System Builder Marathon, June 2012: $1000 Enthusiast PC

[roltzje]

Not digging this build as much, I guess seems too vanilla-gamer for me, and a bit outdated. Using a 2400 which is 18 mo old just doesnt sound good. I mean yea, they perform well, but still its not as exciting. Same goes for a 7970 vs a 670 which I've always seen available for 400-430.

That said, with this budget, its not as exciting. It's not like the $500 budget where you squeeze out as much performance as possible, nor the $2000 budget where you can beast computers with premium parts. Its basically just a good steady mainstream computer. Albeit this time heavy on the graphics.

 

[Sonny73N]

Here's my 1000 bucks system:

Antec one gaming case $49.99
Biostar TZ77B $99.99
I5-2500k $219.99
EVGA gtx 670 $399.99
Corsair CX600 600W PSU $59.99
OCZ Agility3 60GB SSD $54.99
WD Caviar Blue 1TB 7200rpm $99.99
Samsung DVD burner $16.99

Total: $1000.93

Mine or Tom's do you take?

 

[ddan49]

[citation][nom]cobra5000[/nom]Are you really that stupid?[/citation]
I can't believe this.

Anyway, I completely agree that this is a half-hearted attempt. Seriously, I'd probably rather go with an SLI setup or something like that. I mean, they could have AT LEAST waited for the 670 to come out. No one in their right mind is going to drop a HUGE amount on a GPU that doesn't really perform THAT well, and drop the rest of their components to the level of a $500 budget build. Also, I really don't like that they're basically testing out the previous build on a lower budget... it's the same build, essentially. Overall...

Meh

 

[Onus]

While I understand the desire to test the failings exposed or questions raised by a prior SBM build, I think a better way to do it would have been an article perhaps a week later. Call it "SBM: The Aftermath," and write about those failings and questions, and how they might be addressed in the future. Apply minor tweaks or substitutions, and retest. At the very least, it seems to me a better approach than essentially wasting another SBM build on it.
After all, just think what we would have missed if, instead of that quad Crossfire HD4850 build we got to see a few years ago, a few tweaks had been applied to retest the previous effort.

 

[bin1127]

In other words, this system is a test of the difference between 4gb and 8gb of ram.

 

[jgardner88]

I can't imagine anyone building a system this way. With that motherboard you have limited upgrades to improve performance over time. This build was clearly trying to get the most performance right now, in a specific area of performance, without any consideration for future improvements. Too much GPU not enough everything else.

 

[jgardner88]

[citation][nom]Sonny73N[/nom]Here's my 1000 bucks system:Antec one gaming case $49.99Biostar TZ77B $99.99I5-2500k $219.99EVGA gtx 670 $399.99Corsair CX600 600W PSU $59.99OCZ Agility3 60GB SSD $54.99WD Caviar Blue 1TB 7200rpm $99.99Samsung DVD burner $16.99 Total: $1000.93Mine or Tom's do you take?[/citation]

You could buy a i5-3570k for the same price. Micro Center has it on sale for $189.99.

 

[mayankleoboy1]

At the very least, it seems to me a better approach than essentially wasting another SBM build on it.

+1
Minor tweaks != a new SBM.

 

[mayankleoboy1]

if i were the writer of this article, i would forget this build and make a new mid-range SBM.

 

[supall]

[citation][nom]Sonny73N[/nom]Here's my 1000 bucks system:Antec one gaming case $49.99Biostar TZ77B $99.99I5-2500k $219.99EVGA gtx 670 $399.99Corsair CX600 600W PSU $59.99OCZ Agility3 60GB SSD $54.99WD Caviar Blue 1TB 7200rpm $99.99Samsung DVD burner $16.99 Total: $1000.93Mine or Tom's do you take?[/citation]

Tom's. Yours wouldn't even boot. No memory.

 

[spentshells]

I like it as a gaming PC all the money was spent in the right place the GPU

 

[Aquaquake]

That GPU is extreme overkill comparing to MB+Ram, but anyway, interesting article... Too bad that 7970 cost about $650 in our country T_T (Czech Rep.)

 

[jaquith]

Every time I read these comments it gets even funnier, and I'd love to see these folks in person hash it out.

I 'get' it's all about the Frame Rates ... Frame Rates ... and more Frame Rates! Whatever happened to the idea of Quality and Balanced systems?!

 

[lancelot123]

Where are you buying your parts? I can get (and I am) a 2500K for only $170, new. Not to mention a Gigabyte GA-Z68X-UD3H-B3 motherboard for $100.

 

[jjb8675309]

very unimpressed with this build... like someone said if it was my own money then I would have changed out every part just about

 

[burnley14]

We figured that PCMark would probably be the one suite that'd most clearly favor the system with an SSD. . . .In reality, it's hard to tell them apart, aside from the workloads where SSDs excel: boot-up, app-launch, and overall responsiveness.

So basically the whole time the computer is turned on? Sacrificing the SSD and RAM for unnecessary GPU muscle was a bad compromise. Because of that, my mainstream laptop from last year is faster than this system at basically everything but gaming. Not worth it.

 

[SevWarfare]

Terrible. I usually don't comment, but this is just bad. I have that GPU, and it's great. But Tom's could easily have gone with the 7950 OC version of this card or even a 7870. Saves $70 - $100. That would have made the 2500K and SSD available. That case just plain sucks. Really??? How many Rosewill cases would have fit the bill? It is Newegg after all.

 

[lamorpa]

[citation][nom]ddan49[/nom]May want to put "do" in there, instead[/citation]
Yeah. 'due', 'do', who's counting, right? Nice.

 

[Dragoon21b]

To be honest I don't envy you guys. Right now with so much change going on and so many supply problems in channel affecting prices and just basic availability trying to gauge price to performance ratios is a nightmare. I keep an eye on prices almost everyday and I have watched the prices of things creep up across the board over the last couple of months and not always for the obvious reasons. So good job on the experiment even if it's not ideal there is still no such thing as bad data.

 

[doowaditty]

remember kids, never actually try to build any of these system builder machines. you will be disappointed. they alwas over provision the gpu at the expense of the rest of the system. no one in their right mind would actually build this machine.

 

[eddieroolz]

I really dislike this build for much of the same reason as others; its way too lopsided for gaming, and even then it performs well but does not blow everything else out of water. More importantly, the less tangible things that can't be measured easily (look and feel, launch speed, etc) suffer significantly from the cost-cutting measures just to accommodate an overly powerful card.

If the PC is intended for gaming and just gaming, this would be fine. But I question the usability of this.

 

[lamorpa]

[citation][nom]doowaditty[/nom]remember kids, never actually try to build any of these system builder machines. you will be disappointed. they alwas over provision the gpu at the expense of the rest of the system. no one in their right mind would actually build this machine.[/citation]
...other than a kid, who is almost entirely interested in gaming performance (making your comment completely wrong)...

 

[Cazalan]

4GB is low for a gaming rig. It might be fine for quick benchmarks but the system will bog down with normal use which includes having a web browser open while gaming.

 

[rohitbaran]

I would say go to Radeon 7950, stick 4GB more RAM and then it will be a well balanced desktop.

 

[-Fran-]

Well, it seems we're getting to the point where the SBM MUST INCLUDE a monitor in the overall price.

The 7970 is a waste of money giving the almost 50% price of the overall system. This is not a balanced build and that needs to be addressed.

The benefit of getting a monitor is you could have more qualitative measuring of the whole build. Besides, you'll have a target resolution to tweak. In this particular case, you'll be targeting a MORE realistic scenario.

Cheers!