Steve and Hardware Unboxed don't understand CPU testing.
FYI, Steve deleted this comment from the corresponding HU video, and banned me from commenting on their channel for making it. I think that shows he knows he's not being honest and has something to hide. So, let's get into it.
I see that Steve is trying to gaslight everyone once again.
Each argument Steve makes on this topic is a mischaracterisation, and frankly, technically-illiterate. He says 1440p data is useless and tells nothing that you can't learn from the 1080p data. But 1080p data doesn't tell you when and to what severity bottlenecking kicks in, which is important buying information, and so Steve's argument here is false. And it's something Steve's been confronted on multiple times before, so he should be aware of that, even if basic logic for some reason didn't kick in for him. And this is not an either/or situation between 1080p and 1440p. I've never seen anybody pose it to Steve as that, but I have seen many explicitly tell him it isn't that - 1440p testing only compliments 1080p testing. So, he's falsely framing the argument in a way that manipulates viewers towards an uninformed conclusion. This is called "poisoning the well".
A single point of data is non-interpretable, and doesn't leave room for people to understand what it means for their PC. If you add a second, slightly GPU-bound point of data, which shows where and how quickly performance drop-off occurs, then you create a performance delta from which anybody can relate to their own system to understand what kind of performance they'd personally get from that CPU. 1080p results next to 1440p results creates that performance delta, and makes a CPU review far more practically informative for one of its primary purposes.
I'd've thought the concept of performance deltas would be understood by the enthusiast community. Gamers Nexus uses deltas frequently. But maybe HU's audience is more mainstream and casual, and not so much enthusiast.
The purpose of a CPU review is generally to inform on what a CPU's identity is, and what it means to viewers. Unbound 1080p data accomplishes the first point, but not the second. It doesn't let people who game at higher resolutions know whether they would personally experience any benefit from paying more for the CPU that looks 20% more performative in 1080p benchmarks. Providing a performance delta that shows where and how quickly performance drops-off due to bottlenecking accomplishes the latter point of conveying how the CPU's performance will translate to their individual systems, regardless of their specific hardware, and completes the purpose of a CPU review.
Steve deceitfully claims showing GPU-limited data would only mislead people - which is akin to saying showing 1080p data will mislead people... which it will if they're fed a false explanation about what that data shows. But why would you do that? Yet Steve is doing precisely that regarding 1440p data, apparently for the sole purpose of wanting to manipulate people to agree with his position. In fact, showing people 1080p data without telling them the same relative performance gap won't be present with 1440p gaming is misleading - and that misleading situation can be rectified by explaining and showing the bottlenecking that occurs at 1440p.
Showing a car's technical max performance on a dyno doesn't make the real-world, city-driving performance irrelevant. In fact, the real-world performance can be more relevant to people. That's why automotive reviews routinely give both sets of data. The exact same applies to PC hardware reviews. But Steve pretends otherwise and does everything to deceive his audience to think the same.
This is barely scratching the surface of the full scope of reasons why Steve's arguments are wrong. Steve is completely mischaracterising and avoiding the real arguments for higher-res benchmarks. That Steve calls his false assertions "just a fact" suggests his comprehension is limited.
Running a formulaic tech channel doesn't necessarily mean that someone is very tech smart and can think outside the box. It seems to me that Steve has trouble reasoning outside of his usual routine.
