• Pardon our dust as we work on some regularly scheduled forum maintenance. You may notice some missing features during this time. Thank you for your patience!

System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: $800 Enthusiast PC

Status
Not open for further replies.

mayankleoboy1

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2010
2,497
0
19,810
18
Although we're going to miss the snappy boot-up times and almost-instant application launches the solid-state drive enabled, we probably won't be penalized too much in the benchmark results.
And therein lies the problem with benchmarks.
An enthusiast PC, without a SSD boot drive?
 

dudewitbow

Dignified
[citation][nom]ipwn3r456[/nom]If this machine were at $1000 budget, might as well add a 128GB SSD, and replace the HD 7870 to a HD 7950.[/citation]


there would be marginal performance boost from switching from a 7870 LE(nerfed 7950, heck can call it a 7930 and it would be partially correct in a way) to an actual 7950. Though its likely the outcome for the 1k budget coming up next.
 

abhijitkalyane

Distinguished
Aug 24, 2010
31
0
18,530
0
I really wasn't expecting the AMD chip to be so close to the i5. I'm a bit surprised. The power consumption figures look bad for the FX though.
 

Chairman Ray

Honorable
Jun 13, 2012
563
0
11,060
31
I would like to see builds for non-overclocking as well if they are comparing non-overlocked benchmarks. The $800 isn't a good estimate of what you can achieve in a non-overclocked build when you are paying all that extra for unlocked parts. A locked i5, locked mobo, no heat sink, and smaller PSU will scrape enough for a small SSD. This would be a more well-rounded build that a lot of people would choose especially if they are not planning on overclocking.
 
[citation][nom]abhijitkalyane[/nom]I really wasn't expecting the AMD chip to be so close to the i5. I'm a bit surprised. The power consumption figures look bad for the FX though.[/citation]

That's cuz the 8350 is using a 670 which in GPU heavy titles will boost its numbers higher. Same GPU would show a more different story and the price difference between a 8350 and a i5 3570k is only able to bump a 7870xt to a 7950 at most, not to a 670



For a $800 budget, I would rather get all the real in game performance I can first while and add a ssd later than lose out on fps and get faster load times

higher fps(stronger cpu, gpu) > faster load times



$35 saved from cutting cooler and k is not enough for an SSD
 

jdwii

Splendid
[citation][nom]abhijitkalyane[/nom]I really wasn't expecting the AMD chip to be so close to the i5. I'm a bit surprised. The power consumption figures look bad for the FX though.[/citation]

After looking at this it would seem illogical to buy a 8350 over a I5. But yes it does do decent interns of price/performance.
 

mayankleoboy1

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2010
2,497
0
19,810
18
[citation][nom]Stickmansam[/nom]For a $800 budget, I would rather get all the real in game performance I can first while and add a ssd later than lose out on fps and get faster load timeshigher fps(stronger cpu, gpu) > faster load times[/citation]

This would have been correct for a "$800 Gaming PC" .
But for a "$800 Enthusiast PC " , a SSD is a must. Even a 64GB, lower end SSD would have been OK.
 
i am a bit surprised.
this build looks like a budget-upper-midrange build (if that makes any sense). the mobo... looks weak. the cooler and gfx card looked... cheap. i didn't expect the oc core i5 3570k build to keep up with oc fx8350 build in threaded benches (for $200 less, even). only 7zip seems to take advantage of 8 integer clusters/cores properly and the rest of them don't seem to scale well beyond 4~ cores. i noticed that trend in games but this is the first time i've seen it in non-games softwares. i use handbrake, lame mp3 and archivers (7z, zip/rars), so those benches were very informative for me. thank you.
when i first started reading, i wanted to see an fx8320, cm hyper 212 evo(or a corsair clc) with a sturdy 970 mobo + radeon 7870xt. as i read on, this current build and its performance started to look more and more interesting.
 
[citation][nom]dudewitbow[/nom]there would be marginal performance boost from switching from a 7870 LE(nerfed 7950, heck can call it a 7930 and it would be partially correct in a way) to an actual 7950. Though its likely the outcome for the 1k budget coming up next.[/citation]



The difference between the 7870 XT and the 7950 can be huge when overclocking is considered. That lost memory bandwidth is no small matter for Tahiti LE when it runs at around 1.2GHz. I also suspect that the lost compute units from 28 to 24, although not a significant loss, are considerable.


EDIT:
http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5120/powercolor_pcs_radeon_hd_7870_tahiti_le_2gb_myst_video_card_review/index7.html

Also, not only are the 2560x1600 bencmarks not the only ones showing such a comparison, but also the 1920x1200 and 1680x1050 benchmarks. This is also fairly consistent across most games. Both of these claims are demonstrated to be true by the rest of this article.
 


We could easily scrape out enough money from the budget for a decent 60GB/64GB SSD such as Plextor's M5S 64GB without really hurting core performance, at least if we didn't stick to Nweegg (granted Tom's doesn't have much option left in that if they want free systems to hand out). Loading times alone could be worth it.
 

silverblue

Distinguished
Jul 22, 2009
1,199
4
19,285
0
[citation][nom]de5_Roy[/nom]i didn't expect the oc core i5 3570k build to keep up with oc fx8350 build in threaded benches (for $200 less, even). only 7zip seems to take advantage of 8 integer clusters/cores properly and the rest of them don't seem to scale well beyond 4~ cores. i noticed that trend in games but this is the first time i've seen it in non-games softwares. i use handbrake, lame mp3 and archivers (7z, zip/rars), so those benches were very informative for me. thank you.[/citation]

I'm wondering if Blaz's disable-one-core-per-module trick would help Piledriver here, as you'd have a single core with access to 2MB L2 and 2MB L3 without the scheduler needing to worry about the second integer core. As it is, even if the software could make full use of all the CPU cores, they'd likely have a memory contention or bandwidth issue.

Steamroller will definitely improve matters but AMD will continue to be behind until anybody but the creators of 7Zip thread their software to hell (outside of rendering and productivity apps, of course).
 

m32

Honorable
Apr 15, 2012
387
0
10,810
16
These results are pretty eye opening! I already knew it, but dang. As an AMDer, I can't wait for Steamroller (good thing I get to see Haswell first). They need to improve performance, but power consumption as well. No excuse this time around.
 

blubbey

Distinguished
Jun 2, 2010
274
0
18,790
1
[citation][nom]mayankleoboy1[/nom]This would have been correct for a "$800 Gaming PC" . But for a "$800 Enthusiast PC " , a SSD is a must. Even a 64GB, lower end SSD would have been OK.[/citation]
How about a $500 enthusiast PC?
 
[citation][nom]blubbey[/nom]How about a $500 enthusiast PC?[/citation]

I find it difficult to call it an enthusiast PC when it's that cheap, but sure, it's probably too cheap to fit in any decent SSD when it's only using a $500 hardware budget.
 

4module/4core mode might be possible with appropriate bios firmware. then fx has other components that won't benefit from 4m/4c mode e.g. ram bandwidth that archivers benefit from, ipc in mainstream softwares, may be cache as well. i include cache because i don't think 4m/4c mode along with oc won't significantly improve cache performance, it'll only alleviate some (lessen the load on branch predictor, may be..?). in the end it might become a tradeoff between decent per-core performance and potentially better multicore performance provided that more and more softwares become multicore(i.e. 6+ cores) friendly.
i like how 7zip uses fx, i wish more softwares were like this.
 

itzsnypah

Honorable
Aug 20, 2012
56
0
10,630
0
I Think you guys need to rethink your testing methodology. Currently PSUs, Cases and DVD Burners only detract from the overall performance score. Which is evident by you guys choosing the cheapest possible (within reason) every time.

A serious overhaul in overall performance computation is needed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS