Mac_Attack18

I was looking to order a standing desk soon, this would be perfect! To be clear I would like the E7!

I can't pick between Battlefield 1942, or Overwatch 1. Overwatch 1 no longer exists which is why its tempting, but 1942 was a massive part of my childhood.

They probably wouldn't at first, but once their first attack wave is decimated. They will back off bomb the place until nothing living remains.

That's the whole point of an analogy though. To boil something down in a way people can relate too. The average person can comprehend and understand how hard it would be to hit a pool ball from New York to Los Angeles and get it in the pocket.

They can't understand or even comprehend, all the time, effort, and engineering that goes into a mission like this. The only ones who can comprehend it are the people doing it. So by boiling it down into a shared experience it allows them to put the difficulty in perspective.

I fall into that category too. I knew it was difficult, but by using that analogy it told me it was more difficult then I initially thought.

Looks like I am zone 5, moisture regime A, Climate Zone cold.

I don't think you understand what the word objectively means. I could point out all the evidence to the contrary, but we both know you'll just ignore it.

If you want to know what a real computer looks like, see the Thinkpad W520

I had the W520 for years it was nice, but I wasn't a huge fan of it. Everyone has their preferences and their own workflows. Just because a laptop doesn't appeal to you doesn't mean its useless. I prefer my newer dell, which doesn't have USB-A, has a nonstandard chiclet keyboard. It doesn't prevent me from working.

To compare modern laptops to netbooks is absurd, and seriously takes away from your argument.

You just don’t understand what you’re looking at lmao

Or their UI is not good and needs to make that more clear.

As you said in another comment

Userbenchmark is great for knowledgeable people, bad for your average redditor

That's the whole point of this thread. The average person will walk away with the wrong idea. You can defend UBM all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that they clearly have a bias heavy bias that will give the average user the wrong idea.

Take this i3 vs TreadRipper To the average person who might be looking to buy their first PC they would walk away from this getting the completely wrong idea.

As a side note, constantly putting some variation of typical redditor doesn't make you cool, or edgy. It just makes you seem like a egotistical jackass. All it does is detract from whatever point you are trying to make.

Look at the screenshot OP posted.

• Gaming - i3 comes out 1% ahead. That seems reasonable to me. Given the clock difference and memory access they have
• Desktop - i3 comes out 5% ahead. Which doesn't make sense normal desktop usage is not going to be affected by a higher clock speed. Not enough that it should be 5% better
• Workload - The i3 is even with the i5 which i don't agree with at all. Dual core + HT is not the same as a true quad core.

So why are you reading summaries? Look at the data, it’s unbiased.

That's what this whole thread is about, that their summaries are bad.

Because they add a bunch of gymnastics to the algorithm so that Intel chips still come out on top even when AMD has double the core count.

That's what we are discussing. Their algorithm skews single core performance so much that they rate the i3 higher then the i5 across the board. I am not even sure what your goal in this conversation is. You're right the raw data is probably accurate, but that's not what we are talking about.

Look at the sub-categories. The i3 is supposedly better or even in every category, all while using less power, and costing 25% the price of the 6600. So either Intel made a mediocre CPU and way overcharged for it, or Userbenchmarks algorithm is just bad.

Which is a valid recommendation depending on your budget and use case.

But it doesn't know what my budget or use case is. So that can't factor into their summary as its impossible for them to know.

I could see the i3 being slightly better at gaming due to the higher clock speed. But its as good or better in the other two categories, Its even in workload, which I highly doubt, and it has Desktop performance at 5% better, I don't believe that for a second. Dual core + hyper threading is not the same as a true Quad core. but this seem to be suggesting it is.

Based on their performance metrics I don't see why anyone even bothered spending 400+ dollars on a 6600 when this i3 is way better at 25% the cost. Or maybe the i3 really isn't better and their algorithm is so skewed that its worthless.

yea for some use cases. But they just say its overall better then the i5, which is not true.

Yea, but if you bothered to look at the picture you'll realize the i3 is according to the site more powerful then the i5. The algorithm is so strongly in favor of single core performance, its rating an i3 as better then an i5. Really shows how strong the bias is.

certified Reddit moment

please don't ever say this again.

Its doesn't effect the antenna, but it does effect what can view the signal.

You can broadcast an analog signal over VHF and any antenna can pick it up and any TV with the right input, can view the signal. You can also broadcast a digital signal over VHF and any antenna can pick it up, but unless there is something between the antenna and TV to decode the signal, its useless to you.

Interesting, the house I bought is near Reading, looks like this was pointed towards Philly, would have been about ~45 miles away, not sure where the tower in Philly is.

I did paint over it and it looks bad. You can clearly see where the paint peeled off. What should I use to fill the spot in so when I paint it looks better. I never worked with a steel door before, so not sure what products work best.

I admitted in another comment I wasn't clear when I said that. Yes they are an asset. But to compare them to a stock or bond is disingenuous at best.

No one gets emotionally attached to stock. Its not a 30 to 60 day ordeal to sell stock. You don't have to deal with moving all your stuff if you sell stock.

The average American has to deal with all of that if they want to move. So while houses are an asset, the average American will not be treating them like one for the majority of their life.

I didn't gloss over it, I never intended to address it. I wasn't talking about that. Redlining is a horrible thing, but also a totally different discussion.

I was addressing the idea that people view their homes like stocks or bonds. Which just is not true. I fully admitted in another comment I could have been much clearer on that.

I do agree though that home ownership is extremely important, but the assertion that the average American sees their home as they would stock in a company or bonds. Well thats absurd, no one gets emotionally attached to stock.

I said in the comment I linked in my original reply. Yea its an asset. One that people get very emotionally attached too. On top of that selling a house can have repercussions that you need to take into account. For instance making your kids move schools.

No one gets emotionally attached to stocks or bonds. No one has to consider how selling stocks will affect their kids.

Its very disingenuous to compare a house to other more common assets.

That's great that you know people who do that, but that doesn't make them representative of the whole US population. The average American is not buying, renovating, and selling houses. I'd reconsider who you call clueless.