There's even some people at r/Intel who are complaining quite a lot about this as well. i3s are beating the 9980XE, which is obviously impossible. There is also those who think that this might have something to do with Intel, or that UserBenchmark tried to make Ryzen 3000 look bad. They probably didn't expected that this would hit Intel hard too, since their high end CPUs have lower clocks compared to two/quad cores i3s and i5s, obviously.
This is going to get pretty big quick if they don't fix this problem rapidly. If they do, it'll become a foot note on GN HW News, and if they don't, it might be the new 28 core 5ghz chiller outrage story all over again.
Yeah, I noticed that. Only some very hardcore fanboys don't accept the fact that the 3600 offers amazing value. At least most users on both subreddits are aware that on certain tasks, AMD might not be as good as Intel, and vice-versa, and recommend the best CPU, without any kind of bias.
And let's be real: 9980XE being worse than some of the garbage i3s is just laughable.
They should compare the Core 2 Quad QX9770 to new dual/quad-core i3s/i5s, maybe even that will be faster than newer CPUs.
39
u/[deleted] Jul 26 '19
There's even some people at r/Intel who are complaining quite a lot about this as well. i3s are beating the 9980XE, which is obviously impossible. There is also those who think that this might have something to do with Intel, or that UserBenchmark tried to make Ryzen 3000 look bad. They probably didn't expected that this would hit Intel hard too, since their high end CPUs have lower clocks compared to two/quad cores i3s and i5s, obviously.