Over the past few years, “UserBenchmark,” one of tech’s (formerly) most treasured sources of hardware analysis, has become a focal point of controversy due to its dubious practices. The website has faced a lot of criticism for its inaccuracies, manipulation, and questionable data collection methods.
Over time, there have been instances where the website appeared to show bias towards Intel over AMD, skewing results without reasonable justification, and this bias has become increasingly evident now.
UBM’s Alleged Bias Against High Bench Scores for AMD GPUs
The user had apparently conducted tests on their RX 7900 XTX using this benchmark and achieved a notably higher score, with the GPU remaining stable at 100% on most games.
However, UBM classified this score as “atypical extreme,” suggesting that the GPU was unusually fast for its class. At of the time of writing, the highest achievable score on UBM for the 7900 XTX stands at 287%, with the average bench rating at 256%.
While this error may seem somewhat logical, the issue arises when underperforming cards have their scores included in UBM’s database without any indications of an error pointing towards a possible hardware fault.
Since UBM allegedly does not include high scores for AMD GPUs in its database, this could potentially explain why cards like the RTX 3080 have accumulated over 12,000 benchmarks while the 7900 XTX has fewer than 1,000. Regardless of market share, the difference between these figures appears unusually large.
If this still isn’t enough to convince you that the site, while being an integral part of people’s significant financial decisions, is highly biased towards a specific company, there’s no definite proof of this, per se. But you don’t need proof; just take a look at the webpage for any of AMD’s flagship GPUs.
UBM’s AMD GPU Descriptions Are Unprofessional & Misleading
UBM, a place that many people, not too familiar with the general tech space, rely on, should be more professional in how they portray information on their website. Referring to AMD as “Advanced Marketing Devices” and accusing them of “releasing benchmark-busting, heavily marketed, sub-standard products” is enough to highlight how unprofessional the site is in its dealings. Moreover, they don’t even provide proper images for AMD GPUs. If you’re new to this, there’s no way you’d even land on this page.
Take a look at these descriptions for some of AMD’s flagship GPUs, and believe it or not – none of this is Inspect Element.
Similar incidents, particularly one involving a large tech production agency have surfaced recently, prompting people to scrutinize information critically and make informed decisions, rather than relying on websites that abuse their authority.
This is all we know for now, but rest assured that we will keep you updated as new information becomes available.