Well if he’s talking about a gen 1 1600 vs a 10660 at a benchmark that is made to show CPU strength it could be. But that isn’t a practical test and is disingenuous as fuck.
Since he refuses to provide his evidence basically all I can assume is he’s looking at numbers from a sheet by Gamer’s Nexus which they’ve already given ample caution to reading too much into the stat and he doesn’t want to call himself out.
Is that lying? Maybe. Bad faith? Absolutely. But hey as long as ‘50-100% in some games’ is nebulous he can sit in smugness.
I try and defend Leonidas when possible. Is it accurate to say that in CPU Limited situations that Intel will give you the highest framerates? In most instances, yes. Sure. We can acknowledge that. That has value to ultra competitive gamers who want the highest framerates possible.
But I'd say that many gamers looking to upgrade are looking into 1440p - 4K gaming. That's were Intel's advantage is neglible and in many cases non-existent. The savings of going with AMD that can be put toward a better GPU provide a far greater gaming advantage.
I have not seen any recent gaming benchmarks that show 50% - 100% advantage for Intel. 5-10% in some instances at 1080p? Yes, I see that. The only game where the 10% threshold is approached is with Farcry New Dawn. That game for some reason does not like AMD CPUs. Everything else 5% difference is accurate.
Keep in mind that average is being skewed a little bit by Farcry New Dawn.
Jumping up to 1440p reduces the average frame rate and 1% low margin to just 5%, so while the 10700K is clearly faster for gaming, it’s not that much faster and in most instances you won’t notice the difference.
50% - 100% is straight up bullshit and Leonidas needs to be called out on it.