UserBenchmark bashes AMD GPUs and claims they lack real-world performance
"Every year, an army of influencers target first-time buyers normally declaring AMD as a godsend for PC gamers," states UserBenchmark on its RX 9070 XT page.

AMD's Radeon RX 9070 series GPUs are a welcome addition to the GPU market, assuming you can get one at MSRP. AMD has faced fewer complications than Nvidia's lackluster GPU launch, marred by a shortage of supplies. UserBenchmark has not taken lightly to AMD's and the tech media's supposed antics. In its purported review of the RX 9070 XT, one of the best graphics cards, the website claims that Radeon GPUs fall short in real-world performance while failing to mention the GPU in question even once.
For the uninitiated, UserBenchmark (UB) is infamous in the tech landscape for its radical perspectives versus AMD, which it commonly refers to as "Advanced Marketing Devices." For context, it once recommended readers purchase a Core i5-13600K over the Ryzen 7 9800X3D, asserting, and I quote, "Spending more on a gaming CPU is often pointless."
For those considering an RDNA 4 GPU, be warned of the tech propaganda that preys on unsuspecting gamers—or so says UserBenchmark. The website claims, "Every year, an army of influencers target first-time buyers, normally declaring AMD as a godsend for PC gamers."
That's a gross oversimplification of the tech media, portrayed as a large entity with a unified agenda. This is a textbook example of the strawman fallacy, where UserBenchmark distorts and exaggerates our opinions to make them easier to attack. The review further alleges that Radeon GPUs only shine in cherry-picked benchmarks but cites a now-six-year-old RX 5700 XT to defend its claims.
Afterward, UserBenchmark links to a 3% Radeon dGPU market share statistic from the Steam Hardware Survey. This is followed up by what the website believes to be the cause behind AMD's decline in the GPU market: "High average fps are worthless when they are accompanied with stutters, random crashes, black screens, excessive noise and a limited feature set." First, Radeon GPUs reportedly lack real-world performance. Now they do, but do stutters and crashes accompany them? So, which one is it?
Across the entire review, UserBenchmark failed to mention the RX 9070 XT (RDNA 4) even once. Any claim regarding performance is baseless as they haven't provided a single "real-world" benchmark of the RX 9070 series to back their arguments. In fact, Nvidia's latest RTX 50 GPUs suffer from hardware defects, BSODs, crashes, and melting 16-pin power connectors, but that bit hasn't been mentioned anywhere.
Per our testing, which is backed by actual statistics and data, the RTX 5070 Ti is just 2% faster than the RX 9070 XT at 4K across a geomean of 16 games. Sadly, new buyers searching the term "RX 9070 XT vs RTX 5070 Ti" are directed to this site, where they claim a 23% lead in favor of the RTX 5070 Ti based solely on their synthetic tests, potentially misleading many.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Hassam Nasir is a die-hard hardware enthusiast with years of experience as a tech editor and writer, focusing on detailed CPU comparisons and general hardware news. When he’s not working, you’ll find him bending tubes for his ever-evolving custom water-loop gaming rig or benchmarking the latest CPUs and GPUs just for fun.
-
Pierce2623 The “army of influencers” he’s talking about is literally just the current discourse on Nividia pricing lol. Unfortunately Google will continue to show UserBenchmark first as long as they continue to pay up.Reply -
-Fran- There has to be a way to ask Google to blacklist them from tech-related search results. Or, at least, add some sort of warning about their very obvious biases.Reply
This site, while a great idea on paper, the clown running the show makes it terrible for anyone looking for decent data and unbiased analysis.
Regards. -
GenericUser2001 Userbenchmarks has some just deranged anti-AMD bias going on. Go read their reviews of the Ryzen 7800x3d or 9800x3d; apparently you need to "watch out for AMD’s army of Neanderthal social media accounts on reddit, forums and youtube," lol. Seriously though, I have heard rumors that the site owner lost a bunch of money shorting AMD right around when the first Ryzen chips came out, which may explain things. Just rumors mind you, take that with a grain of salt.Reply -
JayGau I'm more and more convinced that the guy behind this site used to work for AMD and they fired him or something like that. All this irrational hate for a company has to have been triggered by something, cannot be just an Intel/Nvidia fanboy.Reply -
baboma >All this irrational hate for a company has to have been triggered by something, cannot be just an Intel/Nvidia fanboy.Reply
Ragebait is not irrational, but a rational response to monetize irrational rage. -
vanadiel007 AMD should use a small percentage of their profits and sue that site for slander and put them out of business. It's one thing to not like a Company and it's products, it's a different thing to continually make falls and misleading statements about a Company and it's product(s).Reply -
-Fran-
I wonder if the Streisand effect would matter in that scenario? 🤔 It may be a good idea to point more eyes to the vile in the site, so people understands their information is not reliable.vanadiel007 said:AMD should use a small percentage of their profits and sue that site for slander and put them out of business. It's one thing to not like a Company and it's products, it's a different thing to continually make falls and misleading statements about a Company and it's product(s).
Otherwise, waste of time and money for the courts and AMD, I'd say.
Regards. -
ThatMouse I didn't even know UserBenchmark had articles. I thought it was mainly a way to compare your specs with other people, but now I'm wondering how accurate those stats are. For all we know those numbers could be tampered with.Reply
I tried to figure out who "they" are, who wrote the what I'd call an oped article, but there's no information other than they seem to think GPU reviewers are paid, and I don't think they are. Some of the smaller reviewers do get free cards is about all I can see, but those are not the ones we're talking about. -
JamesJones44 -Fran- said:There has to be a way to ask Google to blacklist them from tech-related search results. Or, at least, add some sort of warning about their very obvious biases.
Label as potentially bias, but I'm never a fan of removing content, de-ranking, etc. purely based on disagreement of opinion.