• RealThanny@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It was, though I don’t know how long the original was up. It appeared in my RSS feed, but the video was removed by the time I tried to watch it. Either it’s the same video, and the original release was a mistake for timing reasons, or they had to make an edit to remove some kind of mistake or encoding SNAFU.

  • riderer@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    3600 was under $100 back then? wth? how?

    1600 was only sub $100 for a short time.

  • xenonisbad@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    It’s weird to make “5 years later” test, and out of 21 games tested most are older than a year

    • two 5 years old games (Assetto Corsa Competizione, Shadow of the Tomb Raider)
    • 3 years old port of 7 years old port (Horizon Zero Dawn)
    • two 3 years old game (Watch Dogs: Legion, Hitman 3)
    • three 2 years old games (Far Cry 6, Total War: Warhammer 3, Halo Infinite)
    • 1 year old remaster of 5 years old game (Spider-man Remastered)
    • three 1 year old games (Plague Requiem, COD Modern Warfare 2, Callisto Protocol)

    Few of the titles that are from this year are kinda questionable choices:

    • game that comes out every year (F1 23)
    • game that started as expansion for 3-years old game (and it’s heavily based on original game tech) (AC Mirage)
    • this year expansion for 3 years old game with expansion (Cyberpunk 2077: Phantom Liberty)

    I think it would be much more interesting video, if “5 years later” video was about checking how those CPU perform in today’s games, not how well they perform in games released in last 5 years.

    • Slyons89@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s practical to use their existing test suite. It allows for comparison against other parts they have previously tested. Plus plenty of people are still playing games from the past 5 years.

    • RealThanny@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      The purpose is to see how the processors aged over the five years since their release. Testing games that span those five years, including titles released this year (which you neglected to list, given your obvious contrarian agenda), is the obvious way to do that.

  • LifePineapple@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    The Ryzen 3600 beats the Intel 9600K? But i have a very reliable source which says that:

    In terms of performance, the i5-9600K is almost unbeatable for desktop

    the overclocked Ryzen 3600 is approximately 13% worse for gaming

    The masterfully hyped Ryzen 3600 may well be the best CPU for multimedia producers on a tight budget but in today’s market there are faster and less expensive alternatives for gamers, streamers and general desktop users.

    /s