No paid bias
r/hardware banned UserBenchmark for documented anti-AMD bias. 9bench takes zero money from chip vendors. The scoring formula is on GitHub.
"Zero vendor money."
CPU + GPU + RAM, measured in your browser. No download. No login. No vendor money. Open methodology — every formula on the page.
~15 seconds · No login · Privacy-first · Cyan or Orange — your call (top right).
Three things every other benchmark gets wrong, and how 9bench fixes them.
r/hardware banned UserBenchmark for documented anti-AMD bias. 9bench takes zero money from chip vendors. The scoring formula is on GitHub.
"Zero vendor money."
Geekbench, Cinebench, 3DMark, PassMark all need 500 MB–8 GB and admin rights. Useless on corporate networks, schools, shared computers.
"0 MB to test."
We tell you when our number is approximate. RAM is browser-sandboxed. We say so loudly instead of pretending our number is gospel.
"We say what we can't measure."
" Every formula. Every constant. Every weight. If you find a flaw, file an issue. We ship the patch the same week. "
Paste any 9bench result URL or 8-char hash to view the full breakdown. Every result includes CPU, GPU, and RAM scores, global percentile ranking, and a shareable link. You can also compare two results side-by-side or check the global leaderboard to see how your hardware stacks up.
9bench is a free, open-source browser-based hardware benchmark that tests your CPU, GPU, and RAM speed in about 15 seconds — no download, no installation, no account required. The entire benchmark runs locally in your browser using WebGPU compute shaders, WebAssembly, Web Workers, and the Web Crypto API. Results include a global percentile ranking against all submitted scores.
The overall score uses a weighted geometric mean:
overall = exp(0.35 × ln(GPU) + 0.45 × ln(CPU_multi) + 0.20 × ln(RAM)) This means 35% GPU, 45% CPU multi-core, 20% RAM. A single weak component cannot be masked by strong ones — the geometric mean penalizes imbalance. Every formula is documented on the methodology page.
| Feature | 9bench | Geekbench 6 | UserBenchmark | Cinebench |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | Free | Free / $9.99 Pro | Free | Free |
| Download required | No (browser) | 500 MB | 80 MB (.exe) | 800 MB |
| Test duration | ~15 seconds | 5-10 minutes | 2-3 minutes | 10+ minutes |
| Works on locked PCs | Yes | No (admin) | No (admin) | No (admin) |
| Open methodology | Yes (MIT) | Partial | No | No |
| Vendor bias | None | None | Documented anti-AMD | None |
| GPU + CPU + RAM | All three | CPU + GPU | All three | CPU only |
| Mobile support | iOS, Android (GPU test where WebGPU is available) | iOS, Android | Windows only | macOS, Windows |
| Measures native peak performance | No — browser execution path (validation data) | Yes | Yes (biased weighting) | Yes |
| Published validation incl. own failures | Yes | No | No | No |
On the other hand, native benchmarks like Geekbench and Cinebench are more accurate for absolute peak measurement. If you need precise single-core IPC numbers for a hardware review, you should use Geekbench. If you need instant, zero-friction relative comparison across machines — try 9bench. The two approaches complement each other.
Scores are calibrated to hardware. Across the 2,500+ fully-measured runs submitted as of , the median score is 526 and the top 5% exceed 2,148 — real figures from the live database, not projections. (An earlier version of this paragraph claimed a median of ~1200; that number predated the data.) A single weak component cannot be masked by strong ones because the composite uses a geometric mean.
| Tier | Score range | Typical hardware (2026) |
|---|---|---|
| S-tier (top 5%) | 4000+ | Apple M5 Max, Ryzen 9 9950X3D + RTX 5090 |
| A-tier | 2500–4000 | Apple M4 Pro, Ryzen 9 7950X + RTX 4080 |
| Strong mainstream | 1700–2500 | Apple M3 Pro, Ryzen 7 7800X3D + RTX 4070 |
| Mid-range | 1000–1700 | Ryzen 7 5800X, mid-tier 2024 laptops |
| Mainstream / older | 500–1000 | Older laptops, integrated GPUs |
| Office / Chromebook | <500 | Chromebooks, older office laptops |
For example, a 2024 MacBook Pro M3 Pro typically scores around 2100 in 9bench — placing it firmly in the "Strong mainstream" bracket. A budget Chromebook with an integrated GPU usually lands below 400.
In 2019, r/hardware and r/pcmasterrace banned UserBenchmark.com for documented anti-AMD bias (source). Their scoring formula systematically over-weights single-core Intel performance, producing rankings that independent reviewers flagged as misleading.
9bench was built as a transparent alternative: every formula and weight is published on the methodology page and in the MIT-licensed source code. No vendor has paid or can pay to influence the scoring.
9bench uses WebGPU for the GPU sub-score, as defined in the W3C WebGPU specification. Browsers with full WebGPU support:
Without WebGPU, the CPU and RAM tests still run. The GPU shows "not measured" (never zero), the overall score is rebalanced over CPU + RAM, and the run is ranked against other CPU+RAM runs rather than the main leaderboard. It isn't only old browsers: Android GPU-vendor allowlists and Linux builds are affected too, so a current Chrome is no guarantee.
You should follow these steps to get the most reliable scores from 9bench:
Use 9bench if you want to quickly compare machines (for example, "is this 5-year-old laptop worth upgrading?"), test hardware in corporate environments where installing software is restricted, or share benchmark results via a permalink without creating an account.
Use Geekbench if you need absolute peak scores for a hardware review. Use Cinebench for sustained multi-core rendering performance numbers. Use 3DMark for gaming-specific GPU benchmarks. 9bench doesn't replace any of them and doesn't try to: it fills the gap they leave — the machine you can't install anything on, the 15 seconds you actually have, the "can this thing run local AI?" question none of them answer. Different job, honestly labelled.
Accurate at ranking machines against each other — reliably so for GPU, currently not for CPU. 9bench measures what your hardware delivers through the browser: a WebGPU compute shader, a Web Crypto hash chain, TypedArray memory traffic. These are not native figures and are not comparable to Geekbench or Cinebench numbers. We tested two laptops against Geekbench 7 (n=2, one run each): the GPU ranking agreed, both CPU rankings came out inverted. The CPU test is dominated by browser crypto-call overhead rather than by the CPU. Data, cause and fix status are in the methodology. A previous version of this answer claimed 'within 3-10% of native' — that was never verified and has been retracted.
UserBenchmark is community-banned by r/hardware and r/pcmasterrace for documented anti-AMD bias. 9bench takes zero vendor money, publishes all scoring formulas openly, and is MIT-licensed open source.
Partly. Safari 26+ on iOS/iPadOS has WebGPU. On Android it depends on the GPU vendor and Android version, not just the Chrome version — many phones have it switched off. Those devices run the CPU + RAM tests and get a clearly-labelled CPU+RAM-only score.
During the test: nothing leaves your browser. Score submission is opt-in. Submitted data is anonymous: benchmark numbers, GPU adapter name if visible, CPU core count, shortened user-agent. No IP, no cookies, no fingerprints.
9bench runs entirely in your browser — server cost is near zero (Cloudflare D1 free tier). No tracking, no ads, no premium upsell. The core benchmark stays free forever.
About 15 seconds for the full CPU + GPU + RAM test. No download or installation required — just open the page and click Start.