Still at a disadvantage compared to Intel?

Due to its good ranking on Google and large database, Userbenchmark is considered by many to be a serious comparison portal for processor performance. But doubts were repeatedly expressed as to its neutrality. Operators would have deliberately portrayed AMD products as worst, according to the indictment, by overweighting single-core performance and almost completely removing multi-core performance from the equation. Now AMD has not only been able to catch up considerably in single-core performance with the Ryzen 5000, but has also outperformed current Intel processors in most cases. But the user benchmark still allowed itself to scroll.

Ryzen 9 5950X, Ryzen 9 5900X and Ryzen 7 5800X even fall into the top 10 of the performance chart. However, you must first change the list from user ratings to reference numbers. The individual descriptions also include tips and recommendations that are not fully understandable. For example, the Ryzen 9 5900X, Ryzen 7 5800X, and Ryzen 5 5600X say: If you don’t want to pay AMD’s “marketing fees”, you can also look at the Intel i5-9600K.

The Core i5-9600 supposedly performs just as well as Ryzen 7 5800X

According to tests, the Ryzen 5 5600X is already faster than the Core i5-10600K, which is also equipped with six cores – mind you, the successor to the i5-9600K recommended by Userbenchmark. The claim that the Ryzen 7 5800X is as fast as the cheaper 250-Euro Core i5-9600 is particularly strange.

AMD’s flagship, the 16-core Ryzen 9 5950X, the comparison portal operators more or less admit that they are out of competition. And it’s also true that gamers don’t need that many cores. However, Userbenchmark also puts the benefits of applications into perspective. Workstation users who rarely run more than 20 threads might consider an Intel Core i9-10850K for around half the price. AMD’s alternatives like the Ryzen 9 3900X, which is still on sale, are not mentioned.

Also interesting: Did Intel prefer over AMD? UserBenchmark is banned from Reddit

So the question of neutrality arises once again. Userbenchmark already wrote negative headlines last year when, following the launch of the Ryzen 3000 processors, multicore performance was practically irrelevant in the ranking. Critics, including well-known reviewers, then harshly attacked the comparison portal operators. For example like “Army of Shills” which “sells ice cream to Eskimos”.

Those: Userbenchmark

Also appreciated by PCGH readers:

Comparison with Intel: AMD considers Ryzen 9 5950X to be unrivaled

AMD compared the new Ryzen 5000 series to the corresponding Intel processors in a Quick Reference Guide.

Ryzen 5000 availability: No paper toss according to AMD

AMD points out that Ryzen 5000 was not a paper launch. This was promised in advance to users, but now the availability is manageable.

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X and Ryzen 5 5600X in the test: Did Intel crack here too?

PCGH puts the Ryzen 7 5800X and Ryzen 5 5600X to the test. Will the “small” Ryzen 5000 also beat Intel’s Core i9-10900K?

[PLUS] Outlook on Zen 3 (Ryzen 5000)



PCGH Plus: AMD proudly unveiled the Zen 3 architecture on October 8th. We summarize all the architectural innovations and also dare an initial performance analysis. The article comes from PC Games Hardware 12/2020.
More …

go to the article