Posts: 8,776 +1,677
Your two statements contradict one another and don't match the review's findings
tossing a hissy fit every time someone points out your mistakes is no way to go through life (or post on the internet)#1 No they don't.
#2 I pointed out the 7 game average and then continued to say I'd buy a 9900k instead. Try reading the entire statement before replying.
#3 Does Techspot have a block button beyond the ignore button?
The difference in real world scenarios can be a lot bigger and games display more stuttering and other bugs in Ryzen than they do Intel. Digital Foundry have documented this in their 10900K review. Give it a watch because if you are just buying for gaming you will wish reviewers made you aware.
Same here to be honest. But digital foundry reported this in their review. They paint a much clearer picture of the difference between these two CPUs when it comes to gaming.
There seems to be quite a lot of complaints on reddit about it actually. So gamers have picked these things up and complained about it.I'm not saying they are making this up, its just if that was a big issue it would have been pointed out by multiple reviews after all these years. Something like that gamers would have picked up on and complained about.
And I did watch the whole video.
There seems to be quite a lot of complaints on reddit about it actually. So gamers have picked these things up and complained about it.
Anyway I’m not trying to have an argument with you I’m calling out the article for not informing users of the real difference between these chips when it comes to gaming. The article is misleading as it does not inform users of the real performance differences as highlighted in DFs video nor do they highlight any of the stuttering and bugs on Ryzen.
This CPU is definitely a gamer's dream. It's easy to overclock and relatively cheap, if you are into what it offers. With some tweaking it can offer near 10900k gaming performance.
I know it sounds crazy but that's my opinion. I'm also shocked the Intel i5 6c/12t CPU is really just intended for web browsing. I don't know how to break the news to the dual core mediatek special in my six year old tablet it can't browse the web anymore.You don't think paying hundreds more for just 1 FPS on average is a good idea? You must be out of your mind.
Why is it that practically every review out there leaves the 3950X out. Just because it makes Intel's flagship look silly in so many benchmarks? Because Intel slashed prices and nothing matches up?... Funny how when the situation was flipped just a short time ago, all of the top mainstream Intel parts were almost always shown. Just goes to show the stranglehold Intel still somehow has over content like this.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe techspot didn't have any of these bugs or stuttering issues on their test rig?
Why do you automatically assume that site is correct and not this one?
And can you link some of these reddit complaints I would like to check them out.
It might well be possible that Techspot did not experience this stutter. I am not accusing them of deliberately misleading. However, I do trust digital foundry over techspot generally. Just from my experience and from watching and reading content from both sites, DF are far more in depth and their testing is more comprehensive. I’m not saying Techspot don’t do a lot of work either. In DFs credit, they did manage to demonstrate via frame times why Ryzen stutters. They didn’t just say it, they proved it.
To find Ryzen stuttering issues in reddit just google it. When I did there were several pages of results. When I searched the very top result was this one;
All I am doing here is calling out inconsistency between reviewers. I certainly don’t think DF are lying and I am inclined to believe that Techspot also not hiding anything.
I personally do feel that the difference in gaming for users is better portrayed in DF than it is in Techspots reviewing.