UserBenchmark's Misleading Data hits again!
Do you remember the case with UserBenchmark lowering AMD Ryzen CPU scores to favour Intel's benchmark results? Or the case where an intel i5-9400F would beat a Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX? Well, now UserBenchmark is here again to reveal their secret autism: A Ryzen 3700X seems to lose in a fight against a 4-core i3-9350KF! Userbenchmark claims the i3-9350KF wins hands down in all five of of today's most popular games. So, what kind of ratpoison did UserBenchmark eat at their headquarters? This arcitle also covers UserBenchmark's bash of the new Ryzen 7 4800HS.
The 2990WX case
I'm going to cover some facts about this comparison. AMD's Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX is a huge, TR4 socket monster. Mostly used to do some real world work, and gaming in the side. The 2990WX is a 32-core, 64 thread CPU with 80MB cache. This CPU is one of the best gifts the PC community and industry has ever got. For $1799, this product is a real steal at the High End PC platform.
Intel's closest CPU against the 2990WX is the 28-core 255W Xeon W-3175X. Still, it has less core than the 2990WX and eats a load of more watts. Not to mention the price, ridiculous $2999. The i5-9400F is a 6 core, 6 thread CPU, just like the 2990WX, has no integrated gpu. For a gamer who will just play basic games, browse the internet and so on, this cpu is a good choice. I would not recommend this for a system that is used for multitasking or streaming. in 2020, a 6-core computer is like a i3 computer in 2015. On a dead-end platform.
|Feature||AMD TR2990WX||Intel i5-9400F|
|Frequency||3,0Ghz (4,2 boost)||2,9Ghz (4,1 boost)|
|Cache||80 MB||9 MB|
|Price||$1699 (1550€)||$182 (166€)|
We know the CPU features, so let's head to the real benchmarks!
|Benchmark||AMD TR2990WX||Intel i5-9400F|
|R15 Single Core (higher is better)||174||177|
|R15 Multi Core (higher is better)||5224||987|
|Adobe Premiere Pro (lower is better)||135s (2min 15s)||377s (6min 17s)|
|R20 Single Core (higher is better)||398||423|
|R20 Multi Core (higher is better)||11463||2407|
|Blender BMW27 (lower is better)||67.7||367.5|
Tests: Cinebench R15 and R20, Adobe Premiere Pro, Youtube 4k 60FPS H-264, Blender 2.81 BMW27
HDB KDB - HenDaBen Knowledge DataBase
Youtube for i5 9400F https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9aiYYqdlXos
Youtube for TR2990WX https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bakT_MJ78fc
Cinebench R15 https://www.cgdirector.com/cinebench-scores-updated/
R20 2990WX https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-amd_ryzen_threadripper_2990wx-886
R20 i5 https://www.cpu-monkey.com/en/cpu-intel_core_i5_9400f-908
Enough! Gaming results:
|Game||AMD TR2990WX||Intel i5-9400F|
|AotSE||145 (123)||34 (30)|
Test was made in 1080p, average and (1% lows). Ashes of the Singularity with a 1080Ti
AotSE i5 https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-5-3600-review,6287-4.html
AotSE 2990WX https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QI9sMfWmCsk&t=1920s
There are not many reliable benchmarks for this comparison. Only AotS:E could be found with the same system specifications.
How high is the UserBenchmark's office?
As the results can be seen above, the real question is, why does a website manipulate numbers in the PC industry? The i5-9400F's only good feature was the price for a medium-end PC with the single core performance of 170s.
Let's be real, to change these numbers to favour intel, the only explanation would be fatal autism.
The link to the comparison can be found here https://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i5-9400F-vs-AMD-Ryzen-TR-2990WX/4051vsm560423
The Ryzen 7 4800HS bash
AMD publised new mobile CPUs this year. Today we have a Ryzen 7 4800HS and Ryzen 9 4900H with some incredible features, 8 cores and 16 threads. Both of these mobile CPU's are fresh new, based on AMD's 7nm Zen architecture.
UserBenchmark claims that the R7 4800HS has no value in the mobile market section. Also, the high-core count seems to be totally out of people's interest, backing up a statement that Zen architecture has a slow memory controller. The article ends with another pointless argument, "AMD should deliver performance, not cores". So let's have a look at the performance against intel's 8-core offerings.
In the next table we have Intel's high end mobile CPUs against AMD's. These laptops have the same amount of cores and threads. Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 is a CPU with the R9 4900HS, RTX2060 Max-Q gpu. This test was made by running the browser so it would continously browse the internet, stream video at the same time with OpenGL tests running in the background. Not to forget an important thing; the display was at 150nits brightness and ethernet via Wi-Fi.
The following Shadow of the Tomb Raider test was made in 1920x1080, highest settings. Hitman, Ultra with DX12.
|Laptop model and FPS||Asus Zephryrus G14||Dell G7 15||Acer Predator Triton 500||MSI Alpha 15|
|Shadow of the Tomb Raider||49||49||49||35|
So, this UserBenchmark bash seems to be kind of pointless. Looks like a buch of crying teenagers in need of attention. Let's have a look at the file transfer test, handbrake video editing test and of course the most important; battery life.
|Laptop model and test||Asus Zephryrus G14||Dell G7 15||Acer Predator Triton 500||MSI Alpha 15|
|File transfer test (higher is better)||1272.3||221.2||727||484.7|
|Handbrake video editing test (lower is better)||6min 59s||8min 5s||9min 58s||15min 51s|
|Battery life||11hours 32minutes||3hours 12minutes||4hours 24minutes||3hours 55minutes|
Absolutely the most incredible feature of this Zephyrus is the almost 12 hour battery life. Intel's high-end mobile CPUs are showing the refresh of dying 14nm technology. Unfortunately, our little friend UserBenchmark is unable to see all these results.
Here's a video you might want to check out. Zephyrus' features get covered in the Hardware Unboxed's video.
HDB KDB HenDaBen Knowledge Database
Ryzen 7 3700 vs i3-9350KF
When it comes to comparing a 4-core Intel i3-9350KF to a 8-core Ryzen 7 3700X, the Intel variant seems to slaughter the AMD's Ryzen 7 3700X. Or at least that's something the UserBenchmark wants you to believe.
Should we have a comparison with these new CPUs? Or don't the two sections above clear your mind out of UserBenchmarks manipulation? Let me tell you a hint: reasons to consider the i3 over R7? None.
|Feature||AMD Ryzen 7 3700X||Intel i3-9350KF|
|Frequency||3,6Ghz (4,4 boost)||4,0Ghz (4,6 boost)|
|Cache||32 MB||8 MB|
|Price||$329 (300€)||$184 (168€)|
Let's dive into gaming benchmarks, then.
|Game and FPS||AMD Ryzen 7 3700X||Intel i3-9350KF|
|The Witcher 3||148 (108)||119 (73)|
|Metro Exodus||121 (108)||95 (77)|
|Hitman 2||101 (79)||95 (57)|
|Kingdom Come Deliverance||78 (48)||58 (24)|
|Assassin's Creed Odyssey||105 (62)||59 (48)|
|Battlefield V||180 (119)||129 (63)|
These tests were run in 1080p, with a RTX 2080Ti. AMD R7 3700X's 0.1% lows were about Intel i3-9350KF's 1% lows, and what comes to Intel i3-9350KF 0.1% lows.. Let's not even talk about them. I did not include synthetic benchmarks like Cinebench R15, 20, Blender, File compression or so on, just because the Intel i3-9350KF would get totally destroyed in them. These results are a proof that in 2020 nobody should buy a 4-core CPU for gaming. With a 144Hz display monitor, the whole i3 lineup is a no-go zone. If the cpu is overclocked to 5Ghz, it will produce a little bit FPS, but the heat and 1/0.1% lows are still bad.