System Builder Marathon, March 2012: $2600 Performance PC

[Guest]

A 5900 RPM hard drive??

 

[KT_WASP]

After a little research, we found that the Intel RST 3.0.0.112 Enterprise storage drivers packaged by motherboard vendors with its INF 9.2.3.1020 chipset drivers are to blame for the lost performance. While enterprise-class drivers are likely optimized for data protection rather than maximum performance, users who want to extract the highest possible performance from the X79 Express can trick Windows into using Z68 drivers (Intel’s installer will recognize the different hardware and halt).

But Intel's RST drivers aren’t even required for the X79’s basic drive operation. A big performance boost in our overclocked configuration’s SATA performance comes from reverting to Windows 7’s generic AHCI 1.0 Serial ATA Controller driver.

I liked this bit of info the best in the whole article. The build was nice and props to you guys (no complaints on the case for this one, lol). But I really liked that passage above, I learned something new from this article today. Thanks for sharing your findings in detail!

 

[RedJaron]

A 5900 RPM hard drive??

The article states quite clearly ( emphasis added ):

Now that the price of high-capacity drives is tumbling back towards what we were used to last year, we were able to get a 1.5 TB unit for only $100. We weren't able to secure that amount of storage space from a high-performance model, though.

Instead we ordered Seagate’s low-energy, 5900 RPM green drive. This is the repository we’d use to store photos, movies, and other things that don’t get moved much. Lower noise should accompany the slower spindle speed and stepped-back power consumption. All of that is fine; performance isn’t a big priority for the type of files we want to store here, and we already have that 240 GB SSD to help hold speed-sensitive apps.

With that size of SSD, you can load a LOT of speed sensitive apps. Besides, current gen "green" drives have shown to be decent performers while running markedly cooler, quieter, and on less power. They're more than adequate for basic storage.

What a lot of people seem to miss ( but many have also praised, ) is that this build wasn't about sheer unadulterated computing power. Previous $2500 builds went with the biggest, baddest internal components while skimping on most other parts. This time they made a system with class, something that's not big and flashy, something that gets the job done without going overboard. The case is refined, not cramped, and not sporting LEDs on every square inch. Acoustics and power consumption were considered as much as raw performance. It's well balanced in terms of casual use, productivity, creative apps, and games.

Previous builds were like Honda Civics packed with $60,000 in powertrain upgrades. This is more like an Audi S4 that will quietly kick your ass while not looking ostentatious doing so.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]jaquith[/nom]This OC is ALL bad, don't do this OC! No wonder you don't like vCore's >1.38v and neither would I if I did (had to) that OC. Never, exceed 120% or (Medium/High or Optimized)! If you need to then raise the vCore +0.01v~+0.02v. If you want to disagree with me then simply know we agree to disagree.[/citation]TI don't really pay attention to the "%" rating, the setting is chosen with a target voltage in mind. If you need 1.36V + "High" to have 1.38V under load, or 1.41V + "Medium" to have 1.38V under load, the first setting is preferred.[citation][nom]TeraMedia[/nom]@crashman: Were 7950s available at the time parts were ordered? If so, I would have gone this route:Replace 1 x 7970 with 2 x 7950.[/citation]It was considered and rejected over concerns for the early driver status (not consistently producing expected results), because Andrew Ku said it would be silly not to use the Chronos Deluxe 240GB at its special price, and because things like the quiet case were highly desired. As for the Rosewill case, the large fan opening makes it far noisier but I would have highly recommended it for the mid-priced build.[citation][nom]quixoticism[/nom]Not necessarily. The weight of the gaming category on the total system score is 30%. They could add a couple more benchmarks and still limit the effect of the gaming score to 30%, but it would change how that 30% looks across all the different systems.[/citation]You're right, the final score is an average of averages at HDD % x1, Games% x3, Encoding% x3 Productivity% x3. It's a really easy calculation to set up in Excel [citation][nom]bobafert[/nom]Not to nit pick, but could you please follow the chart information layout that your co-workers use. For me it is much easier to follow the information when you always know witch build is in witch spot on the chart every time you look at a chart.[/citation]Official site rules call for performance on top so that no one product is perceived to be "favored" by being on top even when it loses. I know some of the other guys don't follow that rule.

 

[Onus]

Probably the first upgrade I'd do to this machine is add a second 1.5TB drive in RAID-1 for data security.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]Probably the first upgrade I'd do to this machine is add a second 1.5TB drive in RAID-1 for data security.[/citation]Bingo, that's what I'd do first. But the Eyefinity gamers would rather add a second video card and that extra $100 could delay their plans Just trying to keep everyone in mind.

Also, the power supply has enough modular cable jacks AND enough current to support a third card. I found two places that sell the extra PCIe power cable, but the links didn't pass editorial muster.

 

[carbonfountain]

First, I want to say thank you guys for your work in putting up this article. However, $2600 rigs in general appear to be out of reach for most of us on Tomshardware (I may be wrong). I'm curious if you have an estimate of how many people on here would actually base their own builds on these top end configurations.

Personally, I've always found the $600 and $1200 (previously 500 and 1000) builds to be much more interesting and relevant to my own purchasing decisions.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]carbonfountain[/nom]First, I want to say thank you guys for your work in putting up this article. However, $2600 rigs in general appear to be out of reach for most of us on Tomshardware (I may be wrong). I'm curious if you have an estimate of how many people on here would actually base their own builds on these top end configurations. Personally, I've always found the $600 and $1200 (previously 500 and 1000) builds to be much more interesting and relevant to my own purchasing decisions.[/citation]I think a bunch of people will build $1200-1300 PC's based on a FEW of these parts. So at least we get to see how certain parts work together, right?

Top build used to be $4000, until we decided to combine the $500 Gaming PC article with the SBM. The "Dream PC" looked far less practical after that, but dropping the price limit to 4x the cheapest PC gets the top build closer to the "limits" of practicality.

 

[PCgamer81]

This is a gaming rig we are talking about, right?

Instead of the 3930k and 7970 go with the 680 and 2600k. Or two 580s and the 2600k.

Someone don't know how to build a gaming rig.

 

[carbonfountain]

[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]I think a bunch of people will build $1200-1300 PC's based on a FEW of these parts. So at least we get to see how certain parts work together, right?Top build used to be $4000, until we decided to combine the $500 Gaming PC article with the SBM. The "Dream PC" looked far less practical after that, but dropping the price limit to 4x the cheapest PC gets the top build closer to the "limits" of practicality.[/citation]

Yes. I remember when I was in high school, I somehow convinced my parents to get a Dell pentium 4 for around $3,500. Those were the days! Back on topic though, I really hope you guys will consider making a build that consists of both the 3930K AND dual 680s. You'd probably have to sacrifice some things like the hard drive and the case/psu, but I'd be very interested in seeing how such a build would compare to this month's single 7970.

 

[PCgamer81]

Wrong prioritization. Needless spending and bad allocation of resources.

Again, someone here on Tom's don't know how to build a gaming rig.

Take out their recommended CPU, GPU, Mobo, RAM, and cooler.

Replace it with...

ASUS P8Z68 - V Pro - $200
i7 2600k w/ water cooling system $600
8GB of Vengeance 1600 - $70
2 x GTX580 - $800

Not only would the system be cheaper, but it would run circles around their performance rig.

 

[Onus]

[citation][nom]PCgamer81[/nom]This is a gaming rig we are talking about, right?...[/citation]
WRONG. It's a Performance PC; see, it's right there in the title. Like my first post in this thread mentioned, this is a professional's PC, which can also pwn n00bs during off hours.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]jtt283[/nom]WRONG. It's a Performance PC; see, it's right there in the title. Like my first post in this thread mentioned, this is a professional's PC, which can also pwn n00bs during off hours.[/citation]Yeh, I also don't understand why so many people are stuck on big liquid for long-term use, when the voltage levels that necessitate big liquid aren't suitable to long-term use.

 

[airborne11b]

[citation][nom]Darkerson[/nom]For those that KEEP mentioning the damn 680's, they WERE NOT OUT when they bought the parts, FFS! They also said they did NOT want to keep using the 2500Ks. If they keep using the same s*** over and over, what is the point? I just dont get how hard a concept that is for some of the people around here. Read the damn articles before commenting...[/citation]

I agree. It's nice to see different builds.

Obviously, going 2500k + 1155 board cuts 375-400 bucks off price, 680 over the 7970 saves another 90 bucks.

So switching to 1155 build, you can get 2x 680s which would be insane performance even at extreme resolutions.

But the point of the article to is see what the X79 can do. I'm glad for the review, I was contemplating a X79 build, but after seeing this article it's Obvious it's just not a "gamer" build, as there are no noticeable differences and prices are much higher.

 

[airborne11b]

[citation][nom]PCgamer81[/nom]This is a gaming rig we are talking about, right?Instead of the 3930k and 7970 go with the 680 and 2600k. Or two 580s and the 2600k.Someone don't know how to build a gaming rig.[/citation]

Right, like you suggesting paying +100 bucks on 2600k, which has no gaming performance difference over a 2500k? lol

Someone doesn't know how to make a gaming rig.

As I already mentioned, point of this article was to mess around with x79. We already know 1155 2500k is awesome for gaming.

 

[MMO Fan]

[citation][nom]sam_fisher[/nom]As Crashman said, this isn't a gaming orientated machine. It was said in the introduction that "Games account for 30% of our evaluation", which is why they put the SB-E processor in it. Putting more money into a better CPU would yield higher overall performance than putting in another 7970 would.[/citation]
Um putting a brand NEW $550+ Top of the line Flagship GPU in the form of "Radeon HD 7970" put's any build into the catagory of hardcore gaming build and if someone bought this GPU with out gamning in mind needs there head checked.

 

[TeraMedia]

@crashman, thanks for answering my question. HW w/ questionable driver status is definitely a thing to steer clear of.

Looking forward to seeing how this does in the comparison article.

 

[A Bad Day]

It would be nice if the data of the 2012 Q1 and 2011 Q4 computers were compared against older computers, maybe even a decade ago!

[citation][nom]Darkerson[/nom]For those that KEEP mentioning the damn 680's, they WERE NOT OUT when they bought the parts, FFS![/citation]

That, and the 680s are tough to find. There's a difference between a release with supply shortages and an adequate supply, one requires gambling and praying to find before buying, the other only requires a loaded wallet.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]MMO fan[/nom]Um putting a brand NEW $550+ Top of the line Flagship GPU in the form of "Radeon HD 7970" put's any build into the catagory of hardcore gaming build and if someone bought this GPU with out gamning in mind needs there head checked.[/citation]I'd use a 7970 or a 680, and I only game part time. But when I do, I want super-high details. Assuming I don't need my head checked, does spending so little time gaming with such an expensive card make me reprehensible? Am I now a 1%er?

 

[bigmable22]

[/quote]
Seriously, THANK YOU for not building another "how much can we spend on 2 GPU's, and cheapskate on everything else" machine! I LOVED this build. The case... the case is actually something I could have at my house without people thinking I built a kids toy with neon lights! I am grateful to see a build that is not completely GPU centered. Thank you!!!

 

[MMO Fan]

[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]I'd use a 7970 or a 680, and I only game part time. But when I do, I want super-high details. Assuming I don't need my head checked, does spending so little time gaming with such an expensive card make me reprehensible? Am I now a 1%er?[/citation]
7970 in any build makes it a hardcore gaming machine no matter what it is used for.

 

[mkw34]

Why not stick with a 2500k and crossfired 7950? Frequency still beats core count in gaming and the 2500k has higher ips than 3930k.

 

[PCgamer81]

[citation][nom]airborne11b[/nom]Right, like you suggesting paying +100 bucks on 2600k, which has no gaming performance difference over a 2500k? lolSomeone doesn't know how to make a gaming rig. As I already mentioned, point of this article was to mess around with x79. We already know 1155 2500k is awesome for gaming.[/citation]

Because the 2600k has Hyper-threading and it's obvious that Tom's Hardware is big on Performance CPUs. But FWIW I actually agree with you.

I personally have an i5 2500k and two 6970s that would get better performance on games than this performance rig, and it cost me $600 less.

But, I guess I overlooked that it does say performance in the title and not gaming, which has been pointed out to me.

Sorry for overlooking that.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]mkw34[/nom]Why not stick with a 2500k and crossfired 7950? Frequency still beats core count in gaming and the 2500k has higher ips than 3930k.[/citation]Because Tom's Hardware got more requests for SB-E than any other part. And the top chart on the last page counts most in the final calculations, so the big boost in a few non-gaming applications is still valuable.

But I keep repeating myself. Please read the thread.

 

[metro_2020]

where is the fraphic card in this build?