EFps Game Benchmarks

Bottlenecks

An AMD Ryzen 3700X bottlenecks a 2070S: the 3700X costs 40% more money for 11% less performance. The lost performance is similar to downgrading from a 2070S to a 2060S. Publishing EFps data puts UserBenchmark in conflict with the marketers that represent billion dollar corporations, but it also helps users dodge marketing traps and build faster PCs. Users can verify EFps figures with Afterburner

We do

• Focus on user verifiable facts and figures.
• Buy all of our hardware from mainstream shops: no golden "free" samples here.
• Provide PC details, driver versions, game settings and source video for our EFps figures.
• Pick games that most of our users actually play. (ACO, BFV, SOTTR etc. are relatively unpopular)

We don't

• Put lipstick on pigs for sponsorship fees, our users are our only sponsors.
• Care for brands: red, green or blue. PC hardware isn’t a fashion show, performance comes first.
• Test at 1440p or 4K: high resolutions are rarely optimal for gaming (refresh rate > size > resolution).
• Get fooled by the corporate army of anonymous forum and reddit influencers that prey on first time buyers.

So that

• You get the best PC gaming experience for your money.
• You can use Afterburner to check our fps results against your hardware
• Our next decade is more productive than the last: we are on track to benchmark 25% of all PCs.

Intel vs AMD

Intel continues to offer better CPUs at lower prices but they also appear oblivious to social media marketing: forums, reddit, youtube etc. As a result, publishers are openly accused of bias for reporting replicable, real world performance data. Since the launch of Ryzen, AMD have carved 50 billion 100 billion dollars off Intel’s bottom line. After failing to grasp new-age marketing, and consequently losing significant market share, Intel is finally motivated to deliver material CPU improvements. The dynamic between the two companies is a blessing for well informed users who can save money without compromising on performance.

Nvidia vs AMD

AMD’s Vega (56, 64) and Navi (5000) series GPUs deliver great performance in specific games with specific hardware/software configurations. Unfortunately, following the initial surge in sales fueled by AMD's marketers, many users discovered that they exhibit widespread stability and compatibility issues (blue/black screens and driver resets). The cards are engineered to shine in benchmarks, often at the expense of real world performance and hair dryer levels of noise. For example, the reference 5700 XT has its stock clocks set so high that it overheats and stutters in popular games. Expert users, that are happy to tinker with BIOS updates and voltage curves can sometimes extract excellent price/performance but many users end up getting a refund instead. By comparison, Nvidia’s cards have better compatibility, lower return rates and rock solid stability. That said, above the 2060S-2070S tier, where there is no competition from AMD, Nvidia’s pricing remains completely unchecked.