It is generally a misleading site. It causes inexperienced users to doubt their builds. The PC might run every game or app as desired, but an "underperforming" headline causes users to ask why and to attempt to "fix" it. That causes more problems.What do you think about Userbenchmark.com and the criticism it has received?
I think it is useful if you don't only consider the 'effective speed' tab.
Sorry for my english!
So your argument here is that noobs are stoopid and should remain so...It is generally a misleading site. It causes inexperienced users to doubt their builds. The PC might run every game or app as desired, but an "underperforming" headline causes users to ask why and to attempt to "fix" it. That causes more problems.
Outstanding in regards to other hardware Way Under Expectations for the same hardware how is that not a valid thing?!I think it is a useless tool.
A component or system can be both "Outstanding" and "Way Under Expectations" at the same time.
Not a case of stoopid users, but when presented with bold red text that says "Way below..."...a user will latch on to that.
When in reality, nothing is actually wrong.
They don't do that, they use artificial synthetic GPU benchmarks just like everybody else.It can also be misleading for new users because they only show results from games that use only 4 cores, like Fortnite, cs:go, etc, so in those games even the i3 9100f is on par with Ryzen 5 3600.
Fully agree with the statementI think it is a useless tool.
A component or system can be both "Outstanding" and "Way Under Expectations" at the same time.
Not a case of stoopid users, but when presented with bold red text that says "Way below..."...a user will latch on to that.
When in reality, nothing is actually wrong.
The same hardware, but theirs is overclocked, or running different/fewer things in the background, or any of a number of other considerations.10% or even just 5% less performance than other people with the same hardware.
You might see it as freaking out but for a noob it's just the normal learning experience,when I loaded up my first cassette tape on my cpc464 I freaked out from the horrible noise it made although that was the normal thing,a noob doesn't know that running different/fewer things in the background can affect the performance,why shouldn't they make a post and ask more experienced people about it?The same hardware, but theirs is overclocked, or running different/fewer things in the background, or any of a number of other considerations.
We've seen people here getting 200 frames/sec on whatever game they play, and userbenchmark reports as "Way Below"...
They freak out.
Yes, but why don't they collect results for more than the same 5 games? I mean, they're only showing those same 5 games at every gpu/cpu. They're doing that in the youtube videos too.For the games they just show the numbers they collected from users, that part is not a benchmark but a database of results people got.
Yes, my statement is "if it ain't broke don't fix it". Part of wisdom is knowing when enough is enough. You make the assumption that something is "wrong" That is where you and I differ. Many times there is nothing "wrong". Not overclocking your GPU isn't wrong. But it will show your graphics card is "underperforming". Or, one I saw recently, was the user had G-sync enabled. That caused the benchmark to report "severely under performing" But there was nothing "wrong", and having G-sync enabled is usually a good thing.o your argument here is that noobs are stoopid and should remain so...
Attempting to find out what's wrong is what will make a noob find out about how bloatware or different power profiles affect performance,people trying to find out how to "fix" things even if they don't really need fixing is a good thing.
They have about 300 games listed.Yes, but why don't they collect results for more than the same 5 games? I mean, they're only showing those same 5 games at every gpu/cpu. They're doing that in the youtube videos too.
For a noob realising that any form of *sync reduces performance is a big deal.Yes, my statement is "if it ain't broke don't fix it". Part of wisdom is knowing when enough is enough. You make the assumption that something is "wrong" That is where you and I differ. Many times there is nothing "wrong". Not overclocking your GPU isn't wrong. But it will show your graphics card is "underperforming". Or, one I saw recently, was the user had G-sync enabled. That caused the benchmark to report "severely under performing" But there was nothing "wrong", and having G-sync enabled is usually a good thing.
Nice. Still, they should show more of them when you compare two cpus or gpus. I mean, directly on the comparison page.They have about 300 games listed.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Search?searchTerm=FPS