edit:
Wft, is happening to him? He's changing. I don't like change....
He actually isn't.
People just started calling him out on his bullshit.
Seriously, he occasionally raises some decent points but most of the time he is just spouting bullshit. He's just popular because he has good presentation and is an AMD fanboy.
1 Like
In a very few lunar eclipses I have had some decent points...
All I need are followers...
Then I could be just like him.
He shall be my role model.
/s
He's been good in the past with the editorial piece because nobody challenged his opinion (even the ones where he criticizes AMD) until he started to get into the benchmarking gig. Now, he's accountable for the numbers he puts up.
So many tech YouTubers are acting like five year olds recently.
"You disagree with me so you must be wrong!" + Other shit slinging on social media or wherever.
11 Likes
Ehh he got pretty upset when people criticized his Vega video and a few of his other things. When he was completely wrong about Polaris and was called out he made a video claiming he never said what he said. He basically never admitted he was wrong.
Well yeah the thing with benchmarking is yeah you are responsible but a lot of the time too he just goes online and takes other people's numbers and nearly presents them as his own. Often with little evidence or knowledge about them. Kyle is right. You need to do the tests yourself. You don't know their methodology or what they did or their specific circumstances. It is impossible to draw meaningful conclusions from that but it doesn't stop him from doing so
I still watch him but to take his word as gospel, as so many do, is wrong.
I mean he is essentially banned from the AMD Subreddit and that was before he raged and just deleted all of his posts and his redidit account.. lol
I think that AdoredTv is rather touchy in general and easily offended (his skin is thin). He lets people get to him too easily. I think that some of what he does or says may be motivated by that sort of rational. Reactionary. I think that can account for a lot of the actions that people have issues with. However, I think that the rationale that he is using is solid. He cites his sources and draws logical conclusions based on what information he has access to.
Honestly, I don't agree with Kyle. There is no reason that you can't pull numbers from reviews and online benchmarks in order to draw conclusions. That is what all of us do. If that isn't what we should do, then the whole benchmarking article/video thing is pointless because we should all only trust our own benchmarks. Adored specifically said what numbers he was looking at, showed them on screen, and walked us through his thought process so that we could very easily see how he arrived at the conclusion that he did. I see no problem here. Of course, it would be better to be able to test it all yourself, with old hardware (2500k, 8350, GTX680 or 7970), old games, and old drivers/Windows updates. Then retest with the same cpus, a TitanX and new games. Obviously, he doesn't have access to all of that, or else he probably would test it himself.
Hardware Unboxed retested things himself (themselves?) and posted the results. They didn't agree with the numbers that Adored was showing in his video. So Adored responded with a new video pulling more numbers that back up his claims from various sources. Citing every one of them, typically just showing the numbers on screen. No funny business going on here.
And to top it all off, the fact that he isn't testing it himself proves that he isn't manipulating the data, at the very least. He is just analyzing data that we all have access to, and I think he did a reasonable job of it. So what exactly is the problem here? Adored didn't do any funny business, just logically analyzed data. Hardware Unboxed, on the other hand, published numbers that don't seem to agree with the ones that Adored was citing on Computer Base, AnanadTech, Gamer's Nexus. So we are questioning ....... Adored????
I know that people always get more heated than they should about these sorts of things, but honestly, I'm not seeing the reasoning here for a lot of what people are saying.
10 Likes
I like him. Not because I believe him more or because drama is fun or whatever but because he questions the standards of benchmarking and the arguments for those standards which are ... well, also standard today.
If you make that argument I would actually go one step further and say you need to PLAY GAMES yourself. I honestly don't care about fps numbers anymore. Just tell me how it plays.
5 Likes
This is why I really like Jay's video about Ryzen. His whole point was that "it games well enough and crushes productivity". And that is my stance on it as well. I don't need 200fps. I need 60fps and solid productivity. I think that makes for a much more reasonable chip, at the end of the day.
8 Likes
Yup, totally agree. Jay nailed that one.
2 Likes
Well Adore TV made some bold statements latelly.
They seem to call out a couple of youtubers.
But yeah in "their" vision testing cpu performance in gaming, you should test on high resolutions like 4K.
Because low res benchmarks are worthless.
Thats what their original statement was.
That is of course the biggest pile of BS ever, but i can see why they think that way.
its their vision of doing proper cpu performance testing in gaming.
Well educated people simply know better.
Jay and Steve from GN made some fair points on Ryzen i think.
4 Likes
If facts is his thing then he has nothing to worry about, but calling Kyle a "dimwit" is uncalled for, that's Brain-from-Tech-City level of petty. If he thinks there's something the tech press should improve on in terms of benchmarking, name calling isn't gonna win him any points.
3 Likes
this thread is crawling with cancer.
in terms of testing at 480p or so... at lowest details with $400 cpu it makes little to no sense... put different type of load and you'll have intel stuttering while amd won't be affected as much by it. It was already explained why ryzen has poorer performance in games due to rapid context switching forcing data through infinity fabric.
2 Likes
In my opinion.
Benchmarks should simply be done at the most commonly used resolutions.
Which means 1080p, 1440P and 4K.
That way you get a pretty fair image of what kind of performance you could expect.
8 Likes
I completely agree.
Its the same thing with gpu benchmarks and compairissons.
Allot of tech reviewers out there overclock their cards,
and then do head to head compairissons.
Those kind of numbers are of course a nice addition to have.
But i´m personally more interested on how the cards perform against eachother out of the box,
stock vs stock.
Because those are the performance numbers consumers could expect to get,
wenn they buy those said cards.
Those overclocked numbers are a nice addition,
But there is no single guarantee that you will reach similar overclocks with your cards.
2 Likes
Halfwits on youtube arguing over 5% performance and youtube comments filled with bile. Gota love the PC master race.
4 Likes
Actually when you read the comment that he is answering there, to me it reads simply as a joke.
No reaction to Bitwit and Paul thinking you were Irish? hahaha I do remember there being some high praise from Paul in that video though
I mean after this ... he kind of asked for it. xD
I'm not about to fight Kyle's battles for him, if he takes it as a joke then it's all good, maybe they've even pm each other about it already, but if not oh well.
1 Like
Well i suppose Kyle is mature enough to see the humor part of it.
1 Like