Question Userbenchmark alternative?

[megastin]

Is CPUBenchmark.net accurate compared to Userbenchmark? The latter puts 10900k as "better" than 5950x while the first thinks quite the opposite. Also both put 13900k as much better than 7950x in single threaded performance.

I keep hearing that Userbenchmark is bad.

 

[kanewolf]

Is CPUBenchmark.net accurate compared to Userbenchmark? The latter puts 10900k as "better" than 5950x while the first thinks quite the opposite. Also both put 13900k as much better than 7950x in single threaded performance.

I keep hearing that Userbenchmark is bad.

Userbenchmark is a tool. Tools have different uses. For example, someone posts that their performance is bad in XYZ app. Someone here will ask them to run userbenchmarks. It allows the group to get a standardized view of the system. At a glance, we might see that the RAM is single channel. Or the RAM clock is 2133 rather than 3600. The max clock speed of the CPU is low, because of possible overheating. Etc. It is not a good tool to compare CPU "A" to CPU "B", IMO. It is possible, but not optimal. Just like when you have a hammer, everything is a nail. This is also not optimal.

 

[punkncat]

UBM has been called out many times for having bias in regard to Intel.

 

[hotaru.hino]

The only use I see that UBM might have is pointing out the weakest link in the system. But there's a reason why none of the reputable tech sites use it in their reviews.

I just wish some of them would drop GFXBench too.

 

[Bob.B]

Is CPUBenchmark.net accurate compared to Userbenchmark? The latter puts 10900k as "better" than 5950x while the first thinks quite the opposite. Also both put 13900k as much better than 7950x in single threaded performance.

I keep hearing that Userbenchmark is bad.

UBM is a tool they give you some numbers and their opinion.

Other tools give you some numbers and their opinion.

Often the numbers are different because of different test.

Opinion?......form your own based on your usage.

 

[alceryes]

Is CPUBenchmark.net accurate compared to Userbenchmark? The latter puts 10900k as "better" than 5950x while the first thinks quite the opposite. Also both put 13900k as much better than 7950x in single threaded performance.

I keep hearing that Userbenchmark is bad.

Userbenchmark is completely, and openly biased towards Intel and NVIDIA.

As others have said, it's a tool. The benchmark 'score' means nothing but each components 'percentile' score can be useful for diagnosing issues.

 

[Gamefreaknet]

Is CPUBenchmark.net accurate compared to Userbenchmark? The latter puts 10900k as "better" than 5950x while the first thinks quite the opposite. Also both put 13900k as much better than 7950x in single threaded performance.

I keep hearing that Userbenchmark is bad.

Personally I am not 100% certain of the accuracy of the site I'm going to mention now however I have found Versus to be quite useful for comparing all sorts of components. They won't always have the part you're asking about however about 99% of the time they'll have the parts you're looking for and can give a review/comparison between the parts. They can't list for different part combos but for (like just CPU comparison or just GPU comparison) separate parts they're pretty decent.