By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - Digital Foundry is the Performance Review Top Tier But....

JRPGfan said:
DonFerrari said:

Honest review would be:

We had to pay a lot more for the chip, put an expensive cooler to get a marginal improvement that isn't necessary to play any game at ultra setting 1440p or 4k.

Basically.... even though at 1440p there is small differnces.

But saying that a 10600k (265$) on avg is 5% faster than a 3300x (120$) cpu for gameing (real world)... doesnt sound as good.

That might make people question if they should spend 145$ extra on the intel cpu, or another 100-200$ on the intel motherboards.
(not to mention it doesnt even ship with a cooler, you have to buy your own aftermarket cooler for this cpu)

Instead the headline is "Intel i5-10600k - All you need for gaming".

That is because you'll be poor after buying their CPU and Mobo



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network

End of the day, only so much data can be showcased in a Youtube video.
Digital Foundry did test at multiple resolutions so that criticism is moot.

A proper CPU gaming review will not just focus on average framerates either, but 95/99th percentile and with a variety of settings.

Only a website with appropriate graphical graphs can do that much data the necessary credit.

JRPGfan said:


Which is what my point is.
No one buys a 2080ti or better GPU to run games at 720p.
So these tests that show which cpu is better (at 720p) dont serve any purpose.

Basically I think its mainly done to show Intel off, in a better light than their CPUs actually deserve.
Because in the real world, no one buys a 2080ti and games at 720p.
(its a marketing ploy, so you can say "best for gameing", and manipulate the degree to which it actually performs better at)

The purpose is to show which CPU has the absolute best performance in a worst-case scenario so that users can get the most bang-for-buck for their purchase.

And they succeeded at that.

Not all games will be forever GPU bound, in 10 years time those CPU's will be antiquated and the performance differences more important when paired up with a more modern GPU, yes even at higher resolutions.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:

End of the day, only so much data can be showcased in a Youtube video.
Digital Foundry did test at multiple resolutions so that criticism is moot.

A proper CPU gaming review will not just focus on average framerates either, but 95/99th percentile and with a variety of settings.

Only a website with appropriate graphical graphs can do that much data the necessary credit.

JRPGfan said:


Which is what my point is.
No one buys a 2080ti or better GPU to run games at 720p.
So these tests that show which cpu is better (at 720p) dont serve any purpose.

Basically I think its mainly done to show Intel off, in a better light than their CPUs actually deserve.
Because in the real world, no one buys a 2080ti and games at 720p.
(its a marketing ploy, so you can say "best for gameing", and manipulate the degree to which it actually performs better at)

The purpose is to show which CPU has the absolute best performance in a worst-case scenario so that users can get the most bang-for-buck for their purchase.

And they succeeded at that.

Not all games will be forever GPU bound, in 10 years time those CPU's will be antiquated and the performance differences more important when paired up with a more modern GPU, yes even at higher resolutions.

Well if one CPU is half the price, doesn't need external cooler, mobo is cheaper and gives almost the same performance hen the best bang for buck is that CPU and it seems like this wasn't very clear on the review thus why OP is complaining.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

CGI-Quality said:
Yeah, if you want the ins and outs of this tech stuff, look for one of the PC centric sites like Guru3D, TechpowerUp (my personal favorite), or Anandtech

Or, even VGC (Pemalite and CGI-Quality)

Not going with that Pemalite, I hear he looks like the guy from Gamers Nexus and not only that he also waffles on like him, all while raking in VG dollars in cash for comment. In CGI's case why bother I know his  summantion will be "compared to my rig they suck bigtime".

Last edited by mjk45 - on 26 May 2020

Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

mjk45 said:
CGI-Quality said:
Yeah, if you want the ins and outs of this tech stuff, look for one of the PC centric sites like Guru3D, TechpowerUp (my personal favorite), or Anandtech

Or, even VGC (Pemalite and CGI-Quality)

Not going with that Pemalite, I hear he looks like the guy from Gamers Nexus and not only that he also waffles on like him, all while raking in VG dollars in cash for comment. In CGI's case why bother I know his  summantion will be "compared to my rig they suck bigtime".

May you never find socks that match.

<--- That is a pic of me on the left. No long hair obviously. Happy to do hens nights.

BraLoD said:

Numbers are numbers.

If the Intel chip is faster it's also a honest review.

But yeah, a good (different from only honest) review would present all sides of it, so people that want the most independant of price can choose the best, and people wanting to make the most from their buck can also choose the best.

Leading the review purely for one side is also ok if it is made clear from the start, if the only purpose if to know which one is faster price doesn't matter.

But using better parts for one of the test subjects is definilely not okay, if they both can run with the very same parts, that is.

Yeah. Everything needs to be kept equal as much as possible. Coolers can affect turbo speeds and duration, so it's an important facet.

In saying that, AMD's wraith coolers aren't complete garbage either, certainly not like the old Phenom coolers of old. JFC. They were jet engines and did a garbage job.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
CGI-Quality said:
mjk45 said:

Not going with that Pemalite, I hear he looks like the guy from Gamers Nexus and not only that he also waffles on like him, all while raking in VG dollars in cash for comment. In CGI's case why bother I know his  summantion will be "compared to my rig they suck bigtime".

Pemalites cursed my socks and intends to become a male stripper, he'll most likely call himself Hot stuff and have the catchphrase "check out my fire engine" and CGI's given me the evil eye. what type of website is this?



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot