A have the 3900xt and i can say, its not the fastest single core but! I managed to set it on 1,15 volts by 4,2GHz all core OC. Single core in passmark is 3000points and thats more then enough for gaming. The CPU takes about 100Watt by 12 cores 24 threads!!! Runs max to 60celsius. Absolute winner. There is no intel CPU with these preferences..

Are you for real? You're actually taking userbench seriously, please delete this entire 'review' you absolute joke.

Just making sure we all know that UserBenchmark is Intel biased and likely literally took a payout from Intel to change their numbers to favour Intel CPU's.

We all remember that, correct? Ok, good. Lol, UserBenchmark can kiss my a**.

Not only are many not able to properly understand this article but they and NoteBookCheck seem to be unable to understand UserBenchmark ratings. The Bench % score is a gaming rating. UserBenchmark claim is that most games show very little benefit after 6 cores/threads. Their memory latency score under normal is an important factor in their % Bench (Game) rating.  If you are interested in the performance in highly threaded workloads they give that information also. Bur their claim is most users seldom have much use for moar cores in excess of 4-6. This may not meet your requirements but for most it is likely the case. While I find their rating system somewhat opaque it is not as ridiculous as this article would have you believe. Chill a little.

Quote from: Orlynow on June 25, 2020, 12:54:59
Anyone who can't tell that this article is criticizing the heck out of userbenchmark here is unable to read at a basic level. It's that simple.

Absolutely agree. I honestly cannot comprehend whatsoever how one might read this text and not see how it comprehensively criticizes the ranking system and the results presented. The same goes for calling it "sarcasm", though. There is no trace of sarcasm here, just a well written, clearly worded and matter-of-fact examination of the bias visible in these rankings.

Anyone who can't tell that this article is criticizing the heck out of userbenchmark here is unable to read at a basic level. It's that simple.

Quote from: Nikhil Sharma on June 25, 2020, 06:14:13
This is boatload of s*** couldn't find the report button, notebookcheck you've led everyone down this time didn't expected that from you , it's all paid in my opinion cause everyone knows about the shady tactics intel is pulling of in order to prove amd bad. #Boycott intel #boycott notebookcheck

Can you not tell the sarcasm from this article? ......

Quote from: Flomotion on June 25, 2020, 09:15:10
Why are you guys complaining? Although I am a big AMD fan, Intel still bests AMD in single core performance (which is still important, no matter what anyone says). Just look at GeekBench 5 results, it will just confirm these findings here. AMD needs to get on Intel's level with single-core performance, and if/when they do, Intel will bite the dust.

Nobody set their PC to use 1 core for any tasks. We use all system resources to finish our workload.

1) Relax people, the article is making fun of UserBenchmark, nobody at Notebookcheck thinks it's reliable.

2) Nobody thinks that that the i3 can compete with an R9.

3) Given the majority of posts here clearly showing they haven't read the article (why come here then?), it may be worth to consider getting your message across either in the title or the short summay that follows. Yes, not everyone is super into the tech world, and I couldn't blame those who'd take both a title and an article summary at face value. When Renoir chips are obliterating Intel CPUs with twice the TDP, is it such a long shot to assume the same thing the other way around (especially how it was the norm for the better part of a decade)?

I read the article and yes, sarcasm is dripping from it, and I'm not advocating for boring objectivitity all the time. An article can be entertaining while getting its message straight up-front; that's what the summary is about.

Why are you guys complaining? Although I am a big AMD fan, Intel still bests AMD in single core performance (which is still important, no matter what anyone says). Just look at GeekBench 5 results, it will just confirm these findings here. AMD needs to get on Intel's level with single-core performance, and if/when they do, Intel will bite the dust.

This is useless and a shame that notebookcheck publish this userbenchmark crap

Find it shocking that many here don't get the sarcasm in the articles.. indeed most geek are like sheldon cooper

There are some sense mofos commenting...

"Lastly, UserBenchmark results, especially AMD/Intel comparisons, require all the salt you can find to pinch at while reading them."

If that wasn't enough to make it clear they were mocking userbenchmark, I don't know you would ever get it.

This is boatload of s*** couldn't find the report button, notebookcheck you've led everyone down this time didn't expected that from you , it's all paid in my opinion cause everyone knows about the shady tactics intel is pulling of in order to prove amd bad. #Boycott intel #boycott notebookcheck

My Ryzen 3 3300X performs way better  8), Single core performance is the king.