System Builder Marathon: Performance & Value

[jcknouse]

[citation][nom]Gryphyn[/nom]When enough AMD parts are available that provide a good alternative to Intel for the price points and performance they're looking at, THG will build and test one.That wasn't available when this article was planned and written.Don't get your undies in a bundle, folks. Be patient, you're not the only one interested in the information.[/citation]

Aye aye!!! Undies unbundled!!!! *salutes with Jockey's in hand* lol

 

[gaiden2k7]

again like rest of the performance/value article when comparing budget/mid-range/rich-boy configs, mid-range is ALWAYS going to give you the 'the best balance of price and performance' it would have been more interesting if you guys would save the $4xxx spent on the rich-boy config and use it to do 2 articles (one for AMD/Intel budget comparison with the latest cpu/gpu and compare what else can be had at the same price range) and do the same for mid-range. it would make total economically sense for the next few years to come. everyone is about being green and saving greens, so stop spending greens on a $5000 config (i mean really...) it's almost pointless, how many ppl are going to throw their saving nowadays at a pc that will pretty much be outdated once you press the 'submit order' button.

like i've mention last time it would be nicer if every TH staff would submit their own configuration according to a budget voted by the mob here. then run benchmarks on those configs and see who's who.

 

[ohim]

"when AMD parts will be available we will build one" oh i didn`t knew that AMD started to produce CPU`s last month ... i thought they did it since 386 but it seems i was wrong.

 

[jcknouse]

[citation][nom]gaiden2k7[/nom]like i've mention last time it would be nicer if every TH staff would submit their own configuration according to a budget voted by the mob here. then run benchmarks on those configs and see who's who.[/citation]

I'd like it if the TH staff would let me come in and build a PC with them :-D

of course, they live too far away from me...and we all have to work.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]spearhead[/nom]indeed i find tomshardwar becomming crap too because they all keep excluding AMD from the game...[/citation]

Excuse me, but you're misinformed.

I tried a Phenom system in a marathoin a few tries ago and it failed miserably compared to the Core 2; there's no anti-AMD sentiment going on here, it's just that their CPUs didn't have much to offer until the Phenom 2.

We ordered the parts for these machines weeks ago, and frankly the Phenom 2 wasn't available yet.

Now that it's available, we'll be looking at the Phenom 2 hard, but probably for the ~$600 system.

In the $1250 system we'll be able to afford an i7 though, and I don't think you're arguing the Phenom 2 is better than that...

Do you guys really want us to put together a $1250 Phenom 2 system instead of an i7? Be vocal about it, because I'll be counting on you to be just as vocal about it to defend us in the comments when we're trash talked for choosing the Phenom 2 over the i7.

 

[sublifer]

Just want to throw my hat in the ring too...

A follow-up with an Phenom II 940 $1250 comparison would kick @$$

Yes, I know it wasn't available during the builds... that's why I'm asking for a "follow-up" article

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]lacrits[/nom]Thats a wierd sound card you list there for the $5000 PC; Asus SupremeFX X-Fi. Is this a clone product?[/citation]

It's the riser card that comes with the board.

 

[jcknouse]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]Do you guys really want us to put together a $1250 Phenom 2 system instead of an i7? Be vocal about it, because I'll be counting on you to be just as vocal about it to defend us in the comments when we're trash talked for choosing the Phenom 2 over the i7.[/citation]

Honestly?

Do an i7 $1250 system next, then when the AM3 Phenom II 945 comes out, do a $1250 system with it.

i'd love to see the difference.

just my 2 cents worth there.

 

[Hothr]

You did a $1250 i7 last month. Lets see the Phenom next month.

 

[BSMonitor]

An AMD Phenom II system would cost the same as the Penryn system and perform weaker. There, review over. AMD has nothing on the table that competes with Q9550 or Q9650... Nothing!

Nice job on the article, although I'd like to see you defend the $5000 system a little better. If I am playing Crysis on a 30" LCD, its not gonna happen on the $625 system... So in the case of 2550x1600 resolution, any score averaging less than playable FPS should score a 0 in the Value comparison. Just looking purely at the numbers is meaningless. What good is the $625 system getting 15 FPS? It's as unplayable as my 5 y/o Pentium 4 system for that game at those settings.

 

[sandmanwn]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]We ordered the parts for these machines weeks ago, and frankly the Phenom 2 wasn't available yet.Now that it's available, we'll be looking at the Phenom 2 hard, but probably for the ~$600 system.[/citation]
Pff, already placing limitations on it. Can we see the new stuff in its entire spectrum please.
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]In the $1250 system we'll be able to afford an i7 though, and I don't think you're arguing the Phenom 2 is better than that...Do you guys really want us to put together a $1250 Phenom 2 system instead of an i7? Be vocal about it, because I'll be counting on you to be just as vocal about it to defend us in the comments when we're trash talked for choosing the Phenom 2 over the i7.[/citation]
Why the hell would we want to see yet another i7 build. Reviews for i7 are plastered all over the site in a dozen different setups and configs.

The article was poorly timed. Ends up being useless because the competition has a new product out and this article does nothing more than show what we've already known about the i7 for months now.

Of course Chris's article puts the P2 right in line with Intel, so the article has a huge question mark beside it for relevance.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]BSMonitor[/nom]An AMD Phenom II system would cost the same as the Penryn system and perform weaker. There, review over. AMD has nothing on the table that competes with Q9550 or Q9650... Nothing!Nice job on the article, although I'd like to see you defend the $5000 system a little better. If I am playing Crysis on a 30" LCD, its not gonna happen on the $625 system... So in the case of 2550x1600 resolution, any score averaging less than playable FPS should score a 0 in the Value comparison. Just looking purely at the numbers is meaningless. What good is the $625 system getting 15 FPS? It's as unplayable as my 5 y/o Pentium 4 system for that game at those settings.[/citation]

Negative comments about $5000 machine value are all about the parts that did very little to help it perform better. The SSD drives had no effect on anything but synthetic benchmarks, the i7 965 didn't really overclock better than the i7 920 that preceeded it when both were tested with liquid cooling, etc. Lots of ways to cut cost without affecting benchmarks.

 

[cablechewer]

My personal interest is in building a HTPC. I would love to see what one of these SBM Marathons can do at different price points with this type of machine. Perhaps the bottom machine should be a Nano or Atom platform, the midrange a low wattage desktop chip and the high end almost a conventional desktop. Noise, temperature, capture and playback would be more important here that FPS in shooters and strategy games. Of course if you can get a quad SLI or crossfire system to run as cool and quiet as the lesser graphics configs running in most HTPCs I think we would all want to know about that right away...

Overall I think the SBM Marathons need a little more variety on an annual basis. Perhaps ever six months do an HTPC to show what has changed, and maybe once every 12-24 months do a solar powered rig (having a daily energy budget really changes the landscape) or something else readers might be interested in.

 

[terr281]

I would also like to see AMD based $625 system in the next build, Core 2 Duo E8X00 for the $1250 and the i7 920 or 940 for the $2500 system. (For reference, my system history has been Intel Pent 1, Amd Athlon Thunderbird, Intel Pent 4 Prescott Socket 478, then Intel Core 2 Duo.) So, I'm not a "fanboy," but would like to see how the new Phenom compares.

Drop the SSDs and try a software Raid 1 + 0 using high quality 7.2k drives with sufficient capacity for the $2500 system. (No hardware raid cost, performance of a Raid 0, redundancy of a Raid 1, using ~640 or 750 GB drives.)

Use Amd graphics with Intel processors and Nvidia graphics with Amd processors, per your own performance reviews that showed these setups as the best for a majority of games.

Use 6 GB of ram instead of 12 in the $2500 system, and stick with 4 GB in the other two.

Drop water cooling all together, and stick with cases, cpu coolers, and graphics cards known for their cooling capability. (Meaning, no reference coolers on video cards.) Most builders don't watercool.

Include duel drives in the total cost of the 2 higher priced systems. (Bluray and DVD burner for the $2500, duel DVD burners for the $1250) Most people put duel burners in machines these days due to the low cost and added "protection" in the event a drive fails.

Crossfire the $1250 system's graphics. (More immediate graphics "bang for buck" with two cheaper cards than one expensive one.)

Forget secondary sound cards in all systems. Pick up MBs that have good onboard sound.

On the $625 and maybe the $1250 system, pick MBs (if possible) that still have at least a single IDE channel. This would allow a user to put their old hard drive in the system as extra storage in an upgrade scenario.
------------------------
The above is just my personal preferences, as we all have them. Thank you for listening to people's comments and using parts (IE: testing) that may or may not provide the edge we are looking for.

 

[Guest]

How come the price of the OS is never included in the BOM? At the low end it is a high precentage.

 

[Pei-chen]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]….Do you guys really want us to put together a $1250 Phenom 2 system instead of an i7? Be vocal about it, because I'll be counting on you to be just as vocal about it to defend us in the comments when we're trash talked for choosing the Phenom 2 over the i7.[/citation]
Let the baby have their bottles. For next months, please build two $625 and two $1250 PCs. X2 vs. C2D E series and Phenom 2 vs. C2D Q or i7 series. Power PC that cost $2500+ should only be built every 3 or 4 months or after a release of higher end parts (i7 965, GTX 295 etc.)

As far as pricing is concern, just use the purchased price and not the adjusted price. It saves time and stop people complain about not reaching the budget (though they complained about MIR and price drop in the past).

A suggestion on parts, please choose similar priced parts if possible; Phenom 2 940 to Q9550 / i7 920, $100 P45 board to $110 780GX. For i7, I suggest increasing the budget if necessary. If a $1500 i7 will beat the pants off $1250 Phenom 2 940 system, than let them be priced differently. It’ll show what you can get if you spend a little bit more. (Not going to buy $60 320GB drive if $85 gets you 750GB right)

 

[Pei-chen]

[citation][nom]Frankunstien[/nom]How come the price of the OS is never included in the BOM? At the low end it is a high precentage.[/citation]
Vista Home Premium SP1 is $100. Linux is free. Which one do you suggest they use? If they use Linux, people will complain about gaming issues. If Vista, people will complain about cost and cost cutting on other parts.

 

[sublifer]

[citation][nom]Pei-chen[/nom]Vista Home Premium SP1 is $100. Linux is free. Which one do you suggest they use? If they use Linux, people will complain about gaming issues. If Vista, people will complain about cost and cost cutting on other parts.[/citation]
I'd rather stick to XP myself but according to explanations in previous SBMs they leave out the OS assuming the purchaser already has a copy or will choose their own favorite OS, its essentially the same reason they don't include a monitor, mouse and keyboard. Those items are re-used from the previous PC or will buy whichever fits their needs and budget best.

 

[Pei-chen]

[citation][nom]Pei-chen[/nom]increasing the budget if necessary. If a $1500 i7 will beat the pants off $1250 Phenom 2 940 system, than let them be priced differently. It’ll show what you can get if you spend a little bit more. (Not going to buy $60 320GB drive if $85 gets you 750GB right)[/citation]
On a similar note, instead of a fixed price, maybe a price range is more appropriate. $600~700 and $1200~$1400. Pick the best bang for buck for each range. People's budget aren't as fixed as they said and will always go if a better part if price increase is small, e.g., a $20 aftermarket heatsink, bigger HDD for $15, 4850 to 4870 for $20.

This might also solve your price drop issue as most parts won’t drop so much to push the build outside the range.

 

[jcknouse]

[citation][nom]Hothr[/nom]You did a $1250 i7 last month. Lets see the Phenom next month.[/citation]

I only suggest not doing a Phenom II next month, because comparing the brand new i7 architecture to the AM2+ platform that is well over a year old...is like comparing Carl Lewis to Usain Bolt. It just isn't a fair comparison.

I say wait til AM3 to do the newest Intel to newest AMD...and let the chips fall where they may.

 

[bourgeoisdude]

Cleeve, I say just make "The Best PC for the money" in the $12xx range. If you guys think a AMD-based $12xx PC will outperform an Intel based $12xx go for it. On the other hand, with the $6xx PC I believe there is a chance that the money saved by using an AMD architecture may also benefit the machine in other areas such as the case, graphics, and hard drive.

I really believe with current prices that the i7 will probably be the best for the money in the $12xx range, but I'd rather you guys prove me to be right or wrong in whatever way you prefer to do it. Sure an AMD vs. Intel build would be nice, but it really doesn't fit into this SBM category. Build the best for the money.

 

[Aviking]

Yes, please do an AMD one next month, and then make sure to compare it to the prior months i7, and core 2 buildes. The $1200-1500 range is really the sweetspot for perforamance value, and I think where the majority of people buy. It would be great to really analyzie the possible buildes there.

Shoot even better, just do 3 buildes at say $1500, one i7, one core 2, one AMD. Then disect away.

 

[Gryphyn]

I would love to see an AMD PII build at around the $1000-1200 range, as that will be my next build's price point, and I haven't selected the processor yet.

I agree with setting a flexible limit on the builds, rather than a hard "not to exceed" price. If the build hits a point below budget where additional money will achieve no better performance, most folks are going to keep that money in their pocket and stop there. However, if another $20-50 will make a significant difference performance wise, I think most folks are going to raise the cash and make the purchase.

Treating the article this way gives you a little more flexibility to build the best (performance-wise) machine you can at a price point, rather than trying to build the most cost equivalent machine you can.

It also eases some of the strain of trying to build an AMD system comperable to an Intel system. A mid-to-high range AMD system might be cheaper than an Intel system of the same target performance ability. It might also not perform as well. This isn't really an issue, since part 4 of the series always looks at price vs. performance, and that allows a real comparison to be made.

 

[bounty]

I support the commenters that would like to continue to see AMD in these once in a while. Also that you should do some targeted SBM, maybe HTPC(including tuner card), Ultra low power, gamming, tight budget, home server, test bed/programming box (aka vmware and lots of cpu work)... whatever. You could include a few standard benchmarks across the lot, and more that are specific to the main task.

One last thing, good job.

 

[dirtmountain]

Great article, but some of the suggestions by posters is pure garbage. I love the one that says if you build an AMD build your budget is $1,250, but if you choose i7 you get $1,5000! Yeah, sounds fair to me. What is the actual performance difference between a 500GB HD and a 750GB HD and why should anyone concerned with a strict budget build spend the extra $25 on a HD instead of an upgrade to a better GPU? With prices as they are right now and CPUs that are available right now at Newegg (no Phenom3 as of now) you can build a $625 7750 Kuma/790GX 2x 4830 in CF that would probably out perform the E5200 at stock clocks, but fall behind the E5200 after overclock. How much? I don't know, but neither does anyone else and isn't that what the SBM articles are about? or a Phenom2 940BE/790GX with a GTX295 for the $1,250 SBM. You've done an i7 $1,250 build, try something new.