System Builder Marathon, August 2012: $1000 Enthusiast PC

[g-unit1111]

[citation][nom]lighter17[/nom]What's going on with the processor price. The i5-3570k is $230 not $300. Then there's no mention of the CPU cooler in the price list. And you're pairing an Ivy Bridge CPU with a P67 motherboard to save a few dollars?Does anybody proofread these articles?[/citation]

Not only that I'm really wondering why they chose that particular board. P67 is really old now and you can't pair it with a 3570K without having an existing CPU in the motherboard to update the BIOS - for most people that won't be feasible. And what's with the case choices on these builds as well?

 

[niknikktm]

"Who on earth buys a freaking motherboard that does not support your proc out of the box???????????"

That's the 800 lb gorilla in this builds room. There's just no defending this build with that monster staring you down.

 

[jaquith]

Anyone giving me (-1) on page 2 or here for stating the following (see quote below) needs to explain themselves? It's a serious problem to have an incompatible CPU and MOBO, and there's no upside just wasted costs and time. Very few folks have a spare Sandy Bridge CPU handy to fix their brand new MOBO.

In the forums I see P67/Z68 MOBO + Ivy Bridge CPU's problems all of the time, it's a disappointment and a costly fix.

First no surprise. It's frigging buried and not where I expected it to be, and it should be on the first page (WARNING) or by the MOBO info.

Deceptive Add $50+ to the build cost for anyone trying to copy this build. $10 TIM and $41 Intel Celeron G440 as a Donor CPU/RMA Shipping + Time/Repair Shop Costs.

Therefore, instead of that waste for 99.9999% of the people use a Z75/Z77 MOBO. The real total build cost is $100+ over the ($1000) budget.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]niknikktm[/nom]"Who on earth buys a freaking motherboard that does not support your proc out of the box???????????"That's the 800 lb gorilla in this builds room. There's just no defending this build with that monster staring you down.[/citation]

Wow. You guys have really fixated on this, huh?

This is part of the reality of system builds, gentlemen. And if you've never come across this issue, you haven't built many systems. It comes up time and time again, even when new CPUs are introduced to the same family line, not necessarily just when die shrinks or new architectures are involved.

Essentially, you can either deal with it, or wait until the old motherboard stock is gone.

BIOS updates are part of the reality of building systems, plain and simple. Anybody who tells you otherwise either doesn't build systems, or only builds with old tech.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]cknobman[/nom]There is no valid reason why the builder should not have used a Z77.[/citation]

There is a perfectly valid reason. A few actually, you simply don't see them or agree with them.

The ASRock board has a good overclocking rep, it's cheap, and it does the job.

Oh, and it works awesome by the way. Excellent overclock? Check. Low price? Check. Great performance? Check.

Valid? Check.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]TeraMedia[/nom]@I'm disappointed in the over-budget expenditures. I like pushing the limit, but going this far over wasn't necessary. [/citation]

As a rule I agree with you, but when I shoehorn the system into the budget and cut the stuff that doesn't affect benchmark performance (SSD and 8 GB of RAM) I get more complaints than I did this time around.

And I'm not going to cut things that *do* affect performance, such as the graphics card. So this is where we are as a result.

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]niknikktm[/nom]"Who on earth buys a freaking motherboard that does not support your proc out of the box???????????"That's the 800 lb gorilla in this builds room. There's just no defending this build with that monster staring you down.[/citation]
Sure there is. We use retail hardware. There's no way to know if a board has the latest firmware on it until we try it out. There's nothing wrong with P67. Don gave a good deal a shot and discovered that there are still boards with old firmware on them four months after Ivy Bridge was announced. That's good information to know, and perhaps it'll warrant spending extra money on a newer board in the future to work around (at the expense of some other subsystem).

As far as going over budget by 5.7% is concerned, I think most reasonable folks would do the same if it meant stepping up to an entirely different level of performance. Worth it for the K-series chip? I think so. Worth it for the GTX 670? Yes (the 660 Ti was not out yet, but even if it was, I don't see it getting the recommendation). Worth it for a 60 GB SSD? Again, I agree with Don's decision to add that, too.

Different strokes.
Chris

 

[zakaron]

Just curious about the CPU cooler fan - looks like it is configured as a puller and directed toward the rear exhaust fan. Is there any advantage versus having it push air through the cooler? I mean it obviously works because the temps on the graph are very reasonable. Most setups I see configure it as a pusher through the cooler toward the rear exhaust.

Anyway, I do agree that guys like myself who do not have a lot of extra hardware laying around would be stuck with a non-booting system if using this cpu + mobo combination.

I do feel bad though because the author stated at the beginning that he was appeasing to those who flamed him last time for not using 8GB RAM and wanting to see the GTX 670 in the next build, now slam him for using this card and going over budget. Poor guy can't win! To be honest, there are ways of cutting this budget down if you truly can't go over $1000 and still wish to keep the core components in place. He built the system around this and I give him credit for doing so. I mean if you went to a car dealer and found the *perfect* car, but it was $100 over, would you not come up with the extra cash anyway you could? If you really could not pony up an extra $57 when you're already putting down $1000, then cut down the ram to 4GB (yes that's still plenty) and leave out the SSD. Or opt for a non K series cpu.

 

[manojpraman]

I would rather have below -

PCPartPicker part list: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/ffjQ
Price breakdown by merchant: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/ffjQ/by_merchant/
Benchmarks: http://pcpartpicker.com/p/ffjQ/benchmarks/

CPU: Intel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz Quad-Core Processor ($189.99 @ Microcenter)
CPU Cooler: Xigmatek LOKI SD963 52.0 CFM CPU Cooler ($19.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Pro4 ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($117.86 @ Newegg)
Memory: Mushkin Blackline 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($42.99 @ NCIX US)
Storage: OCZ Agility 4 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk ($69.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: EVGA GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2GB Video Card ($299.99 @ Amazon)
Case: Antec Three Hundred ATX Mid Tower Case ($46.90 @ Amazon)
Power Supply: Corsair 650W ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply ($89.99 @ NCIX US)
Optical Drive: Pioneer BDR-206DBKS Blu-Ray/DVD/CD Writer ($94.99 @ NCIX US)
Total: $972.69
(Prices include shipping and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2012-08-21 15:23 EDT-0400)

 

[jaquith]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Wow. You guys have really fixated on this, huh?This is part of the reality of system builds, gentlemen. And if you've never come across this issue, you haven't built many systems. It comes up time and time again, even when new CPUs are introduced to the same family line, not necessarily just when die shrinks or new architectures are involved.Essentially, you can either deal with it, or wait until the old motherboard stock is gone. BIOS updates are part of the reality of building systems, plain and simple. Anybody who tells you otherwise either doesn't build systems, or only builds with old tech.[/citation]
That's simply not true. It's more a Noob error not first checking the BIOS version that's printed on the box and/or label on the MOBO before slapping it all together.

Again, as stated I have no problem with an IB on an older LGA 1155 MOBO e.g. P67, but make it clear in the Article and don't bury the 'oversight.' Someone is going to clone your build and be very unhappy.

Now if the MOBO had tech like ASUS's BIOS Flashback and there's a BIOS supporting the CPU in question then it's no big deal. Frankly, I wish ASUS would license 'BIOS Flashback' to all MOBO MFG's.

Again, I have lost count how many FX & IB Post Failures I've answered in the forum due to the shipping BIOS not supporting the CPU. Sadly telling the folks they'll need to spend more to correct the problem goes over like a lead balloon. This build simply will add more frustrated folks in the forum.

 

[roflmaonow]

FYI for those advocating SMART SSD Caching. If I remember correctly, the P67 boards don't support it. Only Z68 and above chipsets are what supports SSD Caching.

 

[lp231]

There is another IB chipset called the Z75, still allows for ocing.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813157304
The Z77 just have Virtu MVP, but it's not even a exclusive feature for the Z75/Z77.
Asus has Virtu MVP on almost all their IB chipset line up, inlcluding the B75.

 

[rockstar_7]

Should have bought the 660ti instead of skimping on the mobo and psu!!

 

[niknikktm]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Wow. You guys have really fixated on this, huh?This is part of the reality of system builds, gentlemen. And if you've never come across this issue, you haven't built many systems. It comes up time and time again, even when new CPUs are introduced to the same family line, not necessarily just when die shrinks or new architectures are involved.Essentially, you can either deal with it, or wait until the old motherboard stock is gone. BIOS updates are part of the reality of building systems, plain and simple. Anybody who tells you otherwise either doesn't build systems, or only builds with old tech.[/citation]

Got news for you: I'm not a noob and have built too many systems to count and this doesn't happen to me. If it's routine for you then I have to wonder how much research you put into your builds. As someone else pointed out, you can determine whether or not you will have a bios issue ahead of time, but thats not even the point. The point is, this is not someone just working on a build at home or in the office. This is someone performing a build for the specific reason of posting an article on the best build for a $1000 budget. Big difference there. He should have corrected the mistake and noted it in the article.

 

[pepsimtl]

For me i replace ssd 60gb (is to small ), go to 128 gb ,
replace 670 for 660ti ,save 100.00 $ to put on ssd
Benchmark 670 vs 660ti http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1710936&mpage=1

 

[Onus]

[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]...As far as going over budget by 5.7% is concerned, I think most reasonable folks would do the same if it meant stepping up to an entirely different level of performance...[/citation]
No. A builder may or may not be able to do that. Comment on it, but leave the budget in place. In this case, backing off on the graphics card would have still permitted excellent, playable performance in all the games tested, and the drop in benchmarks would have made no real world difference.
[citation][nom]roflmaonow[/nom]FYI for those advocating SMART SSD Caching. If I remember correctly, the P67 boards don't support it. Only Z68 and above chipsets are what supports SSD Caching.[/citation]
Exactly, which is why so many of us don't understand why a Z68 or Z77 board wasn't used, possibly with an even smaller SSD.

 

[Onus]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]...And if you've never come across this issue, you haven't built many systems...[/citation]
A little too condescending, methinks, not to mention untrue...
[citation][nom]niknikktm[/nom]Got news for you: I'm not a noob and have built too many systems to count and this doesn't happen to me.[/citation]
Exactly. This is the difference between cutting edge and bleeding edge. Any builder who has done his research has observed at least one such tale of woe, and takes steps to ensure it doesn't happen to him (or her). At the end of the day though, I think some "ground rules" should be set regarding what sort of "off-budget" parts are available to correct such issues. After all, if you've got a spare $125 CPU lying around, why not a $30 external optical drive, a $10 fan, a $5 cable extension, or...
Here's an article idea then: stock the PC Builders' tool and parts box. Set a few budgets, and have at it.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]Rockstar_7[/nom]Should have bought the 660ti instead of skimping on the mobo and psu!![/citation]

Skimp on graphics instead? Not much better at all.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]pepsimtl[/nom]For me i replace ssd 60gb (is to small ), go to 128 gb ,replace 670 for 660ti ,save 100.00 $ to put on ssdBenchmark 670 vs 660ti http://www.evga.com/forums/tm.aspx?m=1710936&mpage=1[/citation]

The 670 is a memory-bandwidth bottle-necked card. The 660 TI is a 670 with a 25% greater memory bandwidth bottle-neck. The 7950 would have been a better way to go than the 670 and especially the 660 TI which wasn't even available at the time.

 

[TeraMedia]

As for the no-post mobo issue:

Sometimes even researching your parts won't help. The A9DA I mentioned earlier was marketed as supporting Phenom II X6. No footnote. No asterisk. No fine print. But when it arrived from NewEgg, that "support" meant that it could be made to work - not that it worked already.

I like jtt283's idea of a SBM parts bin. It should include a couple of basic CPUs (AMD and Intel), a basic memory stick (DDR3 for now), a basic DVD ROM drive, fans, extension cables, a 32 GB flash drive, drive adapter brackets (e.g. 2.5-3.5", 3.5-5.25"), standard SATA cables, power splitter cables, etc. Any time the builder has to "borrow" a part (e.g. a CPU to flash BIOS), he has to add 10% of the cost of that part as a support fee. Any time he has to "use" a part (e.g. a fan, extension cable, conversion device, bracket, power adapter cable, etc.), he has to add the full cost of that part to the build. Since current THG build prices don't include shipping, it makes sense not to include shipping costs on spare parts either.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]Again, as stated I have no problem with an IB on an older LGA 1155 MOBO e.g. P67, but make it clear in the Article and don't bury the 'oversight.' [/citation]

Dedicating a paragraph to it isn't burying it.

Once again, dealing with BIOS incompatibilities is a standard part of building PCs. It's inescapable. And it's been going on since you could swap CPUs.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]niknikktm[/nom]Got news for you: I'm not a noob and have built too many systems to count and this doesn't happen to me.[/citation]

Then you're lucky, or build old stuff.

It's not rocket science. Sometimes you have to flash to accommodate cutting edge tech. If you don't know that going in, then you've learned something new today.

 

[TeraMedia]

I suspect a lot of the posters who are unhappy with how the BIOS issue was handled have faced that same issue, but didn't have a spare CPU lying around. It certainly doesn't leave the victim in a very forgiving mood. Yes it's a risk from using cutting-edge tech, but if the risk has a cost then that cost should be factored in too, when it rears its ugly head. If you are going to benefit from taking the risk, you should accept the penalty of the associated cost. Otherwise, you're approach is no better than the WS bankers that put everyone else's money at risk so that they could make high bonuses when the risks paid off - and accept no responsibility when the risks came to roost.

 

[Augray37]

I think if you are going to make a dedicated gaming machine, such as this one, then you need either 120GB or more for an SSD or none at all. 60GB can only help with boot times and maybe a game or two, and therefore seems like it would be a better fit for an all-purpose machine, not one with an unlocked Intel CPU and one of the fastest GPUs available.

 

[cknobman]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Wow. You guys have really fixated on this, huh?This is part of the reality of system builds, gentlemen. And if you've never come across this issue, you haven't built many systems. It comes up time and time again, even when new CPUs are introduced to the same family line, not necessarily just when die shrinks or new architectures are involved.Essentially, you can either deal with it, or wait until the old motherboard stock is gone. BIOS updates are part of the reality of building systems, plain and simple. Anybody who tells you otherwise either doesn't build systems, or only builds with old tech.[/citation]

I understand defending your build and its not the end of the world about the z67 board.

With that said though I have built a lot of systems (for a lot of people) and the very first thing I have always done is check compatibility before making a purchase. Can I say I have never bought something that is not compatible? NO but when its not compatible I take it back to the store and get something that is.

What you did is perfectly fine for anyone with an extra processor (that just so happens to be compatible with the mobo) lying around. Reality is that most people dont have that luxury epsecially someone building their first rig.

Your build worked great and performed awesome but there is no way I would recommend following what you did to anyone building their rig.