Userbenchmark Reviews 

I couldnt find information that was consistant. They would just telling lies about cpu performance. After that i couldnt keep using it i went over to toms hardware to get uptodate real data.

They are anti-AMD out of prejudice, the reviews on AMD products seem to be written by a 12-year-old Intel and Nvidia fanboy, a reviewer should be impartial, or at least TRY.......

Extremely biased, not a trusted source....

This site is run by absolute muppets who have nothing in common with technology. Just foul language and clear bias against ryzen/radeon. Not to mention they have the audacity to ask you for money when you run their biased benchmark. Avoid at all costs. Just watch Jayz or Gamers nexus for an example of true tech journalism, reviews and benchmarks.

Just awful, first they made it so that intel CPUs would win in every comparison vs any competent amd cpus, then they talked about amd like its overpriced, and when its at a lower price, they say its worse than an cpu over $50 more than it. Not to mention they continue to say that actual reviewers (ltt, gamers nexus, etc) brainwashed swines that pray to amd. All around sh*tty website that takes advantage of new pc builders and completely ignore real reviews is exchange for there stuck in they pass ideology.

The website is a head-ache inducing mess.

The benchmarks are skewed and biased against AMD. No idea why this is, but there's a lot of lore to be uncovered on Reddit and Trust Pilot, if that's your thing.

The out-of-date commentary is basically just some bitter old fart ranting incoherently and demonstrating an astonishing lack of understanding of what users want from a benchmarking website. He/she/they have practically zero knowledge of markets, product development, innovation.

Absolutely dire.

Bad website, poor design. Looks like it’s made by some high schooler who just learned how to program. Shameful ranking system. Salty owners

If you care about how your CPU will perform in the real world, you might want to give UserBenchmark numbers some trust.

Do modern CPUs perform 10 times better than CPUs bought 12 years ago? Passmark would like you to think so. The reality is that for most workflows which are low-threaded, you will get like a 30%-50% "real world" improvement, which is not bad, but nowhere near what other benchmarks promise.

UserBenchmark is not perfect by any means: the many numbers are a little confusing to the uninitiated, and while I find their rants amusing, I understand they are not to everyone's taste.

Regardless, a good web site to stop by if you care about practical performance rather than some theoretical numbers that matter less than 1% of the time for most workflows.

One star reviews here are usually untrue and meant to lower the reputation of userbenchmark. The experience is almost always great and is useful to compare gpus!

I have been in the gaming market for about 8 years and I've build maybe upwards of 25-30 computers. I've used and experienced everything from top of the line flagship products to 10 year old parts. I can say with confidence I have never seen a company skew their results against another brand more in my life. Userbenchmark hates AMD for no apparent reason. I have used many of AMD's products and compared them to Intel and Nvidia and I can say they are a solid company with quality products. I have used products Userbenchmark has reviewed and have been surprised by how horribly they review them compared my experiences. This also isnt just a few products. Every AMD product that gets reviewed by Userbenchmark is highly inaccurate.

Did Lisa Su sleep with this guys mother or something? That's the only reason I can think of for his raging hateboner for AMD products. Apparently my 7800X3D should be swapped for a 13900k immediately!

This should not be the first result everyone gets for benchmarking their own hardware or comparing options. The person running the site refuses to address all the evidence of inaccurate benchmark results that favour Intel and NVIDIA. The tone of reviews shows a lack of impartiality to begin with.

The response to criticism is to claim that the negative reviews here are due to a co-ordinated attack, and it's all fake accounts. The reviews here don't have that sort of pattern: new ones steadily appear, they didn't pop up in one big lump; the written reviews aren't from an AI prompt or handful of similar sentences covering the same few points; they are overwhelmingly from native English speakers but vary dramatically in skill. I've never seen a company clever enough to disguise their astroturfing by giving reviews their own unique set of mistakes. Then there's the equally large and constant criticism on Reddit, and YouTube, who is funding these hundreds of full time critics?

The software itself might have got a 3 if I was feeling generous and it gave accurate and impartial results. Probably more like a 2. It is clunky to get your system ready to bench because it does nothing for you even with admin rights. The test results are opaque and if they're saved locally I must have missed it. The UI is from 1999 by the styling. There's no integration of the website's information and the software that has to be looked up manually. And it doesn't give system information you get from software like CPU-ID or OC software, which feels like a big oversight when you're benchmarking and you might want to see certain under-the-hood stats. It might even show that you made a mistake and e.g. want to bench uclk = mclk and it's mclk ÷2

Insanely biased against AMD for very little reasoning. They claim AMD has heavy marketing in their favor, yet their job as a website comparing hardware is to purely compare hardware.

They have dropdowns on their own website to defend themselves.

"Why does UserBenchmark have a bad reputation on reddit?"
"Why don't PC brands endorse UserBenchmark"?
"Why don't youtubers promote UserBenchmark?"
"Why does UserBenchmark have negative trustpilot reviews?"

UserBenchmark seems to be the common denominator if they feel the need to defend themselves against all of this criticism.

"Instead of pursuing brands for sponsorship, we've spent 13 years publishing real-world data for users" (we've been rejected from some AMD sponsor and are salty enough to paint them in a bad light because we have nothing better to do)

Horribly inaccurate and bias reviews. Purposely skews benchmarks to further bias. Its a sin that its the first site to pop up when comparing PC parts. NEVER use this sight if you want an objective comparison.

Incredibly biased and AMD hate for no reason.
GPUPro and CPUPro, you suck.

Good to compare your PC against other PCs with identical components (even though their "server full" thingy is bullcrap).

But VERY heavily biased towards Intel and NVIDIA, so DO NOT use it to compare performances between two different brands.

Terribly untrusted page. They talm bout sum "why dont anyone praise us" and will provide some bullshit answer just because they can't tell the truth: the website is shit. It's biased, unaccurate and a literal bullshit website. Not recommended for ANYTHING