I wonder how UserBankmerch is going to compare Intel’s GPUs compared to Nvidia’s. I’m sure they’ll discover something like Nvidia GPUs are actually deficient in iron and that Intel’s iron-based GPUs are more powerful at rendering iron materials in games.
They mostly just HATE AMD. If you see the Nvidia card reviews, you see that they love Nvidia about as much as AMD. I expect for them to side with an visit as they seem to hate new competition lol
"The 3080 Ti does not include any more titanium than the regular 3080. This is false marketing, so you are better off sticking with Intel HD Graphics, which are in fact capable of HD" - Mark, Bench user.
@@josephpoulsen5447 That's because Intel isn't in direct competition with them YET, so they are still able to have reviews on GPUs that didn't look like they came from an insane asylum. Just wait until they release their GPUs for real.
1:00 UserWenchark 1:17 BuserMeenchark 5:24 HuzherShenchmark 5:59 BencharkShmarkShmark 6:40 UserWimimn 7:03 UserPantsmark Edit: I used what I personally heard IMO 6:40 sounds like UserWimimn's and on 5:59 it's written as chmarkchmack, but he's clearly saying shmarkshmark.
Well. Several reddit tab in the browser alone eats 4 of cores in 8 cores of my old 2700x, lags my game and make me finally decide on get a 5950x. Websites these days are truly beautifully crafted.
@@Shuroii Actually, it won't matter. All the profiling results indicates the reddit diff the whole page just to update a god damn vote count. It is just shitty programmed. And it gets even worse when you scroll down further on the home page because the page is being bigger when you scroll down.
@@williamtopping Because I am using it. Did you know you can have multi monitor connect to a computer? If you are going to use your computer only to play game, why don't you buy a console instead? It's much cheaper
@@mmis1000 Not sure it was a core bottleneck you had there since my 6 core 5600X can handle several browser windows with like 100 tabs total just fine, often times a 3D modelling program or Unity along and a demanding game running at the same time without a big performance hit.
In all honesty, they have a point some way or another. Intel wasn’t competitive and as a result AMD offered no budget friendly options like the 5600 so going for a budget friendly 11400F (sort of) is a correct thing to point out if you don’t want to buy the premium. But…it’s true, they are constant contrarians with the goal-posting being anti-AMD. Calling things like the i5-9600k a flagship while saying that the 5600x is a premium you better not pay for, makes it very obvious.
2019: Intels processors are far faster, but oh the humanity, AMDs devilish marketing is making everyone buy their CPUs, whatever shall we do! 2022: Intels processors have so much better value, if only the sheeple would see the marketing fees they have to pay for AMD, Satan himself! Fucking hypocrites
To this day Userbenchmarks is simping so hard yet Intel and literally everyone else Banned their mention from Reddit. Their own Idol, Intel, banned them from their subreddit and forums.
Credit where credit is due, both the AMD and Intel communities banned UserBenchmark or have added automoderator comments to discredit them. It's only fair considering how useless and awful their coverage is.
@@FlakAttack0 Used to be a usable side to at least get a vague idea of how a part matches up to another, but these days you plain cannot trust their bullshit anymore.
@@Pumciusz Exactly, even if you just mention UserBenchmark expect stones to get thrown at you, for good reasons obviously. Even pre-Ryzen UserBenchmark were shit.
The one part where they site implied AMD was to blame for the 5950x for not utilizing all of its cores in gaming was so dumb. Multithreading is something that has to be implemented by the developer, a processor can't just spawn new threads at a whim (unless you want to corrupt the hell out of data and crash). Their reasoning that it's overkill for gaming is absolutely true, but it's because very few games are truly optimized for multithreading. The games that do properly use it are fantastic though, seeing Half Life Alyx not even hit 50% utilization on a single thread due to running on 16+ threads is beautful.
so you're saying as long as i have as many cores or more as the dev cared to use, single core wins again? i guess userbenchmark was right! i'm joking, of course. sort of. maybe.
@@rrrrre2905 it allows the program to send multiple instructions in parallel to the CPU, so that the jobs can be done by multiple threads at the same time.
Threading isn't even that hard, I ended up learning it like 4 hours into game development and it's just as easy as waiting for a thread to be free and then processing something on it
@@JacobKinsley It's not really that simple, safe multi threading has a bunch of strict requirements relating to mutability and references to data that aren't easy to track in most languages. It's also incredibly hard to debug most types of concurrent code due to the fact that the scheduler can produce different timings, resulting in it sometimes working and sometimes causing huge bugs. Some patterns like ECS with a job system make it a lot easier but in general it takes a lot of work to create reliable multi threaded software.
Userbenchmark told me an Intel Core i3 10100f would outperform my Ryzen 9 5900x in both single core and multicore performance. 🤣 Userbenchmark is the clown of benchmarking tools.
I had to check how they compare the i3 to my 3700x. i3 Average Bench 83.4% vs. R7 Average Bench 84.2% It even states that the i3 will do better than 3700x on Overwatch and better than 5900x on Fortnite. It's almost comedic.
@@Tomazack ye i have the same cpu as u and its hilarious. Even tho I was always on intel's side, I've switched my mobo when upgrading my PC for future-proofing it. Don't seem to regret it in any way yet.
@@Mobin92 Nobody is lying here. In December of 2020, right after I got my 5900x, I used Userbenchmark to test my system and it told me the Intel i3 was better than my 5900x. This was back when the Userbenchmark Intel bias controversy had just been discovered. Userbenchmark has since changed their performance weighting scale after being caught.
I always found it funny a lot of the comparisons I was doing on their website were kinda off my 2600x wasn't able to outperform cpus I was sure it would be able to. A buddy of mine bought a 6700xt and my 1070ti didn't seem as bad as I thought it would be.
I don't know for sure if they have anything designed to specifically to lower AMD scores, but about I think 2 years ago they changed their scoring system in a way that just makes it bad all around for ranking any component. Honestly just a shit site overall these days
Their ranking system was never good. Assigning scores to single, dual and multi core performance and adding them is stupid because most people won't do all of those things. It's a blatant oversimplification, akin to "reviewing" cars by adding their 0-60 times, mpg values and lap times in a race track. What the did do is blatantly modify their already shitty algorithm to weigh single and dual core scores much more heavily, which back then were curiously exactly the few things that Intel was convincingly ahead on. They never were a good site, all they did is go from incompetent to actively malicious and misleading.
@@ohnoes9608 it was definitely never enough to be the single thing you used. The way way I described it is "decent enough to be an extra tool to use" but now its "so bad I wouldn't even recommend opening the site" Every once in a while ill use it for shits and gigs to see what my score is compared to a previous score when overclocking, but 9 times out of 10 I only use Cinebench 15 and 20
I love RYZEN CPUs but the fact is the although gen 1 and gen 2 RYZEN were great value and great performance they actually had a problem with FPS. The 3600 solved that problem and the 5600 beat Intel handsomely. Hardware unboxed pointed out there was something not right about the early RYZEN's performance.
@@BigMan7o0 Passmark did too. A shitty Celeron can overrun a C2D because they included obscure "features" who no one notice. And I think there's not a innocent movement. There's intersts on that. Many intersts...
@@4afq This support came 5 years later. During the mobo's lifespan the support was never there for the 4th gen and 5th cpu's. Go watch any linus tech tips video about the outrage of am4 4000,5000 series cpus not being supported on 1st and 2nd gen boards.
Hey Phillip! Ghostwire: Tokyo just released and it has THREE supported upscaling algorithms: FSR, DLSS and Unreal Engine's own hardware-agnostic TSR. Digital Foundry covered it but I'm sure you'd be very interested in testing in on more sensible budget parts, like the 6500XT ;)
Actually AMD did it because of limited manufacturing due to shortages in semi industry. TSMC didn't have enough offering to provide both for budget and premium for AMD, so they made economic decision to produce premium chips first.
sure... but it's mostly because they have wayyy higher margins on the server side, so there is very little incentive to use their limited supply on lower margin parts.
@@Fadexpl actually, even with unlimited supply there still is an incentive to create scarcity on lower margins products to force consumers to get more of the higher margins parts. this is exactly what nvidia has been doing for a while by hiking up prices since amd is not a real competitor in the gpu space.
Thats only half true. The main problem for AMD budget line up is the design. All AMD non APU series CPU are made with the same 8 core dies all the way from the top of threadripper to ryzen 3. The problem now is, TSMC 7nm is very mature d, so they have high yield rate, around 90% or higher cpu dies has fully functional 8 cores, so to make enough lower end models, AMD has to disable working cores, which they are not willing to do as long as they can sell enough mid and high end skus. Intel do make different dies for low end model, so thats not an issue for them.
Here is their review of 5800X3D. Is just hilarious: For most real-world tasks performance will be comparable to the 5800X which is significantly cheaper. Some specific cache sensitive scenarios such as canned game benchmarks with a 3090-Ti will benefit. Be wary of sponsored reviews with cherry picked games that showcase the wins and ignore the losses. Also watch out for AMD’s army of Neanderthal social media accounts on reddit, forums and RU-vid, they will be singing their own praises as usual. AMD’s marketers continue to show more interest in this year’s bonuses than the longevity of the brand. Instead of focussing on real-world performance, they attempt to dupe consumers with benchmark busting headlines. The same tactics were used with the Radeon 5000 series GPUs. In order to compete, Zen4 needs to bring substantial IPC improvements, rather than overpriced "3D" marketing gimmicks.
But the 5800x3d will wipe the floor with something budget from Intel, such as the 12100, 12300 and 12400. On a serious note, I hope to upgrade from a R5 3600 to R7 5800X (or 5800X3D, depending on what I can snipe on eBay) and hopefully get some really nice CPU performance.
@@TheSpotify95 If you don't mind reinstalling Windows and can find a good deal the 7500F + ASROCK B650M-HDV-M.2 + 32GB 6000 cl36 kit is a better choice, the whole cpu + mobo + ram costs about the same as a single 5800X3D and it matches the performance, but now you have the future potential of AM5.
4:15 there are other reasons why you would want the integrated graphics on those For example, I have a discrete GPU (1650 Super) and a G-Series APU (3200G), and I regularly use both GPU and the APU's GPU at the same time My use case is quite niche however, since I'm using both so I can have Linux running so I can do programming and Windows in a VM running so I can do gaming (the Windows VM gets the 1650 super when it's running). This saves me the hassle of having to dual boot, and the fact it's in a VM actually provides some very useful features, for example I can just add a virtual hard drive at any time, and to switch between my host and the Windows VM I just have to press both CTRL keys on my keyboard
@@valletas some games have issues with those tools, for example games like destiny 2 don't work due to their AC Also I've seen a decent improvement in perf in a VM versus using Proton in certain games
If a CPU is cheaper than another one, that's nice, but if the motherboard it requires costs a lot more, you have to account for that in order to properly asses the relative value
one thing AMD definitely has going for them is the longevity and versatility that AM4 has offered these few years. i got a 2700 and an x470 board in 2018 and that leaves me open to grab a 5800 or 5900 without having to grab a new board. especially with the price cuts.
Not only AM4, before that with AM2/AM3 you could upgrade without ever having to replace the whole systems, as some of their CPU lines supported multiple platforms. Last time Intel did that was with LGA775, and there was still some incompatibility. (But great being able to test a single core Pentium 4 and a Quad Core Core 2 on the same board)
@@kittikorn6674 unlike the 5500u, the 5500 on desktop is zen 3, albeit with a pretty big caveat. Instead of using chiplets like the 5600/X, it uses the same die as the 5600G, just with the iGPU disabled.
Its gonna be much closer to the 3600 than the 5600 in performance going by the 5600g. These lower end AMD CPUs really are a bit meh at MSRP, it seems like they are gonna be about the same or worse than Intel's low end. At least its nice to have some more upgrade options for older Ryzen boards.
AMD won't be beating Intel on the low end with ANY Zen 3/2 products. As others have pointed out, they are using Cezzane/Renoir APU's with disabled iGPU for the low end. Which means the i3 12100 will walk all over them gaming performance wise.
Even though I find it totally stupid that everything is getting more and more expensive and even though I know that AMD is NOT MY FRIEND, there is nobody I currently begrudge more than the long underdog AMD... + Better performance per watt + Promise to support the platform until 2022 kept + Great upgrade path
I'd probably swap to latest intel if I didn't have to completely swap my motherboard again. pain in the ass, and unless it really matters for my use case i won't be until i'm a few generations behind with AMD
@@aeswere I'll switch to AM5 as soon as I can. I'm still on 4790k. I watched the behavior of the AMDs very closely and I really liked the way they behaved (promise kept). Hopefully it stays that way with the next platform. But what choice does the customer have? Intel has proven the opposite!
@@mcmormus Intel held quad-core PCs back by almost a decade! *AMD:* We put the AMD in Amdahl’s Law. I mean _Cores for Cheap!_ /s I upgraded from my 4770K to 3 Threadrippers out of spite for Intel’s shenanigans.
12 series intel is a good budget option until you look at the motherboards. Intel just dropped $30-50 from the CPU price to look competitive then made the money back on chipsets. This actually impacts budget builds to a massively higher degree than premium builds as it constitiutes a much larger percentage of the overall build cost.
Yup, I'd have to pay nearly double to get the features I want from an Intel mobo compared to a AMD mobo. Obviously the AM5 mobo's will be much closer in cost, and the AMD mobo's already existed before the shortages, but still. Allowing overclocking on B-series and having manufacturers create proper boards for them will massively solve the issue for me.
@@Alucard-gt1zf Exactly the same? AMD going to start making motherboards that are obsolete for new CPUs every 18 months beacuse of "reasons"??? Biggest scam in the industry. Intel made billions from chipset sales for best part of a decade, churning out 4 and 6 core chips that had miniscule generation on generation improvements but needed a new board each time.
I helped a friend build a mid-range gaming PC, and it was cheaper to buy a discounted 5600x and a B550 than an i5 12400f with a B660. Also, the cheapest B660s were lower quality than the B550s for the same form factor. The 5600x is also a tiny bit faster than the 12400f at 1080p, so the choice was easy.
The funny thing is, I actually ordered a Ryzen 9 5900x the other day BECAUSE userbenchmark was salty about it. When they say things like "it isn't cheap enough" after years of "it's single core speed isn't good enough", you know the single core speed is running circles around intel and they needed to move the goal posts again. I can't think of a CPU line-up in the last few years where intel is actually better value for your money (for engineering CAD/CAM productivity) and with the Ryzen 5000 series, intel are still kinda lagging behind and AMD just dropped the 7000 series little bit ago...
i mean, it's not wrong if you aren't using all 12 cores on something why even have them in the first place? 8 cores doing nothing because the game or application doesn't support them is just dead weight. besides which AMD has always been terrible at programming drivers so you end up with extremely picky chipsets that still cause windows to shit itself if they get loaded too hard.
@@Noruzenchi86 What? This is nonsense, of course it's wrong. 8 cores doing nothing is (at worst) extra silicon area for heat dissipation, and its extremely rare for anyone to do _literally nothing_ that benefits from more CPU cores: It helps with loading programs faster, for example. AMD's drivers have been fine since 2020.
I have a theory on the timing also. it has been said that the node the 5xxx series of cpu is based on has had great yields. perhaps they have been able to push so much to the server segment that it is taking them a long time to build an inventory of chiplets with enough disabled cores / lower clock speeds to warrant launching a product. Otherwise they would be down binning perfectly good high end chiplets for the sake of timing or face those lower end cpu's to be out of stock. Food for thought
Reddit has confirmed ,tsmc N5C,N7 DUV has very high yield,so we are not gonna get any zen 3 ryzen 3 or lower ,as well as zen 4 Also N7DUV has very high yield,thats why amd can do a sophisticated 3d cache version at such reasonable price
I didn't know the previous video you did was so recent :o I could have sworn that it was pre-pandemic but I've been particularly awful with my ability to recognise the passage of time this past while I'd be interested in knowing if they've ever attempted to make a response to any of the accusations, and if they've ever tried to justify their zany claims it'd be interesting to see for sure :o
legitimate problem? everybody active in any community already knows of this since half a decade back, and anybody with a brain easily sees through the sites lies, if they just read the numbers and "reviews"
You should check out 2kliksphilip's other videos, a lot of them are random video game stuff (which I like) but if you are only here for learning more about PC hardware/software, this channel has tons of good videos about that.
I remember getting an "equivalent" performance ryzen cpu from this site, just because someone told me ryzen was pretty good and to give them a try. Long story short, my cpu is amazing compared to anything else in my pc.
For G series processors they were a generation off until now, 2000G processors were zen1 (1000 series) 3000G processors were zen+ (2000 series) 4000g processors were zen 2 (3000 series) and it wasn’t until now with 5000/5000G that they are all on the same ZEN 3 process
Userbenchmark somehow managed to have my 9600k outperform my 5900x in the benchmark. It's honestly hilarious how biased both their reviews and their benchmark is considering in every other benchmark the 5900x beats it significantly in single and multithreaded tests. I should also point out that even in gaming it's a night and day difference and my gpu is only a 1080 so I could only imagine how much bigger it would be once I upgrade.
The Value proposition for first geb Ryzen owners is really good now. Im still running my 1500X on a B350 board and will get myself a R5 5600 soon, without having to swap anything else.
make sure you have several bios versions ad hand you can run into hardcore RAM trouble with those old boards...(drivers were a mess back in the ryzen1 days)
Userbenchmark is great for figuring out if you misconfigured something. You'll know right away if you forgot to turn XMP on, it'll tell you your RAM sucks compared to everyone else with that stick. Also decent for seeing if you lost the silicon lottery, if your overclock is bad, or if you (like me) were a big dumb who was using the wrong port for his external SSD, seriously limiting speed... For purchasing decisions, though, we should all stick with GamersNexus!
@@saricubra2867 You know that 1% and 0.1% lows express the same information as frametime spikes right? And that the recorded footage you're viewing on youtube is a compressed and reduced framerate version of the actual render right? You're kidding yourself if you think you're actually getting more useful data from those things. Personally I'd still go with Hardware Unboxed over GN because they produce concise multi-game averages at multiple resolutions. You don't have to individually look at every single game's plot, just skip to the 1440p averages or whatever your resolution is and call it a day. And you can always cross-reference with other sources like TechPowerup's GPU database as a sanity check (but this is less reliable as all data is condensed down to a single performance value, so differences in performance by resolution are not apparent).
I upgraded from an 1800X to a 3900XT. The 'XT' variant might not be popular, but it was available and the same price as the 'X' variant. So, that's what I choose and haven't had any issues since. Well worth the upgrade.
Yea I have the 3900x and holy shit is this CPU a monster it never struggles with any task and even my 6800XT is the bottle neck in my system lmao. (I am on a 470-F so the 6800XT is losing out on some performance.)
I got the 2700x instead of the 8700k because it was slightly cheaper and came with a cooler making it even cheaper, but the main selling point was the idea i would get more generations further with my mobo and I was right. I wouldn't had to get another board by now but I don't with a 5800x3d. That's the kind of stuff consumers look for. Nobody in the main market is in such a need for like 2fps more, but do like upgrade paths, lower prices, and extras in the box. That free cooler may not be a d15, but it worked for the 2700x just fine and the chip ran stable and pumped a solid 60fps in anything it ever played barring rare occasions. I can't believe the criticisms they make are in good faith at all.
I've never read their opinions on products. I've only looked at the numbers. Stopped using them as my main source of comparisons after I was made aware of the problems.
Same man, I was so fucking pissed when I found out. Never gonna let this happen again and will always check out site rep from now on for everything. I only used it because I remembered it being legit when I was a kid, and now I feel like a fool. So crazy that their comparative stats like eFPS are so fucking bizarre that even the numbers can't be trusted.
since you didn't mention it i will, amd uses tsmc for their manufacturing, which has X amount of wafers to sell, and due to the virus of unknown origins, 2 consoles launching at the same time, and amd selling every single cpu they made for the server market, amd was really supply constrained since the 5000 series launch only recently has that constraint gone away,
The only reason I'm considering upgrading my Ryzen 2700 to an AMD chip again is because my b350 board is supposed to be getting ryzen 5000 support later this year. If I had to get a new motherboard then Intel would be better from the numbers I've seen?
intel motherboards are more expensive and cant overclock unless you pay even more. are other small things that matter too, such as ryzen gaining more from having faster ram. in conclusion, I would get a cheaper mobo & cpu 2nd hand lol.
intel - pricier motherboards (with less features) and higher cpu's tdp (and dont forget security bugs that gets later patched with performance penalty) amd - in general, they become better with underclocking (not as popular opinion) thats my 2'c.. in my desktop, i still run 1700x that i bought 2nd hand for 80€ when Zen2 released many years ago, underclocked to either 1V 3.2ghz, or 1.1V 3.45ghz .. consumes like 65-80W
I'm using Ryzen 5 5600 (NON X VER), overclocked at 4.7 all cores on 1.275V and in Userbenchmark the results are better than those by 5600X version... I bought 5600 for 136 GBP which is 163.74 atm. I'm pretty happy with this CPU and i'm happy that i didnt jump for 5600X
I was wondering, do you think you could do cpu and gpu round up's a few times a year as a consistent series? I really enjoy your perspective as a price understanding consumer, and how you look at the landscape as a whole to give a judgement (i.e. with your budget hero video). other than that, good video!
Userpantsmark has saved me money! I seen these awesome Ryzen 5000 reviews and started thinking about upgrading my 2014 i7-5820k. I looked at looserbenchmark and it put me off upgrading! I made do and have saved up more money since then so will get a better system now. Thanks Userbenchprank!
5800x and a 3080ti is what im currently using and just built. I was going to use my 2700 until the 5800x3d or what ever came out but I didn't want to wait microcenter sold the cpu for like 300 witch was a good deal.
Userbenchmark is cooked. They rate an i7 980x from 2010 higher than a Ryzen 1600x. Spoiler alert, it isn't even close, the Ryzen CPU is miles faster, even when the i7 is overclocked, and the Ryzen does does it while consuming 70-130 watts less power.
Oh I didn't even know about that anti AMD sentiment. I really only used it to compare actual results between GPUs and CPUs etc. :0 It was very helpful for me too find the best bang for my buck to see which product I should get next. In my case upgrading from an Intel Nividia System, slowly to an AMD only one instead.
You know, I never actually real Userbenchmark's reviews. I always thought that it was a website where people used their software and uploaded a benchmark. The 'reviews' were just relaying stats of whatever it came up with. Boy was I wrong lol. I never actually looked deep into the website, just accidentally clicked on it a few times.
I upgraded to a Ryzen 7 3800x in 2020, got it bundled with a motherboard for around $500. I did end up replacing much more than that, but only because my system before I did that was trash. Before that I was running an Intel I5 7400, but the PC was a prebuilt so the mb was only an Intel 100 series chipset so I would have needed to replace the mb no matter what I did. I ended up also doubling my RAM and switching to an NVME SSD for my main drive. I did have to buy a new power supply and case too. All in all, ended up spending $900 to replace literally everything except some of the RAM and the GPU but my PC went from taking 10 minutes to fully boot up to taking 30 seconds to fully boot up. At this point my GPU and power supply are the weak points of my build, a GTX 1050 and a 500 watt power supply. I want to get a 3060 or whatever new AMD hotness comes out to replace my 1050, and I want to get a modular 750 watt power supply.
Yeah, prebuilts are trash. There is no upgrade path, no re-use of old components (except for SSD\HDDs), and they generaly suck. Had the same issue with that, proprietary MoBo that died on me, so I couldn't replace it.
Any suggestions for sites that do a similar comparison though? UserBenchmark's a great place to just say "hey, give me these two things compared" and get a number across a bunch of different tests quickly, instead of finding charts like at 1:30 that might not cover the exact comparison you want. Getting a 5600X soon ($209 at MicroCenter, awesome! - we'll see how the 5500 performs). This 1300X has served me well, but it just ain't cutting it anymore for me. I do hope an equivalent of the 1300X but more modern arrives, it was a great help when I was trying to build for cheap (though, in current times, maybe a G in that range would be better :P)
userbenchmark is mostly useful to get a vague idea and check release dates, it's trash at everything else. If you want to see proper a comparison just check a youtube video or CPUZ scores.
New Userbenchmark review for the Ryzen 7 5800X3D. "The 5800X3D has the same core architecture / IPC as the 5800X but it runs at lower clock speeds and has an extra 64MB of cache (96MB up from 32MB). This results in relatively low latency readings at 128MB because those transfers have a higher chance of remaining in cache. For most real-world tasks performance will be comparable to the 5800X which is $120 USD cheaper. Some specific cache sensitive scenarios such as canned game benchmarks will benefit. Be wary of sponsored reviews with cherry picked games that showcase the wins and ignore the losses. Also watch out for AMD’s army of Neanderthal social media accounts on reddit, forums and youtube, they will be singing their own praises as usual. AMD’s marketers continue to show more interest in this year’s bonuses than the longevity of the brand. Instead of focussing on real-world performance, they attempt to dupe consumers with benchmark busting headlines. The same tactics were used with the Radeon 5000 series GPUs. In order to compete, Zen4 needs to bring substantial IPC improvements, rather than "3D" marketing gimmicks. Either way, new high end PC gaming builders need look no further than the 12600K. Users with existing AM4 builds should wait a few more months for Zen4 / Raptor Lake rather than upgrading an EOL platform."
i simply love my 3950x, you know you have a beast when you dont even notice you have 2 games running in 4k at the same time while also your visual studio solution is open.
As a software dev, I will say that for me, AMD still has the superior value for money for me at the high end, but Intel is ironically definitely superior at the lowest end
Hey Philip, don'T know if you are aware of this, but userbenchmark is also waging a war against amd graphics cards. Here is the review for the rtx 3060 for example: The RTX 3060 Ti is Nvidia’s latest 3000 series GPU. Assuming it (ever…) comes into stock at $400 USD, it will take the crown as the best value for money graphics card. Nvidia’s new Ampere architecture, which supersedes Turing, offers both improved power efficiency and performance. The 3060 Ti features 4,864 CUDA cores, 152 Tensor cores, it has a boost clock of 1.665 GHz, 8 GB of memory and a power draw of just 200 W. Nvidia’s entire 3000 series lineup offers once in a decade price/performance improvements. The 3060 Ti beats the previous generation’s 2060 Super by 35% in terms of effective speed at the same MSRP. Given the widespread issues AMD users are facing with 5000 series GPUs (blue/black screens etc.), AMD’s 6000 series GPU’s will have to see substantial price cuts and a huge marketing effort in order to gain any traction. Meanwhile, Christmas has come early for PC gamers who can look forward to an unparalleled gaming experience in class leading titles such as Cyberpunk 2077. At ultra settings, with ray tracing enabled, Cyberpunk 2077 redefines the boundaries of immersive gaming. It makes GTA5 look like Tetris in comparison. The combination of RTX+DLSS delivers stunning graphics that are several tiers higher than both AMD's best discrete GPUs and the upcoming consoles. In terms of real world performance, Nvidia’s 3000 series has more or less put AMD’s Radeon group in checkmate. Nonetheless, AMD’s marketers are capable of delivering elaborate BS albeit whilst struggling to keep a straight face. Their marketing infrastructure outsold Intel in the CPU market despite a 15% performance deficit. Without an appropriate social media marketing strategy, Nvidia will probably lose considerable market share, for all the wrong reasons.
But Userbenmark is very convenient when you want to fast test your "whole" gaming rig. It tests all GPU, CPU, ram, and storage in 1 test only instead of downloading 4 different testing programs for each part. When first buying a PC at the store I always download User Benmark for a fast test before paying and bringing it home
same here, it's great for this. my only complaint is that with very uncommon SSDs it doesn't know what to call it and lumps you in with a bunch of other people under some generic name, then it tells you your drive sucks >:(
They have a point on the rampant amd fanboyism on the internet though, there are more anti-Intel shills out there than anti-AMD, so they might just be contrarians.
@@steel5897 To explain that, Intel has been the big and abusive winner for longer than AMD has so more people dislike it. $1000+ Extreme Editions, really? And being contrarian doesn't mitigate being wrong. AMD is currently the best right now, and often still the best value (if you're looking for mid-high end).
nah, they arent. just someone justifying manipulating and lying to people just because they feel that they see too many promoting amd. and too much time on their hands
What's interesting is that when Intel was faster but had a lower value than AMD, Userbenchmark didn't care about value, only performance. Now that Intel and AMD have swapped roles, suddenly performance doesn't matter, only value.
interestingly enough, I happened to find a good deal for a new 5900x on Amazon of all places last week. Got that bad boy for $440 and free shipping. Not saying that it isn't still expensive, but patience has made it far more affordable. Side note: Considering the fact that AMD is finally moving away from the AM4 socket in the coming generation, it made sense (to me) that I might as well finish off my computer's upgrade in that department considering that there's no real likelihood for anything beyond this unless something goes horribly wrong. Beyond that, whenever graphics cards get a major update to their hardware that no longer makes them compatible with X570 mobo's; that will determine when I purchase my next graphics card.
what hardware upgrade for video cards? I thought PCI Express is fully backwards and forwards compatible, and you can use any PCI-E video card on any PCI-E supporting motherboards
@@warmike It's more a PCIE Gen 4 vs Gen 5 thing. Not saying it isn't going to be compatible, but rather that when I do my next build I'd rather not have my Gen 5+ graphics card potentially limited by lane speeds of previous generations. That's all.
UPDATE : they got so butthurt these days, they even added an entry for the Ryzen 7600X as the "ADVANCED MARKETING DEVICES". At this point I'm at a loss for words
Wanna try something fun. Tell your friend that has a GTX 1080 to use the site for the best upgrade path between a 3070Ti or a 3080... It will super accurately tell you that the 3070ti is 58% better while the 3080 is only 45% better.... So the 3080 is 13% slower than the 3070ti (unless you compare them directly where the 3080 is 24% faster)
@@152mmgoesboom4 "Game EFPS" or not, it's the big bold letters showing people "which card is better". I was using the word speed as a generic term for the info that 99% of people with little PC experience will take as the "Score". Speed could refer to a lot of things from clock speed to memory speed or bus speed. The point is, there's no way that a 3070ti will have both a higher effective FPS than a 3080 (when comparing it to the 1080) and lower effective FPS than a 3080 (when comparing the two directly). The only way this would be possible is if the reviewer were to be using different test conditions. If they are using different test conditions, that means all of their data is skewed. I could run a 10100 with a 3090 and compare the FPS to a Ryzen 5950x with a gtx 1030 and go, "Oh look, the 10100 decimates the 5950x in gaming." It all boils down to the site being bias and skewing numbers to produce data in their favor.
@@152mmgoesboom4 Go to GPU comparison. Put GTX 1080 on one side and RTX 3070Ti on the other. The 70Ti will show "effective speed" as 59% higher. //// Now switch the 70Ti to 80 and the 3080 will only show "effective speed" as 45% higher. If the 70ti is 59% faster and the 80 is only 45% faster than the 1080, then the 3070ti should, by that scale, be 13% faster....
heh, i've been on a 5800x3d for a while and i have to say, best CPU since my 2500k. probably will have almost as much staying power despite being in a much more competitive era.
the 5000 series now is where the AMD budget shopper is going to go. Though the 7000 series is newer, being the first gen in the AM5 lineup on an LGA form makes Budget 7000 motherboards scarce, when they are released. I just replaced my R5-1600 with a R5-5600g. It was a toss up whether to go with Intel 12th gen or R5-5000. Sentimental pull strings won over, but no buyer's remorse here. (a real fan of the AM4 Legacy)
this is a good reminder that these companies are not your friends. AMD banked on the fact that they were the underdogs for years and as soon as they achieved greatness they flipped everyone off.
To be fair, what they did before was kinda weird. Some of their product literally made others DOA. Like how with PBO a 3600 was the same as a 3600x. Nobody recommended the 3600x. Also, there was a silicon shortage that affected AMD CPUs that everyone forgot about already. I always suspected AMD would release the budget options later because that makes the most sense and so the question always was, how late? AMD is not your friend, nor is Intel, nor Nvidia. But out of the 3, AMD has been more actively listening to consumers and diy community. They switched up on a lot of things people complained about and they've more than kept some of their crazier promises. AND they are releasing a last hurrah for AM4 right before Zen 4 release for those who don't want to jump to AM5.
From an AMD card on userbenchmark - "AMD’s neanderthal marketing tactics seem to have come back to haunt them. Their brazen domination of social media platforms including youtube and reddit resulted in millions of users purchasing sub standard products. Experienced gamers know all too well that headline average fps are worthless when they are accompanied with stutters, random crashes, excessive noise and a limited feature set. [Jan '22 GPUPro]"
Honestly tho, whats in it for userbenchmark? they are just destroying their reputation and maming themselves look like shils who have no clue what they are reviewing. Intel certainly is not paying them to fanboy, so why bother?
5700G and 5600G were the lower-cost 8-core and 6-core processors. The included an APU and smaller caches and a downgrade in PCIe from 4.0 to 3.0. AMD did this because as soon as the non-X version of a CPU comes out, everyone STOPS buying the X-version of a CPU ... Also, I think the 5700 (non-X) has been released, thing is, they actually have been improving the power consumption on non-X CPUs lately (down from 105w to 65w) so the release lags the X-versions by several months ...
