Is the bottlenecker accurate?

[box o rocks]

I just compared 2 builds I'm wanting to put my GTX 980 with; FX-8350 build and a i5-4670 build. I thought I'd try thebottlenecker.com first to see what it said. I was shocked when it reported that the i5-4670 was too slow (13% BN) and the FX-8350 was great (3.5% BN). When I get time, I guess I'll test for myself. But for now, I'd like your feedback please...

 

[bignastyid]

Imho that site is worthless.

 

[Supernova1138]

I would say it's not all that accurate. I don't really see the FX beating a Haswell i5 even on more modern titles with better multicore scaling. At best I could see FX maybe turning in better minimums in some games that run awful on only 4 threads eg. the last two Assassin's Creed games.

In any case I'd go with neither build, both platforms are dead at this point. The Haswell platform at least offers the option to get something like an i7 4790k, but at this point you're better off with a new platform that offers higher core counts and more modern features.

 

[sizzling]

I’d say it’s worse than inaccurate, it’s misleading garbage.

 

[WildCard999]

I’d say it’s worse than inaccurate, it’s misleading garbage.

Exactly, the site doesn't account for the game & resolution which can have a massive impact on CPU/GPU use.

 

[USAFRet]

I just compared 2 builds I'm wanting to put my GTX 980 with; FX-8350 build and a i5-4670 build. I thought I'd try thebottlenecker.com first to see what it said. I was shocked when it reported that the i5-4670 was too slow (13% BN) and the FX-8350 was great (3.5% BN). When I get time, I guess I'll test for myself. But for now, I'd like your feedback please...

Absolutely useless and misleading.

Just for giggles, I've put my specs in there 3 times in the last year.
Same parts, 3 different results. 19%, 9%, 6%.