System Builder Marathon, June 2010: System Value Compared

[Crashman]

Smaller budgets were the rule for this quarter’s System Builder Marathon, but better performance was the exception. How will this affect our multi-budget value comparison? Check out the performance results, and don't forget to register to win these boxes!

System Builder Marathon, June 2010: System Value Compared : Read more

 

[manitoublack]

Another great SBM. Goodluck to US Punters who get the chance to win theses systems. Look forward to the next round where Graphics hardware will take a step out of the lime light.

 

[wildeast]

marry me tom's

 

[touchdowntexas13]

It's interesting to see the performance/dollar shoot up for the $2000 pc when it comes to games. That just goes to show you how much of the budget went into graphics muscle. These machines were definitely built with gaming in mind.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]touchdowntexas13[/nom]It's interesting to see the performance/dollar shoot up for the $2000 pc when it comes to games. That just goes to show you how much of the budget went into graphics muscle. These machines were definitely built with gaming in mind.[/citation]
Yes, the only way to smash those benchmarks is with a faster CPU (2/3 of tests) or graphics (1/3 of tests). The problem with upgrading the CPU is that the 980X would cost 50% of the total budget. We haven't seen a big improvement in overclocking by using a higher-model quad-core i7

 

[touchdowntexas13]

[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]Yes, the only way to smash those benchmarks is with a faster CPU (2/3 of tests) or graphics (1/3 of tests). The problem with upgrading the CPU is that the 980X would cost 50% of the total budget. We haven't seen a big improvement in overclocking by using a higher-model quad-core i7[/citation]

Oh no I wasn't suggesting at all that you should have gone with a 980X for the $2000 build. That's way too expensive for a $2000 limit. The 930 does it's job just fine.

It just amazed me that two 470's in SLI were able to best the performance/dollar of the cheaper builds. Typically you see diminishing gains as you get into the more expensive components.

It was a very interesting set of articles any way you look at it. Gamers on a budget should especially be interested in this SBM.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]touchdowntexas13[/nom]It just amazed me that two 470's in SLI were able to best the performance/dollar of the cheaper builds. Typically you see diminishing gains as you get into the more expensive components.[/citation]I was pretty amazed too, but I really want to give credit to $1000 PC builder Don for making the GTX 470 SLI suggestion for the $2000 machine. Spot on Don!

 

[Tamz_msc]

Overall this month's SBM was good, especially the scalability of the 470s was brought into prominence.Though overclocking those in SLI is certainly not a viable option, unless one steals power from the Hoover Dam.

 

[Willroo]

Did anyone notice that the 858w microwave has a power supply rated for 750w.....sizzle.....pop.....anyone smell smoke...? Running f@h on that machine the power company would have to burn a ton of coal a day and you'd get threat mail from them when you cause a brown out. Ah....But all those PPD.

 

[Onus]

Interesting. Based on a previous article, an Athlon II X2 440 wouldn't be enough to let the 470s in SLI stretch out; I wonder what the minimum CPU there would be.
AND, since many of us found problems in these builds, if those were "fixed" (possibly costing more), those results would be useful too.
Lots of good information in this SBM round. Very nice.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]Willroo[/nom]Did anyone notice that the 858w microwave has a power supply rated for 750w.....sizzle.....pop.....anyone smell smoke...? Running f@h on that machine the power company would have to burn a ton of coal a day and you'd get threat mail from them when you cause a brown out. Ah....But all those PPD.[/citation]
Silverstone says it outputs 77 to 80% of what you input. That's 670W of power output at 858W power input. It's rated at 750W continuous power output, but don't let the facts get in the way of a rant, eh?

 

[dirtmountain]

Nice work on all the builds with some interesting choices. I would never have thought that a 1,000w power supply would really be needed for those 470s. I enjoyed reading about every build, nice work by the SBM crew.

 

[Onus]

I'd like to win any of these. The first just needs a quality PSU, then I'd give it to a family member. If I won one of the others, I'd probably do some parts swapping with my current system(s), keeping the result as my primary system and giving the other one to a family member, and would likely have a GPU left over for another system.

 

[Otus]

Moreover, the shockingly power-hungry $2,000 overclocked system offers a similarly-surprising 95% efficiency rating compared to our $550 baseline.

Image says 84%, which is rather less surprising.

 

[Poisoner]

Okay, we know Fermi uses a lot of power, big deal. So does the 4870. Damn Fermi jokes are already played out more than "Can it play Crysis?"

 

[shovenose]

i think the psu choices are a bit odd. the $550 needs a better psu, and the $2000 needs a bigger psu of the same quality...
but they are great otherwise!

 

[EnderYeah]

I love these system builder marathon articles! Keep up the great work!

 

[ta152h]

I'm still not sure the 720BE is tested right. Unlocking a core could be completely misleading for someone buying the CPU, because they might not be so lucky, and then are going to be disappointed. It might be more meaningful if the core wasn't used. It's also a little scary running one since CPUs don't always fail dramatically, and sometimes just failed a small test that might not reveal itself for a while, and give bad results later on. I'm not that comfortable with that.

But, perhaps more importantly, the 720BE might overclock better were it not for using the "bad" core. It's not that including the extra core results are so bad, but I think including the results without the core would have been very meaningful as well.

It's almost contradictory to say you may or may not unlock a core, so beware, and then not include results in the event you can't unlock the core. Even with the uncertainty with CPUs in terms of overclockability, this adds more than is necessary.

 

[rutoojinn]

This SBM mainly the budget gaming system is great, shows you don't have to break the bank to get a pretty adequate gaming system. Of course it is hard to please everyone at every level but this one did a decent job. I would also like to see the 5770 in crossfire and how that performs and hopefully the Nvidia GTX460 will be out for testing also.

 

[Pei-chen]

I normally support Intel and Nvidia but I gotta say this test isn't fair. 5830 is the worst value in AMD/ATI's line up while 470 is Nvidia's best value.

The $1000 would have a clear lead over the $2000 machine if it is paired with two 5770 or 5850.

 

[misha87]

i have a pc that almost like about 700$ it is a quad core and it is even better than the 1000$ dollar one it is faster

 

[Guest]

Is there any cost savings in buying a complete off the shelf system and upgrading certain components. I think this would make and interesting read: System modifier marathon!

 

[ta152h]

[citation][nom]Rob Robideau[/nom]Is there any cost savings in buying a complete off the shelf system and upgrading certain components. I think this would make and interesting read: System modifier marathon![/citation]

I don't know if there is, but once you start replacing things, you're probably not going to end up saving money, and probably cost yourself some. If you can just add stuff, maybe.

But, if you look a little closer, do you really want to trust the junk that HP, Dell, Apple, etc... put in their machines? To me, the most important component is the power supply, because if it goes bad, you're risking bigger failures downstream. And also a flaky power supply or one that isn't very close to spec can cause unreliability and premature failure. I need to know my power supply is good, and I would never get that feeling from a "big-name" maker. They can't communicate the value of that to customers easily, and so can't use these good parts as they add cost but little or no perceived value.

They also come with generally slow memory, again, because the average public isn't going to understand CL7 or CL9 memory. So they go with cheap. For small cache processors like the Athlon II x3 and x4 particularly, memory speed is significant, and they don't care about saving $2 even when it doesn't make sense. So, you'd have to toss it in many cases.

Also, do you feel comfortable using a weird HP/Dell/Lenovo etc... motherboard? I don't want that rubbish in my house. I'm much more comfortable with Intel, Supermicro, and strangely, Gigabyte than something from a big company that generally has fewer options and often weird BIOS screens. I also question the reliability, because, again, they are after cheap, not great quality.

So, there are a lot of reasons for wanting to build from scratch. In addition, for me, an additional one is I don't use a standard keyboard, so that's throwaway. Maybe you have a special mouse, or whatever. The point is, you have choices when you build your own, and throwing them away and trusting a big company isn't something I want to do. Do you?

 

[khicharkumar]

I want 2000 $ PC i.e 2000*50=INR 100000 for that i have to break a bank or to study hard (m in 10 STD) and get a good job............
Which did u all guys suggest?? .........

 

[Pei-chen]

[citation][nom]khicharkumar[/nom]I want 2000 $ PC i.e 2000*50=INR 100000 for that i have to break a bank or to study hard (m in 10 STD) and get a good job............Which did u all guys suggest?? .........[/citation]
How about getting the $550 system with a 5770? I am not in India nor really tight on money but still don't feel like spending that much just to play game. A sensible versatile computer makes much more sense.