System Builder Marathon: Low Cost System

[retro77]

I'm about to buy this:
Case: COOLER MASTER Centurion 5 CAC-T05-UW Black $49.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811119068

Mobo: GIGABYTE GA-MA78GM-S2H $99.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128090

PSU: Thermaltake Purepower RX W0144RU 600W $109.99 [Modular]
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817153049
-$20 MIR...

Memory: G.SKILL 4GB $79.90
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231122

CPU: AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ Brisbane 2.6GHz $84.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103194

$477.23 with tax and shipping

Any last suggestions?
-No I am not going to switch to a C2D
-Yes I have an HD already
-When the Quads drop below $100 I'll buy one
-When funds become available I'll buy a video card to do the hybrid CrossFire

 

[zenmaster]

^Agreed. Smiler to mine i posted before, and good quality parts.

@Everyone: Do NOT just focus on the BUDGET! You should also focus on the QUALITY. For example MisterChef's build has a low quality PSU and open box items(open box items do not contain CD, cables,etc) .

And to add to that, can't build an article around Sales, Open Box, etc.....
They fluctuate too greatly. Rather you need to build around general prices.

Clearly when as a consumer when you get ready to build, you will be shopping sales, possibly open box, rebates, etc.. etc to make your final selection they are not the most what you need to focus on while building a system.

 

[Shadow703793]

^Agreed.

 

[Iain1974]

I wonder if a better theme for these build articles might be 'What does $750 buy?' (and $1500/2500/4000). It might be interesting to be able to compare $1500 benches over 2/3yrs for example.

As for the cost of including a monitor/keyboard/mouse/OS we're looking at approx $250-300 which would be a very significant addition in any sub-$1k system. However, thats the reality of building a system as far as most people are concerned so I think it should be factored into the price. Obviously in a $2500 system a more expensive monitor would be more suitable so it'd be more like a $2K system the way Tom's has it set up currently.

It might also be interesting to see what % of the build price each component costs. CPU 21%, Mobo 16% or whatever it happens to be per build.

Just a few thoughts.

 

[sojrner]

@Shadow703793 and zenmaster: Agreed

 

[jhangil]

Where did you get the DVD drive for the system. I can' t find it any where.... Can you provide a link please.

 

[krisia2006]

System is great, but it's not low cost...

I think "build a system for my inlaws" when I see low cost.
Quad core, you gotta be kidding me.
And a third party CPU cooler? I stopped reading there.

 

[sojrner]

...I stopped reading there.

then stop posting also... to not read something and then complain about what it does or doesn't contain... uneducated idiocy.

 

[dspear]

Two tips about buying cheap;

Mail-in rebates require cutting and mailing the UPC label, which will eliminate any possibility of returning the product to the store.

I would never buy an open-box mobo, as there is no guarantee you will receive the rear panel shield. The cables, driver DVD, etc, are all replacable, but the shield is not.

 

[zenmaster]

Two tips about buying cheap;

Mail-in rebates require cutting and mailing the UPC label, which will eliminate any possibility of returning the product to the store.

I would never buy an open-box mobo, as there is no guarantee you will receive the rear panel shield. The cables, driver DVD, etc, are all replacable, but the shield is not.

And I don't like Open Box in general, Unless it's a fairly basic part.
There is too much of a chance that its just a "Flakey" part that can't be verified as bad so it's just resold.

 

[dark41]

Well I've gotta say I found this article a big disappointment. As a system builder in Australia, our base system (box only) is cheaper, is definitely a high mid-range system, will blow this system away with most applications and real time performance, and overclocks to the moon.

The only thing our base system could use to make it a better gamer is a better video card, but then that's the point. A person can spend whatever they want on a video card, but it only really helps with some applications and games.

Is this a budget gamer or a budget system? Because most of the readers of TG and TG writers themselves seem to have a very limited definition of gamer anyway (IE: limited to FPS 1st person shooter games, which aren't all that popular for most people). I expect many arguements on that from this forum because most of these readers represent the minority who play FPS 1st person shooter games and aren't informed enough to know that most people couldn't care less about these games. And frankly, most people looking to buy a budget system will never play a game on it of any kind.

I understand to an extent the thinking behind the quad core, but for a budget PC and considering the lack of software to take advantage of a quad core, it makes very little sense in the end unless most of what you do uses the quad core. I have yet to have a customer ask for a quad core, and the apps I use most justify the cost and speed of a C2D over a quad. In other words, certain apps might perform better on a quad, but overall I'd get less done if I used one.

I built a budget system for my son in the USA this summer, which cost just over $500USD, including OS, and will give this system a good run for performance. In fact, almost identical to what Shadow703793 posted on the 1st page of this thread. I still think a 8800GT is overkill, but agree with most of the rest of his components.

The OS absolutely has to be included in the price of any system. Anyone wanting to run a free OS can take that price out, but the majority of users will require Windows (XP/Vista) and have to figure that into the price. For 3 years now this has been brought up in the forums without a good reason stating why it's not included.

The fact that this system came in under budget proves that the current price categories are worthless. I'm all for the new format suggested by Cleve, as long as the OS is included.

 

[imaginary]

Ignoring arguments about what dollar amount is cheap (pointless really), let's look at what the article was really about: a supposedly "highest quality for $1000" computer. Or rather: that's what I expected it to be. Instead, it seems to simply be an example of something someone might build if they had an extra $1000, without much thought put into quality or reliability.

CPU: Phenom 9500
An odd choice considering that the Q6600 isn't far off in price. It doesn't suffer from core problems. It's been shown to perform quite well at a good price point. Most notably, it outperforms the 9500 and overclocks past 3.0 GHz easily.

Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H
This is fine for the Phenom. The Q6600 would work in a GA-P35-DS3L at the same price.

CPU Cooler: HyperTX 2
Since you're planning on overclocking, it would be unfair not to upgrade from the stock cooler. I'd have gone with the Freezer 7 Pro, but this is fine.

Memory: 2GB Wintec DDR2-800
Why Wintec? I guess DDR2-800 doesn't vary all that much, but... G.SKILL and GeIL sell modules at the same price and usually have better reliability and demonstrated overclockabilty. Maybe I'm just out of the loop and all the cool kids are using Wintec, but it certainly doesn't sound like it.

Hard Drive: Seagate 500GB
DVDRW: Sony Optiarc
Sound: Integrated
Sounds good.

Case: NZXT Apollo
PSU: NZXT 600W
Alright, first off, the PSU is questionable. It's listed as a Tier 5, and even ignoring that, it's rare enough that there aren't many reviews on it to judge its quality. Next, it's more power than necessary. This is a budget computer, 450W is more than enough (though that doesn't appeal to people's egos...) As others have pointed out, one of the Sonata/EarthWatts bundles is more appropriate, higher quality, quieter, and probably cheaper. If you really like the flashy NZXT case, you could at least use a Corsair VX model for $20 more. It would be quieter, more efficient (cooler), and more reliable. Really, there are loads of PSU's in the $80 which outperform this PSU and are much more respected.

Graphics: Radeon 3870
This is a bit confusing as well. You set a $1000 budget, and you're not even close to it, but you don't go for a higher quality video card. The 8800GT or 8800GTS(G92) are noticeably better and still well within the budget.

I'm really not trying to promote any of these parts or complain about someone picking other parts. Mostly I just wish there was a better explanation for some of these choices. It seems that for the most part the reasoning behind them was "because we felt like it". That's fine, I guess, but it seems odd to hold this build up as a standard for comparison when so many of the parts were picked because it felt interesting.

I know its boring to hear about yet another Q6600/8800GT/2GB/500GB/Sonata build, but there is a reason why loads of people have built them: you end up with a high quality system for less than $1000. When reading the conclusion of this series, I already know that I'll be asking myself: "What if they would have chosen to make their $1000 build a quality build rather than a for-fun build?"

 

[krisia2006]

then stop posting also... to not read something and then complain about what it does or doesn't contain... uneducated idiocy.

I commented on the parts I read. You on the otherhand contributed nothing...

 

[retro77]

I wish the Intel and Nvidia fanboys would stop bagging on the build. If it were a Q6600 running an 8800GTS, then we wouldn't have half as many whiners on the build. But thats not what was chosen. So lets accept the fact the when people think budget, they think AMD. Why? Because its cheaper!

One thing to point out is the mobo chipset choice can not be found in the Intel/Nvidia camp with comparable performance.

Lets move on, please?

 

[sojrner]

I commented on the parts I read. You on the otherhand contributed nothing...

my point is that if you had read the whole article then your comments might carry more weight, but to say you did not read it and then complain about what was written is just ridiculous... [:mousemonkey:4]

as for my contribution, I have quite a bit in this thread... but I guess you don't read thread before you post on them either. [:mousemonkey:2]

Now I will be the first to admit that my last post came off a bit harsh, perhaps too much so. I apologize for that my friend, but I still stand by my observation of the idiocy in complaining about something written that you have not read.

 

[imaginary]

I wish the Intel and Nvidia fanboys would stop bagging on the build. If it were a Q6600 running an 8800GTS, then we wouldn't have half as many whiners on the build. But thats not what was chosen. So lets accept the fact the when people think budget, they think AMD. Why? Because its cheaper!

I'm no Intel/nVidia fanboy and I'm not saying the build sucks, just that it doesn't manage to be a good example of anything. It's not the best performance you can get for $1000 and its not the cheapest build you can make with good performance. It's not even a particularly good value example. It's mostly just a "Hey let's make an AMD box with NZXT stuff" build.

That's fine, but it makes a poor article. Who picks components based on how fresh and original the choices are? This is an excellent way of ensuring disappointment. When you build with a budget, you buy the best quality you can get for that price. That means dropping the 500GB to one of the new 320GB drives, getting a more powerful video card sold at stock speeds and a respectable PSU. I could argue the Phenom choice more if they weren't so far under budget with the superior performance, reliability and overclocking ability of the Q6600 just $50 away.

 

[retro77]

The video card choice is so that it is the same as the built in card on the mobo. That way they could do the hybrid crossfire.

If you say your not a fanboy but only suggest Intel, does that make you not a fanboy?

 

[krisia2006]

my point is that if you had read the whole article then your comments might carry more weight, but to say you did not read it and then complain about what was written is just ridiculous... [:mousemonkey:4]

as for my contribution, I have quite a bit in this thread... but I guess you don't read thread before you post on them either. [:mousemonkey:2]

Now I will be the first to admit that my last post came off a bit harsh, perhaps too much so. I apologize for that my friend, but I still stand by my observation of the idiocy in complaining about something written that you have not read.

Apology accepted. I do not see why I cannot post my response concerning the quad core cpu and third party
cooler, which are clearly not within the realm of a low cost system, without your blessing...

Not sure which parts of those points you do not understand...

(And you did take my comments out of context and that is not appreciated.)

 

[Phrozt]

2 things Cleeve:

1) You mentioned that you had to "request" these components. How long ago did you have to request them? The prices for nVid cards that are better than the 3870 have been well below the 3870 for quite awhile now.

2) Consider your "low end" audience. You're going to have one of two people: The middle aged individual who wants to see pictures of their kids/grandkids and check email, and the high school/college student who wants their own PC but has a very limited budget because of [insert any number of reasons here].

The Oldie looking for a computer could likely do everything they want on a $299 comp from walmart and really wouldn't have the knowledge to build *any* system, much less a competitive low-cost system to begin with. So in all seriousness, you're looking at a HS/college student w/a low budget. Let's see what would be important to them:

- Word processing/web browsing? Absolutely, but not explicitly. If this was all they needed it for, they could probably get their parents to put in for an "education" machine.
- Gaming? Most likely, due to most other reasons being ruled out or inclusive in this request.
- Image editing? Could easily go either way.

So we're looking at someone who wants to play games... which probably means they want to play the latest and greatest games... which means they want as much power as they can get, but they just don't have a lot of money. Therefore, this easily justifies the need for something that you figured this user wouldn't really be considering: overlocking potential.

So really, your two most controversial components, the GPU and CPU, shouldn't have been used in the first place... based on very simple logic. I hate to say it, but this reeks of a AMD biased article.

 

[cleeve]

I disagree with you based on a lot of points, Phrozt. I believe a hell of a lot more people than geriatrics and students are interested in buying a sub-$1000 PC, hell most of my friends who are gamers have a sub-$1000 PC just because they aren't interested in spending more money than that, plain and simple. And you know what? None of them overclock. You and me are enthusiasts and it's hard for us to understand why folks wouldn't tweak for a bit of extra performance, but that's the truth of it.

IMHO the Phenom makes a great low-end (or sub-$1000 PC if you prefer) processor. But I'll restate my opinion one last time if it'll help clear things up:

Not everybody overclocks, which is hard for some enthusiasts to see, but the truth is the massive majority of folks take their PCs home and use them at their stock settings. I also don't necessarily believe that everyone upgrades for gaming exclusively, nor would I automatically agree that an E6750 would blow away a Phenom when it comes to gaming. in fact, I'm pretty sure it'd be close, with the Phenom blowing away the E6750 in heavily multithreaded games like Supreme Commander.

At stock settings I would put the Phenom 9500 vs. the C2D E6750 and expect the final result to be pretty close. For this marathon I was hoping to showcase a dual-core Penryn (even though you might think I'm AMD biased), but I the E8400 wasn't readily available in retail at the time of writing, and I can't recommend something people can't buy yet.

I think the biggest problem with the article is that I couldn't back up the recommendation with numbers, by comparing the 9500 to the E6750 in our last low-cost system; our benchmark suite changed and we couldn't use the old numbers, and unfortunately we didn't have time to re-bench the E6750 system. I might do that on my own time just to show that the Phenom isn't such a bad sub-$200 processor after all.

 

[morg]

ok 1st of all, the budget system DOES NOT EVEN HAVE AN OVERCLOCK-FRIENDLY CPU...

why use a low overclock range cpu for a budget/performance overclocking contest ?

most users would've cut on the following parts :

case/PSU -> my choice for entry-level is sonata III including a 500W PSU.

Dual Cores instead of quad/tri cores.

and accessories...

popular ideas :
P35-DS3L , or any good lookin nforce 650 Ultra with only 1x PCI-X
the video card SHOULD'VE BEEN 9600GT... but the 3870 is a good pick
pick any overclockeable low-range CPU e2200-e2180 / e4500 / even q 6600 wouldn't make the price much higher while it's certainly a better choice... for overclockers...

 

[retro77]

ok 1st of all, the budget system DOES NOT EVEN HAVE AN OVERCLOCK-FRIENDLY CPU...

why use a low overclock range cpu for a budget/performance overclocking contest ?

most users would've cut on the following parts :

case/PSU -> my choice for entry-level is sonata III including a 500W PSU.

Dual Cores instead of quad/tri cores.

and accessories...

popular ideas :
P35-DS3L , or any good lookin nforce 650 Ultra with only 1x PCI-X
the video card SHOULD'VE BEEN 9600GT... but the 3870 is a good pick
pick any overclockeable low-range CPU e2200-e2180 / e4500 / even q 6600 wouldn't make the price much higher while it's certainly a better choice... for overclockers...

Um...are you even reading what Cleeve has been saying over and over. The low end systems are not built with overclockers in mind.

 

[Shadow703793]

^ Exactly. I think the next SBM should focus on OCing. Come on... most people on the Forums do OCing.

 

[retro77]

maybe have 2...one PC for something G-Ma and G-Pa or even Aunt Ellen would use and one for a budget OC'er.

 

[Phrozt]

Ok Cleeve, I understand what you're saying about your friends, but if you take "enthusiast" out of it and they "just want a PC" and don't want to spend a lot of money, that sounds like the fact that they really aren't into PCs that much to begin with... which means they probably wouldn't have the know-how to build a computer. Therefore, again they'd be in the group of people who would be better off buying something in a box from wal-mart.

I think you're swaying on a very fine line here. At one point you're confining an audience by pricepoint, and on another point you're confining them on enthusiasm for components. I think that if you made a ven diagram of these two major categories, you'd find that the only overlapping individuals would be those wanting to overclock.

To invest your time in putting together a powerful yet cheap system suggests at least a moderate amount of enthusiasm to begin with... so I don't think it would be a good idea to rule out overclocking, given the group of people who would even be looking at this article to begin with.



Honestly, if my non-tech savvy friends (or family) came to me and asked for a low cost computer (and I've had quite a few do so), I wouldn't look to an online forum or sift through parts for hours... I'd tell them to buy one out of a box. Both because they most likely wouldn't appreciate the work put into it simply out of ignorance, and because I would be stuck having to support said machine for the rest of it's life.