PC

Userbenchmark’s conclusion about the Intel 14900K did not age well


Userbenchmark’s conclusion about the Intel 14900K did not age well

14 Comments

  1. Derefringence

    I’d say UserBenchMark’s conclusion about anything they ever wrote didn’t age so good

  2. I wish I could more easily block that site from my search results, it’s the PC hardware equivalent to Fox News.

  3. AllMyFrendsArePixels

    UBM say something bad about Intel challenge. Level: Impossible.

  4. missviolet96

    The only conclusion they’re good for is how not to measure performance.

  5. thesituation531

    If you actually cared about honesty and accuracy, you would not give them traffic.

  6. HardStroke

    Who tf uses this shit website? You can test 10 fully overclocked i7 2600k’ on a z77-a and 10 stock 14900k’ on a cheap ass b660 ds3h and it’ll say that the 2600k is far better. Stupid website. Every part’s rating will be affected by the user’s build. If someone tests a 14900k on a cheap $50 mb, it’ll effect the overall rating of thr cpu. Stupid.

  7. mistericek1

    it claimed my 12 year old i5 2500 was as good as 10100F it thinks maybe im confusing it with something else but u get the point(right?)

  8. Not_so_new_user1976

    Is Userbenchmarks at least a decent site for comparing Nvidia cards to other Nvidia cards? Or do they suck at that too?

Write A Comment