System Builder Marathon, Q4 2012: $2,000 Performance PC

[adgjlsfhk]

Can you add an article that includes these and the special $000 pc from last quarter? I really want to see how it does against the new one.

 

[rpsgc]

Only 8GB of RAM? Really?

 

[spentshells]

Not that it would make a difference but get rid of that terminator 2 soundtrack cd that has been going on for way to long.

 

[blibba]

Why not do without the top drive cage?

 

[grumbledook]

A hyper 212 is ridiculous with this build. A beefier cooler should have been chosen.

 

[zooted]

[citation][nom]herooftimex[/nom]Suggested changes:Core i5 3570k - savings of $1202x - MSI N670 PE 2GD5/OC - $800 (gtx 670 OC'd to 1019 core clock)Rosewill FORTRESS-750 - $140 (80 plus platinum + 7 year limited warranty)LIAN LI PC-7B plus II - $100 (gamer cases look tacky, less is more)[/citation] So less all around performance for the same money, makes sense if you don't think about it.

 

[Sooth1]

I noticed that there were 2 crossfire bridges both connected for 2 cards?

 

[Onus]

When I first read this article, I had some of the same criticisms of the same shortcomings on which others have commented, BUT...
I'd like to suggest a name change for future $2000 SBM machines; call it "The $2000 Professional's PC." This will allow you to identify the person who would build (or buy) that machine, considering fitness for purpose; build a "Jack of All Trades, Master of ONE," that focuses on what that person does for a living.
Thought about in that context, most if not all such "shortcomings" in this build go away. Any number of programmers, developers, and media professionals, etc. who also play games, would love this machine, looks and all, particularly if their applications take advantage of GPGPU processing.
One of the biggest shortcomings was in overclocking, but I don't think professionals OC their PCs, at least not anywhere near the edge of stability as is often done in the SBMs.
I do think any overkill should be targeted, and that wasn't really the case here. This machine is not a pure gamer, making the pair of HD7970s look pointless (1080p gaming needs just one) without some other reason. Identifying the user would answer that question.

 

[elbert]

Really nice build. The 2 7970's really own at the highest resolution. Looks like AMD needs some optimizations on lower resolutions.

 

[BSMonitor]

Every time I see it, I am just blown away by how power efficient Ivy Bridge is. Yeah the 6 core SNB-E is nice, but look at the stock power numbers between the two to get that extra performance.. Is this really the same CPU company as Prescott, Smithfield, Netburst..

 

[Strategist]

One thing I would like to see an experiment with is the sandy bridge-E 4 core processor... Based on what I have seen from other reviews, due to base rate overclocks it can do 4.5-4.6 Ghz for most despite the locked multiplier, making its pure processing performance comparable to the top Sandy/Ivy bridge processors, at a comparable price point. However, the underlying motherboard runs quad channel memory and has more lanes for the GPU's, which might just give it the performance edge you are looking for. While you will have to spend a little extra on memory, memory is cheap enough that it should be possible in the budget, without having to sacrifice the GPUs like you have to with the (overpriced) 6 core sandy-bridge-E processors.

 

[herooftimex]

[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]This was a balanced performance build, not a purely gaming build. The i5 would have hurt that significantly.[/citation]
Why would a i5 3570k be much worse than the i7 3770k. If they could link to some comparisons that show this. The i5 3570k seems like it could do 95% of the i7 but is $120 dollars cheaper.

 

[Guest]

great build, love that case.

Would go with some water cooling all-in-one instead of that CM-Hyper-Evo. I have the EVO on my 3570K and it does ok but I'm not OCing it yet. I think the EVO is a good replacement for the stock HSF but that's about it. In the future when I decide to push the 2570K I will move up to H100

 

[dscudella]

Suffice to say that if you were to justify building a PC like this for gaming, you should have a 2560x1600/2560x1440 monitor. That's really where you'll see worthwhile scaling in games. If it's 1080, stick to single card.

I'm just reminding those who want to go SLI/crossfire. Avoid, if possible, dual mid-range/low-end cards just because they have better value. More often than not, you'll see more issue or poor scaling that's almost isn't worth the money you spent

You make a valid point but remember that some people will read these articles and think "Sweet, a gaming rig, I'll just copy it" which is not good. The articles need to be renamed to Q4 $2000 All Purpose PC.

Why would a i5 3570k be much worse than the i7 3770k. If they could link to some comparisons that show this. The i5 3570k seems like it could do 95% of the i7 but is $120 dollars cheaper.

Because in apps Hyper Threading plays a HUGE role. The i5 has 4 cores for gaming and apps. The i7 has 4 cores for gaming and 4 threads preloading data for the cores for apps. It's not double the performance but it's still a large increase in productivity.

Check this out i5-3570K vs i7-3770K. In games the CPU's are damn near equal. In apps the i7 is the clear leader. That's the Hyper Threading.

 

[MasterMace]

This $2000 build is excellent, I love it. The memory and motherboard issues can be fixed within the $100 cushion you have, as well.


I hope we can see the alternative build look at fixes for the $2000 build.

 

[JohnUSA]

You are nuts to spend $780 (41% of budget) on the video cards.
There are better and cheaper alternatives.

 

[Strategist]

You are nuts to spend $780 (41% of budget) on the video cards.
There are better and cheaper alternatives.

On the contrary, I would say 40% on the graphics is a very solid choice... for an all-round performance PC. If it was meant to be a gaming PC I would have spent an even bigger portion of the budget on the GPU's... But to go for less than that in a computer with this kind of budget is rather silly unless you are using an old 1920x1080 resolution monitor, in which case you should probably cut your computer budget and get a better monitor first.

 

[EzioAs]

You make a valid point but remember that some people will read these articles and think "Sweet, a gaming rig, I'll just copy it" which is not good. The articles need to be renamed to Q4 $2000 All Purpose PC.

Peoples perspective need to change. Lots of people who've seen a couple builds and PC videos seem to think they know it all already. While builds like the SBM are great as guides, they are still guides. They need to learn the basics first and know the importance of one component to the other. For newcomers or amateurs who needs a PC for gaming (the most common ones), they should never spend more than $1000 (no OS, no monitor) for the hardware, maybe the previous build was more suited for them but even then a lot of the components selection need to change

 

[silverblue]

[citation][nom]Strategist[/nom]On the contrary, I would say 40% on the graphics is a very solid choice... for an all-round performance PC. If it was meant to be a gaming PC I would have spent an even bigger portion of the budget on the GPU's... But to go for less than that in a computer with this kind of budget is rather silly unless you are using an old 1920x1080 resolution monitor, in which case you should probably cut your computer budget and get a better monitor first.[/citation]

Not just this, but you have a compute monster on your hands.

 

[TeraMedia]

Given that a $2000 system might be capable of 3D Eyefinity or 3D vision surround, it would be great for you to include such a test just for this price-point so that we can see both capabilities / shortcomings, and relative performance of one config vs.another for this purpose. I know that there are few games that support 3D well for both platforms, but you get the idea. The metric would not be part of the Day 4 system value comparison, but could be part of the TQ/LQ comparison.

I would never have bought that case for myself, but it really doesn't look all that bad in your photos.

At first I was a bit concerned about your PSU given CF 7970s, but it looks like it was able to get the job done and have some room to spare.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]herooftimex[/nom]Why would a i5 3570k be much worse than the i7 3770k. If they could link to some comparisons that show this. The i5 3570k seems like it could do 95% of the i7 but is $120 dollars cheaper.[/citation]

In any threaded work, such as most software that this build is intended for, the i5-3570K can be anywhere from 15-35% slower at the same frequency compared to the i7-3770K and it also generally hits slightly lower overclocks too.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]jrm88[/nom]great build, love that case. Would go with some water cooling all-in-one instead of that CM-Hyper-Evo. I have the EVO on my 3570K and it does ok but I'm not OCing it yet. I think the EVO is a good replacement for the stock HSF but that's about it. In the future when I decide to push the 2570K I will move up to H100[/citation]

Why would you go to the H100?Air coolers such as the Xigmatek Aegir, Tuniq Tower 120 Extreme, and more cool better and are much cheaper.

 

[orionite]

Interesting build as always. When comparing the benchmarks, could you please consider using the same order of builds, i.e. Q4 OC, Q4, Q3 OC, Q3? Rather than putting the one with the highest FPS at the top. I think it would increase readability significantly.

 

[g-unit1111]

After building that awful piledriver rig you go ahead and do something like this... and totally REDEEM YOURSELVES!!!

-Good Job

I'm the only one who got the Dumb & Dumber reference here? :lol:

 

[gsxrme]

Motherboards are backbones to the computer and taking corners on budgets isn't worth it. Should of used the Maximus 5 Extreme