Userbenchmark - the April Fools that never ends

Summary

This video script humorously critiques Userbenchmark, a hardware benchmarking site known for its bias against AMD processors. The narrator details the site’s shift from relatively balanced reviews to a clear preference for Intel, despite AMD’s increasing competitiveness. Through sarcastic commentary, the video exposes the site's inconsistent and sometimes contradictory ratings, especially after AMD's Ryzen series gained market share. The script highlights how Userbenchmark distorts benchmarks, particularly in gaming, and manipulates data to favor Intel, all while mocking the site’s blatant biases and the tech community’s reaction to them.

Takeaways

• 😀 Userbenchmark is an entertaining site, but it has a clear bias against AMD processors, especially as AMD’s products have improved over time.
• 😀 Initially, in 2017, Userbenchmark praised AMD's Ryzen 1600 for its multi-core performance, but this praise disappeared as AMD gained market share and Intel began to lose ground.
• 😀 AMD’s Ryzen processors, particularly from the 3000 series onward, were competitive with Intel in both single-core and multi-core performance, but Userbenchmark continued to downplay their advantages.
• 😀 Userbenchmark changed its rating system in 2019, giving more weight to single-core performance and de-emphasizing multi-core performance, which favored Intel’s CPUs.
• 😀 This shift in rating methodology led to bizarre and often misleading benchmark results, where lower-end Intel CPUs outperformed higher-end AMD CPUs in certain tests, despite real-world performance being the opposite.
• 😀 The introduction of Userbenchmark’s 'EFPS' metric, a gaming performance test they created, further exaggerated AMD’s weaknesses and often resulted in AMD being ranked lower than Intel, even in games.
• 😀 AMD CPUs were often criticized for their memory latency and stuttering in games, but Userbenchmark was the only site to consistently report these issues as severe, even though other sites found no such problems.
• 😀 Despite AMD’s clear victories in multiple performance categories, Userbenchmark continued to favor Intel by either downplaying AMD’s strengths or inventing new reasons to criticize them.
• 😀 Userbenchmark's bias was not just a personal preference but a calculated attempt to mislead consumers who aren’t knowledgeable about hardware, leading to skewed perceptions of AMD vs Intel.
• 😀 The review of Intel’s 11900K was the ultimate demonstration of Userbenchmark’s bias, as they praised it despite its high power consumption, poor performance in comparison to AMD’s Ryzen 5000 series, and high price.
• 😀 The video script highlights how Userbenchmark has transitioned from being a helpful resource to a site known for its manipulation of benchmark data to fit a narrative that favors Intel, despite AMD’s superior performance in many areas.

Q & A

What is the main criticism of Userbenchmark in the script?

The main criticism of Userbenchmark in the script is its consistent bias against AMD, especially in favor of Intel, despite AMD’s processors outperforming Intel’s in various benchmarks over time. The site is accused of manipulating benchmark results and changing its review criteria to favor Intel.

Why did the user initially like Userbenchmark in 2017?

In 2017, the user appreciated Userbenchmark because the site was objectively positive about AMD’s Ryzen processors, acknowledging their competitive pricing and multi-core performance, especially the Ryzen 1600, which offered more cores and threads than Intel at a lower price.

How did Userbenchmark’s review criteria change with the Ryzen 3000 series?

With the release of the Ryzen 3000 series, Userbenchmark changed its review criteria to emphasize single-core performance over multi-core performance. This shift resulted in higher scores for Intel CPUs, which were typically better in single-core performance, despite AMD’s Ryzen processors offering superior multi-core capabilities.

What is EFPS, and how is it used by Userbenchmark?

EFPS, or Effective Frames Per Second, is a metric introduced by Userbenchmark to measure gaming performance. However, the script suggests that EFPS is a flawed and unrepresentative metric, designed in a way that disadvantages AMD processors, especially in gaming benchmarks where AMD often performs well in real-world tests.

How does Userbenchmark justify its negative reviews of AMD processors despite their strong performance?

Userbenchmark justifies its negative reviews of AMD processors by introducing irrelevant or misleading factors, such as criticizing AMD for having bundled coolers or lower EFPS in gaming tests. Even when AMD processors outperform Intel in most metrics, Userbenchmark claims Intel’s products offer better value or are more suitable for certain use cases.

Why is the Intel i9-11900K review by Userbenchmark considered problematic?

The review of the Intel i9-11900K by Userbenchmark is considered problematic because, despite widespread criticism of the chip for being hot, power-hungry, and overpriced, Userbenchmark praises it as the 'best' Intel CPU in its generation. The review is seen as biased, as it overlooks the i9-11900K's shortcomings and praises it for features that are not necessarily reflective of real-world performance.

What does the user think about Userbenchmark’s approach to gaming performance benchmarks?

The user finds Userbenchmark’s approach to gaming performance benchmarks flawed, particularly its use of EFPS and selective game choices. The script criticizes the site for manipulating benchmarks to present Intel in a more favorable light, even when AMD processors perform better in real-world gaming scenarios.

What does the user mean by 'shifting goalposts' in relation to Userbenchmark’s reviews?

By 'shifting goalposts,' the user refers to Userbenchmark’s tendency to change its review criteria or benchmarks to suit its narrative. As AMD’s processors became more competitive with Intel’s, Userbenchmark adjusted its evaluation methods to downplay AMD’s improvements and maintain Intel’s perceived superiority.

What impact has Userbenchmark’s bias had on its reputation in the tech community?

Userbenchmark’s bias has significantly harmed its reputation, with the site being banned from multiple subreddits, including those of both AMD and Intel, due to its inconsistent and biased reviews. Its credibility is questioned by knowledgeable hardware enthusiasts, and it has become a meme within the community for its misleading benchmarks.

How does the user feel about the way Userbenchmark handles the release of new AMD and Intel CPUs?

The user feels frustrated with Userbenchmark’s handling of new CPU releases, particularly with AMD’s more recent processors. Despite AMD’s consistent improvements, Userbenchmark continues to find ways to criticize AMD while praising Intel, even when Intel’s chips are objectively inferior in terms of performance.