How am I supposed to know to Google “RA tech Gamers Nexus” if you don’t say who was involved?
Also yes I am going to question your hyperbolic and subject language like “tantrum”. It’s not manipulative for me to ask that. Typically a tantrum is used to describe toddlers stomping and falling to the floor screaming and crying. And when I look into it and find Gamers Nexus was harsh and critical, but not histrionic or emotional, I know you’re being subjective by saying he threw a tantrum. So I’m questioning your bias because your comments are filled with hyperbole (gospel enshrined by the Pope himself?? Really??)
Steve could have taken more time to hear RA Tech out or validate his tests or been nicer etc etc and handled it better. I personally am disappointed in his response. We shouldn’t treat anyone as above criticism, especially someone like Steve that people watch for his educational content. However, many other people also disagree with RA Tech. And when Steve commented, 90% of his comment was focusing on the technical aspects of why he disagreed. And I couldn’t find any discussion between the two past that, feel free to give more context or follow up if there is any.
I’m not going to say either Gamers Nexus or Hardware Unboxed had correct benchmarks, but the RA Tech video alone doesn’t disprove them because his testing methodology fundamentally lacks transparency. He didn’t say what resolution or setting he was testing at, he compared those unlabeled numbers with cropped screenshots of Gamers Nexus’ numbers. Gamers Nexus tests at different resolutions and settings, so saying you got better results is meaningless without that context. But RA Tech glosses over that by then shifting to comparing to his own simulated test of a 2 core 4 thread, which is a CPU that he artificially handicapped. And he entirely dismissed 1% lows for some reason? Saying FPS is good enough and pointing to an unlabeled graph that looks to be steady. But I can’t compare that graph to GN’s actual 1% low numbers. Which is especially silly because one benchmark showed GN got a better result than he did but the problem was in the 1% lows… which RA Tech didn’t test. So sure, GN and HU could have made mistakes. But RA Tech’s lack of transparency and amateur testing didn’t prove his point the way you think it does.
I do know that acting like this was some big drama moment or that Gamers Nexus’ entire credibility is destroyed by this one time he wasn’t super nice and patient while disagreeing with another YouTuber is disingenuous. Take all testing with a grain of salt, and don’t blindly believe what someone shows you in a YouTube video (Gamers Nexus or RA Tech)
How am I supposed to know to Google “RA tech Gamers Nexus” if you don’t say who was involved?
Also yes I am going to question your hyperbolic and subject language like “tantrum”. It’s not manipulative for me to ask that. Typically a tantrum is used to describe toddlers stomping and falling to the floor screaming and crying. And when I look into it and find Gamers Nexus was harsh and critical, but not histrionic or emotional, I know you’re being subjective by saying he threw a tantrum. So I’m questioning your bias because your comments are filled with hyperbole (gospel enshrined by the Pope himself?? Really??)
Steve could have taken more time to hear RA Tech out or validate his tests or been nicer etc etc and handled it better. I personally am disappointed in his response. We shouldn’t treat anyone as above criticism, especially someone like Steve that people watch for his educational content. However, many other people also disagree with RA Tech. And when Steve commented, 90% of his comment was focusing on the technical aspects of why he disagreed. And I couldn’t find any discussion between the two past that, feel free to give more context or follow up if there is any.
I’m not going to say either Gamers Nexus or Hardware Unboxed had correct benchmarks, but the RA Tech video alone doesn’t disprove them because his testing methodology fundamentally lacks transparency. He didn’t say what resolution or setting he was testing at, he compared those unlabeled numbers with cropped screenshots of Gamers Nexus’ numbers. Gamers Nexus tests at different resolutions and settings, so saying you got better results is meaningless without that context. But RA Tech glosses over that by then shifting to comparing to his own simulated test of a 2 core 4 thread, which is a CPU that he artificially handicapped. And he entirely dismissed 1% lows for some reason? Saying FPS is good enough and pointing to an unlabeled graph that looks to be steady. But I can’t compare that graph to GN’s actual 1% low numbers. Which is especially silly because one benchmark showed GN got a better result than he did but the problem was in the 1% lows… which RA Tech didn’t test. So sure, GN and HU could have made mistakes. But RA Tech’s lack of transparency and amateur testing didn’t prove his point the way you think it does.
I do know that acting like this was some big drama moment or that Gamers Nexus’ entire credibility is destroyed by this one time he wasn’t super nice and patient while disagreeing with another YouTuber is disingenuous. Take all testing with a grain of salt, and don’t blindly believe what someone shows you in a YouTube video (Gamers Nexus or RA Tech)