They claimed to have issues with the cable we sold them. I dug into it because based on the same logic you just expressed -- an HDMI cable is an HDMI cable. I tried using the same model 50ft HDMI cable to pass the 4k Bluray copies of 'Interstellar', and 'Guardians of the Galaxy 2' from a UBDM9700 Samsung player, a UBK90 LG player, and a UBPX700 Sony player -- to a QN65Q8FN Samsung TV.  With HDR disabled on the TV, it easily passed a 4k signal -- since it would have been essentially 4K@30hz. However when I *enabled* HDR, the screen either flickered or failed to display a picture at all.
 
The bandwidth sizes needed to guaranteed pass 4K HDR, or high frame-rate 4k content is about 18Gbps. This is what the "Premium Certified" is for, each of those cables will 100% guaranteed pass 18Gbps each direction. 
 
This doesn't mean a cheap cable WON'T work, but you will run a higher chance of it not working. That being said, the length of the cable seems to have some impact on performance as well. I was able to take the same movies, players, and TV, and successfully pass 4K HDR with a 6 (VH6HHR), 10 (HDMMV410), and 15 ( HDMMV415)  foot cheaper cable. As soon as I stepped out beyond the 25ft point I started having issues. It also seemed TV brand dependant. An LG OLED65C8P, 65SK9500, and 65SK8000 each accepted the signal (with HDR) without complaint. Samsung however, failed to pass the signal with the QN65Q6FN, Q7FN, and Q8FN. 

So basically, it's getting weird with all the high bandwidth, high resolution and high framerate content that is getting pushed recently. If you're running a cable a longer distance -- it's probably worth spending the little bit of extra money to get something that is "guaranteed" to work as intended. 

Gotta say I really don't see the appeal here.

Now that the C9 OLED from LG supports Freesync (and therefore G-Sync as a byproduct), what is the point in either the BFGD OR this Alienware? They're both SUBSTANTIALLY more expensive than even the 65" OLED65C9P which is $2499 at most retailers.

I mean, the BFGD is $5000! For that price you could purchase TWO 65" C9 OLEDs! While they're 120hz instead of 144hz, they still include a digital tuner (nice to have an OTA Antenna for those of us who cut cable), have FAR better contrast, and still support Freesync (and therefore G-Sync). Even the Samsung QN65Q90R sounds like a more compelling option for the price:
 
480 zones of local-dimming vs 384 on the BFGD Samsung's new 'X-Wide' viewing angle screen which competes with OLED level viewing angles Freesync support. I'm unsure if this has been updated to support G-Sync as well but it's supposedly in the works Significantly higher peak brightness for better HDR performance
The Alienware 55" is just an LG OLED panel with the HDR carved out and a whole lot of markup shoved into it's place. While the input latency is impressive, you can get the 55" LG C9 OLED for $1599 as opposed to Alienware's $3800 asking price. I'd take that trade for all the benefits already mentioned.

Gotta say I really don't see the appeal here.

Now that the C9 OLED from LG supports Freesync (and therefore G-Sync as a byproduct), what is the point in either the BFGD OR this Alienware? They're both SUBSTANTIALLY more expensive than even the 65" OLED65C9P which is $2499 at most retailers.

I mean, the BFGD is $5000! For that price you could purchase TWO 65" C9 OLEDs! While they're 120hz instead of 144hz, they still include a digital tuner (nice to have an OTA Antenna for those of us who cut cable), have FAR better contrast, and still support Freesync (and therefore G-Sync). Even the Samsung QN65Q90R sounds like a more compelling option for the price:
 
480 zones of local-dimming vs 384 on the BFGD Samsung's new 'X-Wide' viewing angle screen which competes with OLED level viewing angles Freesync support. I'm unsure if this has been updated to support G-Sync as well but it's supposedly in the works Significantly higher peak brightness for better HDR performance
The Alienware 55" is just an LG OLED panel with the HDR carved out and a whole lot of markup shoved into it's place. While the input latency is impressive, you can get the 55" LG C9 OLED for $1599 as opposed to Alienware's $3800 asking price. I'd take that trade for all the benefits already mentioned.

Gotta say I really don't see the appeal here.

Now that the C9 OLED from LG supports Freesync (and therefore G-Sync as a byproduct), what is the point in either the BFGD OR this Alienware? They're both SUBSTANTIALLY more expensive than even the 65" OLED65C9P which is $2499 at most retailers.

I mean, the BFGD is $5000! For that price you could purchase TWO 65" C9 OLEDs! While they're 120hz instead of 144hz, they still include a digital tuner (nice to have an OTA Antenna for those of us who cut cable), have FAR better contrast, and still support Freesync (and therefore G-Sync). Even the Samsung QN65Q90R sounds like a more compelling option for the price:
 
480 zones of local-dimming vs 384 on the BFGD Samsung's new 'X-Wide' viewing angle screen which competes with OLED level viewing angles Freesync support. I'm unsure if this has been updated to support G-Sync as well but it's supposedly in the works Significantly higher peak brightness for better HDR performance
The Alienware 55" is just an LG OLED panel with the HDR carved out and a whole lot of markup shoved into it's place. While the input latency is impressive, you can get the 55" LG C9 OLED for $1599 as opposed to Alienware's $3800 asking price. I'd take that trade for all the benefits already mentioned.

Not to be a pain in the ass about the little details Linus -- but I'm going to be a pain in the ass about the little details.

At 5:25 you talk about how 'it doesn't make a difference having a premium certified cable for a digital signal'. This is getting to be less true with high framerate, and HDR 4k content. I work in a store that specializes in Home Theater equipment. One customer of ours was attempting to run video from a 4K Bluray player, through a compatible receiver in the rear of a room -- up to the front where they had mounted their TV on the wall. They claimed to have issues with the cable we sold them. I dug into it because based on the same logic you just expressed -- an HDMI cable is an HDMI cable. I tried using the same model 50ft HDMI cable to pass the 4k Bluray copies of 'Interstellar', and 'Guardians of the Galaxy 2' from a UBDM9700 Samsung player, a UBK90 LG player, and a UBPX700 Sony player -- to a QN65Q8FN Samsung TV.  With HDR disabled on the TV, it easily passed a 4k signal -- since it would have been essentially 4K@30hz. However when I *enabled* HDR, the screen either flickered or failed to display a picture at all.
 
The bandwidth sizes needed to guaranteed pass 4K HDR, or high frame-rate 4k content is about 18Gbps. This is what the "Premium Certified" is for, each of those cables will 100% guaranteed pass 18Gbps each direction. 
 
This doesn't mean a cheap cable WON'T work, but you will run a higher chance of it not working. That being said, the length of the cable seems to have some impact on performance as well. I was able to take the same movies, players, and TV, and successfully pass 4K HDR with a 6 (VH6HHR), 10 (HDMMV410), and 15 ( HDMMV415)  foot cheaper cable. As soon as I stepped out beyond the 25ft point I started having issues. It also seemed TV brand dependant. An LG OLED65C8P, 65SK9500, and 65SK8000 each accepted the signal (with HDR) without complaint. Samsung however, failed to pass the signal with the QN65Q6FN, Q7FN, and Q8FN. 

So basically, it's getting weird with all the high bandwidth, high resolution and high framerate content that is getting pushed recently. If you're running a cable a longer distance -- it's probably worth spending the little bit of extra money to get something that is "guaranteed" to work as intended.