Question Could Userbenchmark be more dishonest?

[Thunder 57]

First, they changed their scoring methodology just after Zen 2 came out.

Now, I was looking for a laptop for my sister, and was searching for info about the Ryzen 3500U. These clowns try to claim that a Whiskey Lake chip would be better for gaming than a Ryzen 3500U. She certainly doesn't need Vega 8, Vega 3 would probably be fine. The CPU is solid though, and she does do some light gaming.

These idiots give the Intel chip a 57% vs 50% for AMD in gaming. And when you click on the "CSGO AMD vs Intel Gaming" link, it compares a 9900k to a Zen 3600!!!

I'm certain my sister will be happy with a Ryzen 5 3500U, for less the cost of any i5 available. I'm tired of the bias that some sites have. I haven't seen this kind of fudging since the P4 days. You know, when Intel bought off Bapco and was sued for it?

 

[UsandThem]

Yeah, I used to use their site as a "rough estimate" between different CPUs over the years, and the comparison and rating was decent (for a site like that).

However, I also noticed the changes to the site after Zen 2 arrived. Suddenly, the Ryzen 2700X I was pondering getting at the time suddenly dropped in their rating system. That was the last time I used their site, and it was obvious in what they were doing.

There's really no legit reason for them to even do that. If they want people to use their site, they should just legitimately compare the CPUs, and let users decide what works best for their needs. Sometimes that's Intel, and sometimes it's AMD.

 

[cfenton]

That website is garbage, but it's not an editorial site, so I'm not sure dishonest is the best term. It's just confusing and poorly designed. From what I can tell, their 57% vs 50% is how good the CPU alone is for gaming. As in, if you used the CPU alone with a dedicated GPU, then this is how fast it would be. To compare the iGPU you have to use their GPU comparison tool. For example Vega 8 vs Intel 620. From that, it's clear the Vega 8 is much better.

 

[Thunder 57]

That website is garbage, but it's not an editorial site, so I'm not sure dishonest is the best term. It's just confusing and poorly designed. From what I can tell, their 57% vs 50% is how good the CPU alone is for gaming. As in, if you used the CPU alone with a dedicated GPU, then this is how fast it would be. To compare the iGPU you have to use their GPU comparison tool. For example Vega 8 vs Intel 620. From that, it's clear the Vega 8 is much better.

I agree about the garbage part, and I also agree that I may have acted in haste. It is poorly designed and it could certainly be much better. Thank you for that link, it makes things a bit more clear. They should be using the iGPU for their CPU tests though, that seems rather disingenuous. Thanks again though for providing that Vega 8 vs Intel link though. Maybe they aren't "dishonest", just biased.