Question Userbenchmark paywalled LMAO!

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
8,353
7,426
136
Do you think there's anyone sad or deluded enough to actually pay for a subscription?

If Intel did stop sending checks, maybe this is their way of shaking them down and clawing some of that money back
 

Pohemi

Lifer
Oct 2, 2004
10,716
16,452
146
I haven't used it in at least a few years now, but 3dMark and PCMark are no longer free either, or at least not current versions. It use to be just the "Pro" versions with extra features unlocked that cost anything. Now the only free downloadables are older versions. They aren't expensive, but still...
 

Thunder 57

Diamond Member
Aug 19, 2007
3,489
5,784
136
I haven't used it in at least a few years now, but 3dMark and PCMark are no longer free either, or at least not current versions. It use to be just the "Pro" versions with extra features unlocked that cost anything. Now the only free downloadables are older versions. They aren't expensive, but still...

IMHO 3DMark hasn't been relevant in almost 20 years.
 

DAPUNISHER

Super Moderator CPU Forum Mod and Elite Member
Super Moderator
Aug 22, 2001
31,200
29,768
146
IMHO 3DMark hasn't been relevant in almost 20 years.
I always run 3DMark when I slap together a build to play with. It was $5 on a Steam sale. It's a quick and easy means to know If the CPU or GPU are performing properly if there are enough database entries for the hardware. When there are not enough results for comparison, the stress tests suffice for ensuring the new stuff isn't nerfed.
 

Schmide

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2002
5,686
916
126
IMHO 3DMark hasn't been relevant in almost 20 years.

3dmark doesn't pretend to be anything. They make a pretty scene, it runs, it provides metrics. Whatcha See is Whatcha Get (Song by The Dramatics)

Userbenchmark is more like This is what you want, this is what you get. (song by Public Image Ltd)

Edit: Extreme overclockers seem to think it's relevant as they risk high value hardware just to top it.
 
Last edited:

Thunder 57

Diamond Member
Aug 19, 2007
3,489
5,784
136
3dmark doesn't pretend to be anything. They make a pretty scene, it runs, it provides metrics. Whatcha See is Whatcha Get (Song by The Dramatics)

Userbenchmark is more like This is what you want, this is what you get. (song by Public Image Ltd)

Edit: Extreme overclockers seem to think it's relevant as they risk high value hardware just to top it.

I didn't mean to say that 3DMark was bunk like Userbenchmark. Just the I haven't found much use for it since 2001SE or 2003. I grew to dislike synthetic becnmarks.
 

Schmide

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2002
5,686
916
126
I grew to dislike synthetic becnmarks.
Why? They provide a baseline repeatable operation. Moreover their simplicity makes them inheritly cross platform.

Edit: So I'm not up in 3dmark's business. But they're kind of respectable. (I looked them up) Correction really respectable. UL. Underwriters Laboratories. Their metrics and standards drive almost every industry.
 
Last edited:

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
7,913
9,032
136
3D Mark and Uni engine Heaven/Valley have been my go-to stability testing for ages at this point.

As a bonus, you get an immediate feedback on what the performance bump over old hardware aught to *look* like.

Going from a HD7950 to a 980ti to a 6800xt in Fire Strike, I got to visualize what the performance improvment looked like each time in a test I was very familiar with.