UserBenchmark's current bench charts make for interesting reading, even considering the site's checkered and much-criticized past. Rocket Lake parts dominate the top of the table, while AMD's Ryzen 9 5900X languishes in 13th position. The multi-core Zen 3 monster Ryzen 9 5950X suffers the ignominy of being outbenched by both the Intel Core i9-9900KS and the i9-11950H.
https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Ryzen-9-5900X-lags-behind-12-Intel-Rocket-Lake-and-Comet-Lake-chips-while-a-Coffee-Lake-CPU-and-a-mobile-processor-outbench-the-Ryzen-9-5950X-UserBenchmark-really-doesn-t-like-Zen-3.539230.0.html
The problem is well known. The question is: how should the site known as UserBenchmark be destroyed?
BiasedBenchmark
Google and other search engines should ban this website imo.
:) will wait for more benches from multiple pro sites. AMD is a freight train with its roadmap though...
I think the OP above article has plenty much answered his own stupid questions with using UserBenchmark..If I recalled even Jim Adored TV at some point had trash this application it's nothing more than straight up hot garbage! 🔥
The geeks know Userbenchmark is not trustworthy but the problem is getting the message across to everyone who does a quick Google search and sees this site as the top results and falls for its fake inaccurate benchmark results.
user benchmarks..........
This is old news.
They've changed their "algorithm" multiple times to further weight single threaded scores above all else.
Userbenchmark is paid by intel.
Passmark is a reliable and unbiased site for CPU rankings.
You are all paid AMD shills, all know that the most important parameter for CPU performance are single-threaded tasks, like how quickly programs can check for updates, or how well games from 1998 perform.
Compiling? Video editing? Compression? Criptography? What's all that nonsense? I only use my computer to play Fallout 2.
Google always gives cpubenchmark (passmark software) a higher ranking so seems it's not much of an issue.
Even just looking at the main page for userbenchmark is confusing it is all in percentages and right below the 4800h / 5800h amd "intel vs amd value" does look like there is intel money behind it.
That's clever. AMD FUD disguised as a "joke" headline. Because the headline is all that matters. This site is funded by the same wallet as UserBenchmark.
Quote from: Wereweeb on May 12, 2021, 22:17:44
You are all paid AMD shills, all know that the most important parameter for CPU performance are single-threaded tasks, like how quickly programs can check for updates, or how well games from 1998 perform.
Compiling? Video editing? Compression? Criptography? What's all that nonsense? I only use my computer to play Fallout 2.
I know this is a joke, but you actually stated a half true: single threaded tasks are still important for most application nowadays. While multicore has indeed caught up, it introduces several issues when coding a program, so it's still not taking advantage of 8 cores or so.
Compiling Java code, for example, is still single threaded so far for most IDEs.
Source is a previously confirmed Intel shill and benchmark used not by reviewers but inexperienced buyers - aka Intel market.
Has anyone noticed that the Intel system had an RTX 3090 graphics chip while the AMD system had an RTX 3080?
Quote from: kek on May 13, 2021, 05:44:20
Quote from: Wereweeb on May 12, 2021, 22:17:44
You are all paid AMD shills, all know that the most important parameter for CPU performance are single-threaded tasks, like how quickly programs can check for updates, or how well games from 1998 perform.
Compiling? Video editing? Compression? Criptography? What's all that nonsense? I only use my computer to play Fallout 2.
I know this is a joke, but you actually stated a half true: single threaded tasks are still important for most application nowadays. While multicore has indeed caught up, it introduces several issues when coding a program, so it's still not taking advantage of 8 cores or so.
Compiling Java code, for example, is still single threaded so far for most IDEs.
For Java compilers, you can use several threads, such as Eclipse and Buck Build, but there are limitations.
When Java is compiled it can be run as multi-thread programming language which means that every thread can run in parallel.
The OS splits the processing time not only between different applications, but also between each thread in an application. 😬
From a programmer's point of view: Many programs cannot scale with the number of cores. It is single-core performance that determines the performance of such programs. The scaling of the performance with the number of cores is determined by how much of the program can go in parallel and how much must go in series. Therefore, single core performance is very valuable. Furthermore, vectorization is better than parallelization. This is because parallelization has high latency. My experience with modern compilers is that Intel is best at vectorization and single-core performance.