System Builder Marathon, Sept. 2010: Value Compared

Page 3 - 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.
Saying SSD is not included as it does not help improve performance is double-edged. How does CD-ROM drive or expensive cases and power supplies do help to better performance?
 
"making SSD obligatory for 2000$+ builds"

I have been thinking about this since I started reading these articles: For the sake of the value analysis and maximization of benchmark based performance,I think that the authors should consider going with a standardized storage choice for all of the builds. Hard drive needs vary so dramatically from user to user, that it makes it hard to determine what portion of the budget should be used for storage every few months. For example, I would never build a PC that cost over a grand without including an SSD, because that kind of responsiveness and speed is important to me. A media nut may not be able to afford an SSD because they require a few TB of storage space. And for a 15 year old kid building a midrange gaming rig who just wants to be able to join the LAN party, it doesn't make sense to invest in SSD when it doesn't equate to kills.

The aim of these articles seems to be maximize the gaming and productivity benchmarks used in the test suit, so, shouldn't all the hardware go towards meeting that end? We all know that SSDs are one of the most appreciable "real world" upgrades, but they don't affect the speed in the tests used. Unless the same storage subsystem is used monthly, it makes it hard to see what kind of performance increases are being made month to month. It should be left to the reader to decide if getting an SSD is worth trading in those 480's for a pair of 470's or 5850's, or going i5 instead of i7 for example. Use the same base HDD's in each build, and let the reader adjust their own build based on their storage needs. Or, include a HDD benchmark suit and find a way to integrate them it into the results.

 
personally i could care less about the gaming factor more interested in the hand break scores .. its pretty impressive to say the least. I mean considering the most i would do would maybe play wow or vandetta it would be pretty much over kill for me but i would still be greatful to win a system like this .. i was actually considering a 1090t build but i wanted to wait and see what bulldozer was all about first.
 
This whole AMD FAIL thing is nonsense. I'm running a 1055T at stock with a single 5850 and haven't found a game yet that I can't run at max settings on 1920x1080. Definitely something wrong with these benches.
 
The by far the most fun I've had reading an SBM in a very long while. As it was said during a previous marathon, possibly June of '09, the whole point is not to just create kickass systems. Part of the whole challenge is to try something new and different and crazy and see what happens. If you learn something in the process, so much the better. Kudos to all of the guys.
 
Toms not overclocking the AMD to its full potential.

Try running the HT at around 3ghz(which is attainable and attained all the time on good cooled cases). 2.8ghz is always stable for me and many others regardless of burn ins and benchmarks.

Bottom Line: Bump that FSB up and push that north bridge. Wtf. Those scores are ****** for a 4ghz 1055t. I would know, i own one.

**Post edited by moderator** Cool it on the language.
 
[citation][nom]TheCapulet[/nom]1079 watts? Lol! Holy ****. Even though someone may win this machine, they still won't be able to afford the power bill to run it.[/citation]

They will, as long as they don't do anything like game on it. Idle power is great!
 
I just built a system on Newegg on the $2000 budget:

Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth X58 LGA 1366 Intel X58 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 - $189.99
Processor: Intel Core i7-950 Bloomfield 3.06GHz - $299.99
Memory: G.SKILL 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 - $134.99
Graphics: 2 x MSI GeForce GTX 480 1536MB - $899.98 (2 x $449.99)
Hard Drive: 2 x G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 60GB SSD (RAID 0) - $279.98 (2 x $139.99)
Optical: LITE-ON CD/DVD Burner - $19.99
Case: Antec Three Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - $59.95
Power: XION Power Real 1100W SLI Ready ATX Power Supply - $99.99
CPU Cooler: Standard Intel - $0
Shipping: $12.65
Total: $1997.51

So...
i7 = much better CPU
MB with SATA III and USB 3.0
2 sandforce SSD's in raid 0 = 500mb/s+ read/write w/120GB for games
All in all, a much, MUCH better build. Why didn't you guys build THAT?
 


Whats wrong with the benches? The 1055T system ran every game just fine at 1920x1080.

The i5 did it faster, that's all.
 


All CPUs do not reach the same height when overclocking, there's massive variance. You should know that if you have experience with them.




If you know what you're doing, then you also know that pushing the FSB and NB harder results in game performance that might be a couple FPS better. But if you own one, I invite you to repeat the tests we've done and submit your results.

Without hard evidence, you're just blowing smoke.
 
[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom]All CPUs do not reach the same height when overclocking, there's massive variance. You should know that if you have experience with them.If you know what you're doing, then you also know that pushing the FSB and NB harder results in game performance that might be a couple FPS better. But if you own one, I invite you to repeat the tests we've done and submit your results. Without hard evidence, you're just blowing smoke.[/citation]

First off, what does the CPU's height in overclocking have anything to do with the pumping that north bridge? You act like it was already tinkered with enough and theres no extra room. It was left at the standard 2000mhz/4000mhz effective clock.

Overclocking the x6 to 4ghz and leaving the northbridge at 2000 is (insert one of all the bottleneck analogies ever used.)

As far as FPS, everyone of them counts, especially in benchmark comparisons. And trust me you'll get a little more than just a few fps with a 1ghz bump in HyperTransport speeds. Simple as that. This 2000$ machine could really be ripping but unfortunately its set back by a number of things including the 1055t it's self, but for godsakes if your going to throw a 1055t in a 2000$ machine, at least run it at 110% for overclocked benchmarks.

Repeating the test's you guys did would require everything you had and every benchmark suite version down to the nip. I invite Tom's to repeat the test with everything THEY ALREADY have and then kindly post a few updated benchmarks.

This was in no way an insult to Tom's. I've been following Tom's Hardware for around 8 years now. Good stuff. Nothing wrong with a little constructive criticism.
 
[citation][nom]ancientgammoner[/nom]I just built a system on Newegg on the $2000 budget:Motherboard: ASUS Sabertooth X58 LGA 1366 Intel X58 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 - $189.99Processor: Intel Core i7-950 Bloomfield 3.06GHz - $299.99Memory: G.SKILL 6GB (3 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 - $134.99Graphics: 2 x MSI GeForce GTX 480 1536MB - $899.98 (2 x $449.99)Hard Drive: 2 x G.SKILL Phoenix Pro 60GB SSD (RAID 0) - $279.98 (2 x $139.99)Optical: LITE-ON CD/DVD Burner - $19.99Case: Antec Three Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower Computer Case - $59.95Power: XION Power Real 1100W SLI Ready ATX Power Supply - $99.99CPU Cooler: Standard Intel - $0Shipping: $12.65Total: $1997.51So...i7 = much better CPUMB with SATA III and USB 3.02 sandforce SSD's in raid 0 = 500mb/s+ read/write w/120GB for gamesAll in all, a much, MUCH better build. Why didn't you guys build THAT?[/citation]

Thank you for sharing your thoughts.They may 've built it because they wanted to try AMD or maybe because of the prices.But about your configuration, I'd ditch the second SSD for a better cpu cooler,better case, better HDD capacity.I'd use the SSD for the OS and a game that I currently play and the large HDD for storage.And,This rig would've been a much better performer.At least the showed us AGAIN that using Phenom II x6 in a multi-card environment really hammers performance (Dual card Not dual GPUs).
 
[citation][nom]sverrirrolf[/nom]Hi guys, i'm new here. How do I sign up for this competition to win the 2000$ computer?[/citation]

Welcome to tomshardware,to sign up for the giveaway, please check the beginning of any of the four SBM aricles. You'll find the statement"To enter the giveaway, please check out this Google form, and be sure to read the complete rules before entering!".You should be able to click on the hyperlink in this sentence and enter the giveaway.
 
[citation][nom]classicaxe[/nom]...It was left at the standard 2000mhz/4000mhz effective clock. Overclocking the x6 to 4ghz and leaving the northbridge at 2000 is (insert one of all the bottleneck analogies ever used.)...

I invite Tom's to repeat the test with everything THEY ALREADY have and then kindly post a few updated benchmarks. This was in no way an insult to Tom's. I've been following Tom's Hardware for around 8 years now. Good stuff. Nothing wrong with a little constructive criticism.[/citation]

Constructive criticism is great! We're not insulted at all, but simply can't repeat an entire SBM on your say-so. To us it's wasted time because our experience tells us that the NB doesn't make a huge difference in results. Some difference, sure, but not notable and certainly not enough to change the flavor of the conclusion.

Your complaint doesn't provide evidence to the contrary, and doesn't carry the weight of actual data garnered from experimentation that we have done.

I appreciate and fully understand your concern but simply disagree as to the significance of it. I'm not saying your comment is worthless, I value your feedback. But without evidence to the contrary of our own experience we can't move ahead with a significant time investment based on your suggestion alone.


 
I love the type of analysis in this article, particularly how it highlights tradeoffs created by some choices (particularly the $2k system). It would be nice if there were some speculation for each system of which modest extra investment (say 8-10% of the price point) would meaningfully change the value conclusion for each system.
 
i been thinking about the $2000 build for about a week now, maybe when the bulldozer comes out a chip replacment will produce better test results? at any rate a free build is a free build dont hesitate mailing to my house if i win the drawing ;-P
 
"This has been explained over and over. The point of the Marathon is to build the best performance on their benchmark suite under the price limit. SSDs do not help it. The end. "

So their suite is impractical. Now the end.
 
I agree with the fact that putting an AMD processor on your high end build is a strange idea. It will not perform as well as the intel's and will handicap the build against anything that runs your intel processors.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom