System Builder Marathon: Performance And Value Compared

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]xthekidx[/nom]And at the same time, I think if the price points were set at $1000 and $500, the low and midrange systems would have been forced to go with AMD options, because at those intervals AMD chips make sense.The thing about AMD chips though is that they cannot OC very high since they have very low tolerance for heat. The intel chips can withstand much more heat than the AMD chips can, which makes them better options for overclocking, especially in a crowded case with low airflow.[/citation]

Although I agree about the OC comment regarding AMD Chips vs Intel, I have to say that aside from hard core gamers or enthusiasts, the majority of computer owners do not overclock their systems. The exception would be OC'd factory built systems or graphics cards which have become quite common and don't require modification by the consumer.

These systems and components are covered under warranty, where as a consumer OC'ing a processor or graphics card and then having it burn up
may be denied warranty replacement. This is all situation dependant however. Obviously OC'ing doesn't mean the cpu or gpu is going to burn up, but it is risky unless you really know what you're doing. The question is, does the increased performance outweigh the risks?

-- MaSoP
 
[citation][nom]masop[/nom]The best bang for the buck is not always Intel. I've done my share of research and price comparisons over the last 15 years and know that is a fact. Geez.-- MaSoP[/citation]

Yes, but that has been increasingly *less* the case for the past 5 years.
 
I dream of a triple monitor gaming setup via a TripleHead2Go Digital running 5040 x 1050 on a trio of 22" widescreens. This would require upwards of 5 megapixels of power graphically. I wonder, would an OC'd E5200 be enough processor?

Integrated liquid cooling in a microATX or SFF case would really be something, wouldn't it? I wonder if a budget liquid cooling setup could be squeezed into the mid and high-end builds with judicious trimming?

 
how about an SBM in the *opposite* directly? Completely ignoring portability, and only focusing on raw performance for a desktop (floortop?) that's not meant to move except when you need to clean it?
 
[citation][nom]PanSola[/nom]how about an SBM in the *opposite* directly? Completely ignoring portability, and only focusing on raw performance for a desktop (floortop?) that's not meant to move except when you need to clean it?[/citation]

Uh, if you look in the article index you'll find that's what the site has been doing for the last couple years.
 
[citation][nom]sublifer[/nom]So when is the SBM PC giveaway contest going to happen?[/citation]

Great question! I was expecting it to be officially announced today, but it's still kind of early on the U.S. west coast.
 
[citation][nom]masop[/nom]Look at the history of the "system builders marathon". Intel is exclusive in at least 4 of the last 6 SBM (may 2009 included) articles. In May of 2007, the AMD X2 3800+ was the low-cost pc. In March of 2008, the AMD Phenom 9500 was again the low-cost pc. Every other system build from May 2007 to May 2009 has been either a Pentium E, Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad or Core 2 Extreme system. It shouldn't be all about Intel all the time, price points or not. I just don't see why AMD/ATI didn't make it into the current and past system builder marathons, aside from those 2 low-cost builds in 2007/2008. Also, I don't know anyone who has ever owned a i7 based system in order for me to care how such a system would perform. This is why I said "biased" originally.-- MaSoP[/citation]


Dude, I agree with you 100%. But don't waste your time here, I have been arguing the same thing for a long time using the exact evidence. They really don't give a $h^t what you have to say.
 
[citation][nom]caamsa[/nom]Dude, I agree with you 100%. But don't waste your time here, I have been arguing the same thing for a long time using the exact evidence. They really don't give a $h^t what you have to say.[/citation]

We care about what readers who make sense have to say. Nobody wants to lose, which is why they use the fastest parts they can fit within the budget. And fastest only counts AFTER overclocking.

Tom's Hardware has a heavy bias towards performance. It's hard to appologize for that.
 
Even though I'd like to see a little less focus on overclocking at the bottom end in the SBMs, I've got to otherwise agree with Crashman. Don't expect to see a particular brand until their performance is as good as the competition.
 
[citation][nom]caamsa[/nom]You just made my point for me, thanks.[/citation]

You quoted the wrong part. Your quote should have been:

"Tom's Hardware has a heavy bias towards performance. It's hard to appologize for that."

Then you could have argued that Tom's Hardware should spread the wealth, be more empathetic, etc.
 
Of course you get bad ventilation when PSU blows hot air on the processor 😀
 
[citation][nom]_jb_[/nom]Of course you get bad ventilation when PSU blows hot air on the processor[/citation]

You have to actually know something about computers before attempting to make such an evaluation. Most power supplies, including the ones in the $650 and $2500 PC's, pull hot air IN from the lid-mounted fan. So, in a typical configuration with the lid facing downward, they pull hot air away from the CPU.
 
So, the 1250$ system is the winner, thanks -in no small part- to its larger case, as well as the arguably poor nvidia drivers!
I just noticed the 2.5k system draws ~ 1100 w on full load, while having a 1000 w PSU..!! This doesn't feel safe.
Correction😛age 3: 1280x1024 is 5:4 not 4:3
While I prefer intel/nvidia systems, I do think that AMD/ATI setup would fit in the $600 better than the one THG guys built..I suggest you use AMD/ATI in the next SBM at least for the 'miserly' price point!! I think the no. of requests for that exceeded the requests for uATX builds..So please take them seriously.
 
[citation][nom]avatar_raq[/nom]I just noticed the 2.5k system draws ~ 1100 w on full load, while having a 1000 w PSU..!![/citation]This is actually pretty normal. The 1000W from the PSU is the amount of power the PSU delivers to the system. The 1100W is the amount of power the PSU is pulling from the wall. 1000W/1100W = ~90% efficiency. It is quite normal to lose that amount of power when converting from AC to DC (at least in computers). All that heat has to come from somewhere, right?
 
[citation][nom]traken[/nom]This is actually pretty normal. The 1000W from the PSU is the amount of power the PSU delivers to the system. The 1100W is the amount of power the PSU is pulling from the wall. 1000W/1100W = ~90% efficiency. It is quite normal to lose that amount of power when converting from AC to DC (at least in computers). All that heat has to come from somewhere, right?[/citation]
Err... that math is a little messed up, but it gets the point across. >_>
 
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]It's not "wrong" if your fellow readers requested it. As for blaming Micro ATX, that again was only done by fellow readers. Tom's Hardware Editors blamed the case design, not the motherboard form factor, and Tom's selected from similarly sized cases because that's what readers requested.What I'm saying here is that your argument isn't with Tom's Hardware, it's with other readers. Readers who requested "SFF gaming cubes" while refering to Micro ATX designs such as the SG01. Even though Micro ATX isn't SFF, the editors understood the request.You don't personally represent everyone, and we can't represent everyone. That's because nobody agrees. All the editors can do is look at a repeated request for "SFF gaming cubes" and interpret those requests.This is the type of case that was being requested:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod [...] 6811163071Notice that it has the same layout as the SG01 (SBM $600 PC) and similar to the SG03 (SBM $2500) laid on it side.The Lian-Li V350 is a nice case, but it has little in common with the type of system request Tom's Hardware was trying to fill.[/citation]

Hey, i've been following these articles with keen interest given that i built a system similar to the $600 build. I used a Thermaltake case, that closely resembles the reference you give for the "Gaming box" requested for testing.

Here's my case: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16811133035

The manufacturer asks EXPLICITLY on the manual that, if the PSU has a large fan on it's bottom, to install it so the fan is facing the top grille, for better ventilation. Also, there is a 90mm intake and 2 60mm exhaust fans, that conveniently are placed over the Mobo's I/O Shield, very close to the CPU Socket area in a uATX mobo. Could it be that a solution such as this (using small 60mm exhaust fans, and installing the psu backwards) could have helped your heat troubles?

Also, i'd like to ask for a comparison review of low profile coolers, there are many out there but i find there is no site on the web that i know of that has made such a comparison, and the selection can be staggering (all the CNPS ones in their Cu and Al-Cu variants from Zalman, The ORBS from Thermaltake, the Thermalright AXP-140 (the previous one is too tall to be considered low profile IMHO), the Cooler Master GeminII S, the Cogage MST-140 and prolly some more that escape my knowledge) and without more comparative info between them and the stock coolers it can be tricky to make an informed buy, given that all manufacturers claim their solution is the best. That would be interesting for the lucky winners of these builds (except the $1300 one) so they can replace the stock cooler and get more bang out of the builds.
 
As to the i7, they are going to be EOL soon and de i5 will perform almost the same for less money. No need for a i7 system in the fall when the i5 are here. Then they can be compared to the amd phenoms II as well.
Although the hardware is great the overclock potential is as mentioned far to low and the closed psu is just a very bad choice.
still I would like to see what the systems would do in a bigger better ventilated case, where the gtx 260's can be oced, and the cpu can be oced to the max. I think some uitcomes will be a lot different then.
 
I seriously doubt the i7 is going to be EOL'd when the i5 ships, since the i5 has less memory bandwidth (dual-channel versus triple-channel) and less bandwidth for QPI (Or DMI in the case of the i5, same type oftthing). You're *not* going to get the same performance with less money... look at the performance difference between identically clocked i7 920 and Xeon 5550 (both 2.66 GHz, but the i7 920's QPI is limited to 4.8 GT/s and the Xeon 5550 has a cap of 6.4 GT/s, like the Core i7 965). the answer is almost a 25% performance difference for identically clocked processors, and that is *just* the difference in QPI, not taking into account the difference in memory bandwidth between the i7 and i5 architectures.
 
[citation][nom]Crashman[/nom]We care about what readers who make sense have to say. Nobody wants to lose, which is why they use the fastest parts they can fit within the budget. And fastest only counts AFTER overclocking.Tom's Hardware has a heavy bias towards performance. It's hard to appologize for that.[/citation]
agreed, but ya know, it would be nice to see a little bit of variety.
i mean, come on, for the $600 build, i was expecting a phenomII to be squeezed in there but instead, it was an old E5200...
a phenomII 720BE would crush an E5200 in games, apps, and maybe even overclocking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom