System Builder Marathon, Q2 2013: $650 Gaming PC

Page 6 - 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.
This is almost exactly like my build. I started with the i3 and ended up with the 3770K because I noticed my GTX 670 was being massively bottlenecked in Crysis 3, but other than Crysis 3, the i3 was 'perfect' at only 55 W. I had a CX650, but ended up going with a modular MX750 and that was a MUCH better setup, because I was originally running the 2WIN GTX 460. The CX650 couldn't run the dual card setup and the MX750 made it MUCH easier to do cable management.

Dry
 


When it's two potent cores each capable of 2 threads (2 core/4 thread) yes! Hyper-Threading Technology makes a huge difference in most (threaded) games.

Example: Crysis 3 is a weakness for Core i3, yet look at the very playable medium details and it barely lags behind Core i5 with 4 physical cores.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-wolfdale-yorkfield-comparison,3487-10.html

If you are buying huge graphics for the highest details, then it makes sense to go i5/i7. But i3 balances out very good with a single HD 7970.


Also the Asrock B75 M is fine for gaming if you do not plan to overclock. Stepping up to a Z77 board is wise if you may later step up to a K-series i5 or i7 (with plans to OC).
 
New idea for your System Builder Marathon - Instead of setting an arbitrary max price point, why don’t you adopt a US Gov contractual perspective and set three levels of capabilities (previously called “requirements” – Requirements did not provide a contractor with an incentive to provide best value by beating the requirements of the contract. Requirements also did not allow a contract source selection board to consider the value vs cost for a proposal that may significantly exceed the requirements but cost more than a competing proposal that only meet the requirements). The required capabilities would be set for your various performance criteria (benchmarking, productivity, gaming, power usage, …). Those capabilities could also be binned into Threshold (must be met) and Objectives (nice to meet).
Finally, after you have the three levels of capabilities mapped out, try to build the cheapest computer to meet each of the three capabilities sets.
 


This would be a worthwhile endeavor :)
 


Actually, I also like this idea and will run it by the team (if I remember it a month from now).

I'd expect the most opposition from Thomas, as he writes the value conclusion and much prefers we have pricing spreads that 'write well'. What I mean is.... twice the performance at four times the cost. Or 3/4 the performance at half the cost, etc. It makes his value comparison flow and read better if our prices are in multiples.... 600/1200/2400 or 500/1000/2000.

This quarter was a bit funny as there were some delays in the pricing discussions caused by busy schedules. We decided on the mini-ITX theme and knew it commanded a cost premium. I could deal with $600, $625 or $650 but wanted to know within say 24 hours which one to price up. Don (and Chris) quickly jumped on $1300, and Thomas just couldn't spend the $2600 he was then dealt, without blowing funds for no reason.
 
As for any build, I think each system in the SBM should have certain performance targets. The competition is entertaining, but the lessons come from how performance goals were met, if at all. Consider, for example, the build a few cycles back with the Celeron and the ...HD7970? The stated goal, iirc, was good 1920x1080 gaming; it met that goal, but did so poorly in all other metrics that people realized it was not really a good idea.
 
I think they should consider building MINI-ITX cases differently. Maybe put the thin optical drive and maybe a SSD below the motherboard and use a fan in the horizontal position on top of the case. Rear Top mounted fans seem to cool quite well. The real problem is the power suppy if you build a gaming rig. I usually dont want to use a video card so a low-end power supply makes sense. I have not built an ITX build mostly because ATX has been cheaper, even though I dont need the extra cooling or the I/O slots or even a video card. I cant help thinking it is all a waste of building materials. Even though an ATX computer case is like 20 inches high, many of the ITX gaming rigs take up just as much space on the desktop if you have enough room for a video card and drives.

I think it should be illegal to require a 5 1/4" disk just to run some game or some software. I have worn out several old cd drives just playing games. Just put games and even the OS on a flash drive. Load once and play forever, or just download the games. I hate movie DVD's with a passion. I have ruinied quite a few movies trying to watch them. Lately I have seen some dvd'S sold with both the DVD and an electronic version. I say get rid of the DVD's all together for movies.

I also hate 2.5" Hard Drives that run at 5400rpm. That is going backwards as far as I am concerned. That goes back to the Dinosaur days.
 
This build provides a better gaming experience. But if your value goals allocate only 30% to gaming, these gains aren't going to show. As I know now, frame latency is much more important than raw FPS.
 
you know, now that I'm playing with MiniITX configs, I'd be really really interested to see an FM2/ Athlon750k built within the same budget (or even -$100) stacks up in not just gaming but everyday computing compared to this low-budget setup. I know it wasn't in the plans because the chip's newer, but it would be nice to see an updated comparison since there's essentially no articles on Toms about the FM2 chips that lack APUs.
 


Stay tuned, just finished testing one. :)
 
I want to be able to do my school work with this build as well, so I would be getting Microsoft office and possibly C++ if my school requires it along with necessary antivirus programs. Do you suggest I get 8GB ram instead?
 
I got a ATI 7950 for $250 (and thats Australian at 90c in the 1USD) inc freight & exchange rate so i dont know how you couldnt find a better GFX card for the money, it was $209 on AMAZON with FREE USA delivery after all!???!
 


Congrats, you did well then. Enjoy it!

But this system was from earlier this year. We bought 7870 Tahiti LE for $250 a LONG time ago.

Since then, came the GTX 760 debut at $250,and AMD answering back with 7900 series price drops.

 


Congratulations, you "successfully" built a system six months after this one that can slightly outperform it. And you did so by completely ignoring the SBM purchasing rules. A few things to consider:

  • ■Mixing an H61 mboard with an Ivy Bridge CPU can be risky since the mboard may not support the CPU without a BIOS update ( which update typically requires the CPU be installed. )
    ■It was said many times in this thread that the 760 wasn't available when this system was built.
 

Could you suggest an Ivy Bridge mobo that's non-H61? (prefferably the same price)
Also I was bringing that rig as an "Update" so others could have a more modern variant of this build for the same price.
 

They do the SBM every three months, so they essentially update themselves.

But you're not going to get a decent B75 / H77 ITX board for $50. The H61 is complete end-of-life, which is why you're finding it so cheap.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom