System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2011: $2400 Performance PC

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
when i first saw "System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2011: $2400 Performance PC" first thing i thought was a x79 build, $2400 just for performance PC using a 2600k CPU i kinda cringe , i cant imagine how much more expensive it would be if u did it with a 3930k, yes i know it not a big different in performance between the two but was just wonder :)
 
When I saw how much power this thing sucks down, I was glad to see that it pretty well shows the law of diminishing returns. This does nothing to change my opinion that only where time is money, i.e. for professional use, is this kind of cost justified. Spending this amount of money just to play games is a waste of resources all around, from the money to buy the parts, to the expense of running it. For future high-end builds, please specify the professional and/or his/her software that this machine is being designed to run. Justify the GPU choice by throwing in a GPGPU application that can take advantage whatever was selected. BTW, it does LOOK great; nice case choice.

Also, as much as I understand the frustration with sacrifices, IMHO that's where the best lessons are.
Fun to read, yes, but just not practical. Hmmm, I guess that means the downvoting is about to begin...
 
[citation][nom]Novulux[/nom]So, I wait until tomorrow to enter?[/citation]

No, you're good today. It should start with today's story. I'll see if I can get that changed.
 
[citation][nom]one-shot[/nom]$2400 and no i7 3930K?[/citation]What, and ditch one of the graphics cards for a reduced average-performance score? 3930K didn't show up until after the system was ordered, but I stand with the first argument, there's just not enough performance to be gained using these specific apps.[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]For future high-end builds, please specify the professional and/or his/her software that this machine is being designed to run. Justify the GPU choice by throwing in a GPGPU application that can take advantage whatever was selected.[/citation]We try to add professional apps that at least a few thousand of our readers have access to, but I'll ping Chris for more. Basically we try to spend our money boosting our own apps and adding a few more is probably justified. Suggestions? [citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]BTW, it does LOOK great; nice case choice.[/citation]I was a little disappointed in my examination of the Arc Midi, that it's nowhere near as solid as the Arc Mini. I think it's because it's larger (so the bracing bends are further appart). As nice as the Arc Midi looks, the Antec Three Hundred is far sturdier at a similar size.[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]Also, as much as I understand the frustration with sacrifices, IMHO that's where the best lessons are.Fun to read, yes, but just not practical. Hmmm, I guess that means the downvoting is about to begin...[/citation]I almost voted you down for saying that... 😛
 
I can't find the storage benchmarks. Am I just overlooking them? I am thinking about getting the Crucial M4 for Christmas. It seems like a good overall value.
 
[citation][nom]MattMock[/nom]I can't find the storage benchmarks. Am I just overlooking them? I am thinking about getting the Crucial M4 for Christmas. It seems like a good overall value.[/citation]They're on the PCMark benchmark page. Tom's Hardware uses those four application-based results to calculate the storage score.
 
[citation][nom]stuffex[/nom]add battlefield 3 into the benchmarks please! i wanna see how the computer performs![/citation]Great! Now, any suggestion for benchmarks that might be somewhat common among readers that could highlight the value of a six-core CPU?
 
"I was a little disappointed in my examination of the Arc Midi, that it's nowhere near as solid as the Arc Mini. I think it's because it's larger (so the bracing bends are further appart). As nice as the Arc Midi looks, the Antec Three Hundred is far sturdier at a similar size."

Its also half the price.

Toms needs more current benchmarks, some of these games were talking are ages old. And need i say we need a RTS game in this mixture. I am a bit disappointed that the 3930k wasn't in this build along with a nice X79 board. Not that a 2600k processor isn't fast enough but you never know. I would rather pick up my six core but thats just me, and most likely it could be a waste. But like i said you never know, i remember SupCom came out and that required some CPU multi core power. Not sure how many cores were needed but a Quad was definitely better then a Dual core.
 
The love affair with nVidia continues. 3x 6950 can be had for substantial savings even while factoring a nf200 motherboard while providing increased performance and eliminating microstuttering. The inclusion of watercooled gpu/cpu setup while novel, is little more. The loss of a cpu HSF and no addition of spotcooler means your VRMs and memory are relying on just a single exhaust fan being pushed through a radiator for circulation. I know this was a 'no-sacrifice' build, in the end it just felt like an ill-planned money sink.
 
I would also like to see a comparison using three 6950s. Also, microstutter is gone with a triple card configuration.

Considering the price of the 2 gtx580s, 3 hd6950s might offer better value - as long as the game allows multi-gpus.
 
[citation][nom]Zeh[/nom]I would also like to see a comparison using three 6950s. Also, microstutter is gone with a triple card configuration.Considering the price of the 2 gtx580s, 3 hd6950s might offer better value - as long as the game allows multi-gpus.[/citation]

You can compare the two by using another article by Thomas Soderstrom that also utilizes the i7-2600k but is looking at SLI/Crossfire scaling.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/crossfire-sli-3-way-scaling,2865.html

In the 3 games that the two systems both had shared benchmarks, the 3x 6950 was the clear winner.
 
I guess it would have been nice to see what this 'gaming system' can do on a few more games we are actually playing not just games we use to bench.
 
nice build, but it looks like somewhere in the $2000-2400 range there is a definite loss in !/$, though it does still help with the ultra high end graphics on games like metro.

Toms, can we get some reviews on how the computers from each bracket compare year over year as a general summary to end the year out? I would love to see what $2000 gets you in 2010 vs 2011, and even 2009. My bet is that there would be some decent changes over the last 2 years as everything has droped in price with the exception of those peskey hard drives.
 
[citation][nom]Zeh[/nom]I would also like to see a comparison using three 6950s. Also, microstutter is gone with a triple card configuration.Considering the price of the 2 gtx580s, 3 hd6950s might offer better value - as long as the game allows multi-gpus.[/citation]After the failure of the Gigabyte board from the last SBM, this builder wanted to try the competitor from MSI. Upgrading to 3-way support would have required a far-more-expensive NF200-equipped motherboard to get the PCIe lane multiplication...and the Core i7-3930K wasn't available when the machine was ordered. So, maybe a 3930K next time using less-expensive 3-way CrossFire to recoup some of the extra money? That depends of course on availability and cost of competing solutions.
[citation][nom]a4mula[/nom]The love affair with nVidia continues.[/citation]I'd address the rest of your post but you've already proven yourself incapable of making an accurate statement. Tom's Hardware uses AMD graphics far more often in its SBM machines. Now go on to Tomorrows build and let's see if you claim a love affair with AMD...
 
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]...We try to add professional apps that at least a few thousand of our readers have access to, but I'll ping Chris for more. Basically we try to spend our money boosting our own apps and adding a few more is probably justified. Suggestions?...[/citation]
Aligning with the theme that this isn't a gaming PC, but is a professional's machine, who also wants to play games, I'd look at either video rendering or CAD/CAM. For the sake of those applications, that the pro would NEED, this may mean a workstation-class GPU, which will eat budget fast. Tossing in a HD6870 as an afterthought to play games TOO might be the sort of thing the graphics pro might want to try (assuming the drivers play nice together). Such a machine would no doubt be blown out in the gaming benchmarks, while remaining the most viable professional's choice.
 
[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]When I saw how much power this thing sucks down, I was glad to see that it pretty well shows the law of diminishing returns. This does nothing to change my opinion that only where time is money, i.e. for professional use, is this kind of cost justified. Spending this amount of money just to play games is a waste of resources all around, from the money to buy the parts, to the expense of running it. For future high-end builds, please specify the professional and/or his/her software that this machine is being designed to run. Justify the GPU choice by throwing in a GPGPU application that can take advantage whatever was selected. BTW, it does LOOK great; nice case choice.Also, as much as I understand the frustration with sacrifices, IMHO that's where the best lessons are.Fun to read, yes, but just not practical. Hmmm, I guess that means the downvoting is about to begin...[/citation]

I suppose you live in minimal housing without useless air conditioning and don't own a car, drink sodas, go to movies, watch television, waste your time reading Tomshardware articles when you could be working to save the starving children in Africa and trying to solve the Middle East conflict?

Puh-lease. I bet if I knew you, I could find a dozen ways you are "wasting resources" in your life, and you are too busy judging other people to know it. Here's a clue: life isn't just about doing what is practical, sometimes it's just about having fun, and, good news, you get to have fun your way, and I get to have fun mine.
 
I'm very impressed by the number of comments pointing out the diminishing returns found when building a "no compromise" system versus a more mainstream choice. If we give up SLI and overclocking, we can save $50 on the CPU, $75 on the motherboard, huge money on the graphics, and big money on the power supply. And we still end up with a machine that can play any modern game at 1080p with admirable fidelity. The monitor industry doesn't seem to be ready to provide us with high quality IPS 3d displays, and even with the way NV and ATI drag their feet anymore, technology moves fast and buying more beef than you can currently use almost never pays off. I just can't see any compelling reason to run a kilowatt beast right now.

BTW, good call on the Antec 300. No USB 3.0 up front sucks, but it's such an amazing case for $50 that I never see justification for spending more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom