Do not use userbenchmark for speed comparison. Ever. They are not user based. They are essentially a marketing scheme by Intel to make AMD look bad. Just search userbenchmark on YouTube and the first suggestion will be `userbenchmark bias`. See 2kliksphilip video about them https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQSBj2LKkWg
I'd say this usage is very specific - that the best way to move forward would be to run the workload on real hardware. You might get a huge benefit from a high-core count in certain projects while other codebases will build faster on fewer cores with higher single-thread performance.
the best way to move forward would be to run the workload on real hardware.
OP is asking whether the hardware will perform so he know whether to buy it. Is the "best way to move forward" really to buy the hardware and find out?
There are vast amounts of data online on why userbenchmark should not be used. Based on your answer, I guess any link I will provide will not change your mind. For anybody else, here is the link pcmasterrace provides as arguments on why userbenchmark is banned from their subreddit.
Comments
Do not use userbenchmark for speed comparison. Ever. They are not user based. They are essentially a marketing scheme by Intel to make AMD look bad. Just search userbenchmark on YouTube and the first suggestion will be `userbenchmark bias`. See 2kliksphilip video about them https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQSBj2LKkWg
I'd say this usage is very specific - that the best way to move forward would be to run the workload on real hardware. You might get a huge benefit from a high-core count in certain projects while other codebases will build faster on fewer cores with higher single-thread performance.
OP is asking whether the hardware will perform so he know whether to buy it. Is the "best way to move forward" really to buy the hardware and find out?
If you can return it if it doesn't fit the need, then yes. You can also model approximations with cloud servers.
I would just love some trustworthy data rather than a youtuber conspiracy video. Show a benchmark!
Are their facts wrong? Number of cores? Clock speed? TDP?
Or maybe its the nature of their writing:
Intel: "Intel’s 13th gen. Raptor Lake CPUs offer around 10% faster gaming and 45% faster multi-core performance than their predecessors."
AMD: "AMD’s 16 core, 32 thread Ryzen Threadripper 1950X is finally here to seize the throne for high end desktop processors."
Feel that PRO-INTEL bias!
Are the users in on the scam too?: https://www.userbenchmark.com/Software
There are vast amounts of data online on why userbenchmark should not be used. Based on your answer, I guess any link I will provide will not change your mind. For anybody else, here is the link pcmasterrace provides as arguments on why userbenchmark is banned from their subreddit.
https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/search/?q=userbenchmar...