System Builder Marathon: $1,250 Mid-Range PC

[DXRick]

Ach!!

I just realized you only used 3G RAM in an i7 build! Now I too am wondering if a Q9550 build with 4G RAM would be better!?!?

 

[jthorn]

Fun article (again) and very well done. One sentence that stood out is the authors conclusion that the Q9550 would be an interesting study for the mid-range and readers point this out too. There are too many processor choices between the 8XXX series and the I7. Too big of a jump for one month. Downgrading the GPU challenges the reader to be open-minded - but that is all good and the authors reasons are all sound. I like how I7 was shown to be a viable mid-price build maybe for everything but gaming. That says "good job Intel" - again. I still think mid-price build is all about 'most bang for the buck' and 'mainstream'. I am not sure I7, 2X4870, water-cooling, and SLI/crossfire qualifies in this category. I think high end build should be reserved for those components at least until the cpu and gpu prices drop. Overclocking is fair game for all three categories. Thanks again TH.

 

[avatar_raq]

Some of my thoughts
(1)What I and many readers liked about Nov.SBM was the flexible price points, back then you shifted from 1500$ to 1250$, and I think now it's relevant to shift back to the 1500 point, which can afford a 4870X2 and a decent CPU cooler.
(2)Hardware for corei7 systems are still immature, and is not suitable for a mid-range built, they are new and designed around "to be or not to be" philosophy. Unless a P55 overclocking friendly mid-range mobos become popular, it is very early to use core i7 in anything but high-end 4500$+ PC...And your article is the proof..Thanks for it.
(3)The only obvious advantage over last month's build is the future upgradibility. Sooner or Later socket 1366 CPUs will fill the market and LGA775 ones will be obsolete. At that day you'll wish you chose an X58 mobo!!

 

[falcompsx]

i'd love to see a productivity based comparison of two systems equal in price between core2 quad and the core i7, all other components being as close to the same as possible.

 

[NuclearShadow]

Because of the 4870 X2 clearly aiding the last build this was a bit unfair to the I7 build. You should have just done a third setup with a I7 with a 4870 X2 just to see how it would preform. This would have shown any true advantages that the I7 may have.

Though to be honest it would probably be a better investment to wait till the I7's mature before getting one anyways.

 

[Hothr]

You know, I'd really like to be able to compare these builds with some older builds to see how much performance/price has increased. Is there anyway we can get some "Legacy" benchmarks like FEAR, Doom 3, or Oblivion like what was used int this System Builder Marathon from May 2007 . It is unlikely you still have those systems around, otherwise you could run current benchmarks on them.

 

[zodiacfml]

still like the core i7, i'll just endure the less FPS on crysis than sacrifice twice performance on quadcore apps.
also, i'll get a single hd 4870 over that 4850 x2.

 

[caamsa]

[citationSooner or Later socket 1366 CPUs will fill the market and LGA775 ones will be obsolete. At that day you'll wish you chose an X58 mobo!![/citation]

I doubt 775 will be obsolete that quickly. I would be willing to bet we will see the predecessor of the i7 before 775 becomes obsolete.

 

[bourgeoisdude]

avatar_raq said: "Hardware for corei7 systems are still immature, and is not suitable for a mid-range built, they are new and designed around "to be or not to be" philosophy. "

I agree, but at the same time I'm glad Tom's decided to try it. It gives us something to compare the previous and future mid-range builds to.

Additionally, I also agree they should try the Core 2 Quad Q9550 in the next round.

 

[c0olking]

I would like to know how you find out how much Watt a system is using. Thank you. Ü

 

[thomasxstewart]

Nice to see Ultimate succeed in so many builds, yet price is bit stilted, especially on low end by Not Including cost of ultimate 32. 13,000 vantage isn't bad, yet its bit light, of course faster card isn't much to boost to push it up notch.

SignedHYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART von DRASHEK M.D.

 

[thomasxstewart]

Opps, took look at card & its already at Top 4870 X2. Shouldbust 20,000, maybe even 30,000 3d Vantage with crossfireX & 3 cards, where real action is at.

SignedHYSICIAN THOMAS STEWART von DRASHEK M.D.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]DXrick[/nom]Ach!! I just realized you only used 3G RAM in an i7 build! Now I too am wondering if a Q9550 build with 4G RAM would be better!?!?[/citation]

Most systems with 32-bit operating systems can barely access more than 3GB anyway!

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]avatar_raq[/nom]it is very early to use core i7 in anything but high-end 4500$+ PC...And your article is the proof..Thanks for it.[/citation]

Jumping to conclusions? Read tomorrow's article!

 

[joelg88]

When will you guys post a Benchmark of the Performance of Flight Sim X with the Core i7. We all know that game is like pure CPU and no GPU so that would be nice to see.

 

[weinheimer]

Good article, I like the series... but Q9550 is best comparison option for I7 920

 

[enewmen]

I think (most) THG readers know a 64 bit CPU is needed to see the benifit of more than 3.5 gigs RAM.

 

[kenratboy]

Nice write up.

This is VERY useful to people who want to build a system and see what they are really going to get. Thanks and keep up with these monthly marathons!

 

[megamanx00]

I'm not sure if this one even counts since they picked a case that couldn't even fit the components they chose. Never skimp on the case or PSU. Yeah I think getting a Q9550or E8400 and overclocking them along with a 4870X2 and a bigger case is the way to go. For $1500 I really think they should have gone with at least a single 1TB Hard Drive, but that's just me.

 

[coopchennick]

Megamanx00,

As though that little hitch completely invalidates the whole article... You have to realize the 4850 X2 is massive and if they had to move the HDD in order fit it in a case consistent with the given budget, big frickin whoop. I think the team did a fine job with this one.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]Megamanx00[/nom]I'm not sure if this one even counts since they picked a case that couldn't even fit the components they chose. [/citation]

But, er... it DID fit. Just had to mod a little.

 

[DXRick]

[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]Most systems with 32-bit operating systems can barely access more than 3GB anyway![/citation]

I just can't imagine someone building a Core i7 system and not using 6G RAM and Vista 64-bit. It's like putting a Ferrari engine into a Honda Civic. (I could not come up with a better analogy.)

 

[rickpatbrown]

It is unfortunate that we don't get to see what the i7 could have done with the 4870x2 and after market cooling, but I understand the writer's need to stay in budget.

Definitely need to switch to Vista64 for standard OS in system builds. Even for DDR2 systems, it is rare to see less than 4GB in a system plus the VRAM.

Good job on the write-up.

-Still sad about Tom's Games.

 

[zodiacfml]

i think the better analogy is filling gas to your Ferrari with half the capacity of the fuel tank.
not fully utilized fuel tank and less range, but gives the same performance.

[citation][nom]DXrick[/nom]I just can't imagine someone building a Core i7 system and not using 6G RAM and Vista 64-bit. It's like putting a Ferrari engine into a Honda Civic. (I could not come up with a better analogy.)[/citation]

 

[avatar_raq]

[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]Jumping to conclusions? Read tomorrow's article![/citation]
Well that's how I see things. Let's be honest, very few people -if any- buy a 1200$+ PC for anything other than gaming, and sacrificing gaming performance by downgrading the GPU to afford better CPU is irrelevant, therefore you either choose a Core2 1200$ system or raise your price point to include core i7 without sacrifice. Wait! did you mean by tomorrow's article the high-end build of SBM? I'd like to see that!!