Tom's SBM: The $1,500 Mainstream PC

[malveaux]

Hrm,

AMD6000+ ($80 retail), 2 x 9800gt's ($99 each at TigerDirect right now), and watch it smoke these Crysis Benchmarks for half the cost.

Cheers,

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]dirtmountain[/nom]$497 and yes a cheap mobo, small HD, cheap RAM etc, but in terms of bang for the buck it would perform.[/citation]

Our low-end system builder marathon machine is $500. Stay tuned to see how close it is to your rig.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]malveaux[/nom]Hrm,AMD6000+ ($80 retail), 2 x 9800gt's ($99 each at TigerDirect right now), and watch it smoke these Crysis Benchmarks for half the cost.[/citation]

I don't think so. Two 4850's should beat two 9800 GTs in Crysis quite handily...

[EDIT] Only comparison I could quickly find. THe 4850's win by a smidge but as AA increases the 4850s give the 9800 GTs a pounding:
http://www.tbreak.com/reviews/article.php?cat=grfx&id=636&pagenumber=3[EDIT]

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]JeanLuc[/nom]I can see why you wanted to use a water cooling kit so that you got the best possible overclock from the CPU but water cooling is hardly ‘mainstream’ which is what I thought this system builder marathon was all about. [/citation]

I couldn't disagree more.

System Builder Marathon is about 'specing the best components for the money, then building it, testing it, and overclocking it to see if it lives up to our hopes.

As far as water cooling, the 'mainstream' is a functiion of pricing and affordability. With good water cooling available under $150, liquid has entered the mainstream, IMHO.

Remember, a big part of our System Builder Marathon is overclocking. I personally think that if we ignored watercooling options for an overclocking rig, you guys would be all over us - and rightly so.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]WheelsOfConfusion[/nom]I also don't think a mid-range build would realistically have dual graphics cards. [/citation]

I have to disagree on that point. If you can have a rig with a single 4850 for $1300 and a rig with two cards for $1460, I think the performance diffrence more than justifies the extra card.

Multiple cards are no longer toys for the elite, I think they're very mainstream friendly.

 

[kanthu]

[citation][nom]fallen2004[/nom]P45 wouldnt have workd cos it would bottleneck the crossfire as it only runs at 8x and 4850's need 16x[/citation]

I thought

P45 in crossfire offers 8x ver2.0
X38 offers 16x ver1.

8x ver 2.0 = 16x ver 1.0
So both are the same.

Please correct me if I am wrong

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]merlin_kolio[/nom]You have addressed the issue to a great degree in the article later, but still I think it will be appropriate to try to further increase the voltage because this is a watercooled 65nm CPU[/citation]

Hi Bobby,

We backed the CPU down to 1.45 because going higher made no diffrence in this case. We pushed CPU voltage past 1.55 and the max overclock was the same, unfortunately. As well, a ton of other settings were played with and other voltage settings were increased with no diffrence in the max OC.

Yeah, we were dissapointed, too.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]fallen2004[/nom]P45 wouldnt have workd cos it would bottleneck the crossfire as it only runs at 8x and 4850's need 16x[/citation]

I still haven't seen compelling evidence that 4850's need two 16x slots to get a noticable boost in performance.

This has been a bit of a popular myth for a while now, but from the actual tests I've seen it makes almost no diffrence.

 

[cah027]

I don't see why they paid all that money for a water kit when they could have spent it on a faster cpu/hs-fan ??? Then you could get a cheaper case and saved a few $$$'s

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]cah027[/nom]I don't see why they paid all that money for a water kit when they could have spent it on a faster cpu/hs-fan ??? Then you could get a cheaper case and saved a few $$$'s[/citation]

What CPU/cooler combo would you get? A Q9300 and a good air cooler would cost about the same, I don't know if it would overclock much higher on cheap air.

Alternatively, an E8400 with air would be cheaper and probably clock a bit higher, but we mentioned that in the article, and we'll probably go that route in the next marathon. Or we might use liquid on that and really push it, but we will still probably lose more ground in the apps that take advantage of hardcore multithreading.

As for the case, anyone can pick whatever case they like of course, this is simply our prefrence. But the Cosmos 1000 is a damn fine case for under $200.

 

[jcknouse]

holy smokes...and i thought i was picky lol

i think this is more of a "mid-range-priced mainstream do-it-yourselfer PC" config.

i mean, after all...if it was just a "mainstream" PC, i'd say either Dell or EMachines baseline systems are more appropriate...cause most people buy the cheapest thing that will get them by. i tend to think most (if not all) people who read tom's sites are more technical than a mainstream user.

i do agree with the one poster. i'd like to see noise levels and all. my last build 2 years ago...has to be 40+db cause i have to turn the TV up an extra 8 levels to hear it well when it's running. can you say...8 case fans? lol

i like this article series tho. it lets me see what i might be doing wrong or right. thanks Tom's.

 

[bounty]

Cleeve, H20 is not "mainstream." It may be affordable to some (usually people buying expensive systems.) 50$ is what I consider affordable for CPU cooling.

Hand carving a mahogany wooden case and filling it with oil would also have been within your budget. It's still not mainstream.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]bounty[/nom]Cleeve, H20 is not "mainstream." It may be affordable to some (usually people buying expensive systems.) 50$ is what I consider affordable for CPU cooling. [/citation]

That's the thing, isn't it? What you consider affordable for a $1500 box is not what I consider affordable for a $1500 box. It's a bit subjective, and therefore difficult to come to a consensus.

Having said that, I wrote the article and I'm OK with liquid cooling being recommended in a $1500 box. I see your point but I reserve the right to disagree, and you certainly have that right as well.

I'm not the all-time authority on PCs, I'm just a guy who built a box for your reading enjoyment.

 

[jcknouse]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom][/citation]

As far as water cooling, the 'mainstream' is a functiion of pricing and affordability. With good water cooling available under $150, liquid has entered the mainstream, IMHO.

I don't know if I would agree with that. Since most of your top-end air-cooled options are below $75, I think twice that for water-cooled is going to be a "mainstream" option, especially since that additional $75 can double the amount of RAM in the box for you nowadays...and we all know how important RAM is with Vista.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]jcknouse[/nom]I think twice that for water-cooled is going to be a "mainstream" option, especially since that additional $75 can double the amount of RAM in the box for you nowadays...and we all know how important RAM is with Vista.[/citation]

Well, if water cooling will increase a max overclock by, say, 500 MHz, it's going to have a larger impact that the extra gig of RAM that Vista 32-bit can see.

From my testing, Vista will chioke a bit with 1 GB but it's still workable. Gains over 2GB can be pretty small, and if you're using 32-bit Vista it can only see 3 GB max anyhoo...

 

[blackened144]

There's a difference between Toms "mainstream" and the world at larges "mainstream".. I think mainstream here at Toms is perfectly fine with water cooling and Crossfire. The world at large, does not even considering overclocking "mainstream", but here at Toms its just par for the course.

 

[cleeve]

[citation][nom]blackened144[/nom]There's a difference between Toms "mainstream" and the world at larges "mainstream".[/citation]

Exactly.
If people's biggest problem with this article is arguing semantics over proper use of the word 'mainstream', than I'm happy.

 

[anartik]

You know I almost feel for the guys writing these articles with the packs of hyaena's attacking. Building a computer has a near infinite set of choices that can be made even with a specific budget. So of course everyone else is going to armchair quarterback with everything from good to half wit suggestions.

One thing people really don't seem to get is that this is a hardware enthusiast site and yes this is a mainstream enthusiast system (lowend mainstream IMO). A peep mainstream system is probably anything off the shelf with a reasonably modern CPU and more than 1gb of memory. Having to buy everything (including decent monitor) a real mainstream enthusiast system is probably more like $2000-2500 w/o WC.

 

[scryer_360]

Actually, looking at the system they built, I can't help but think "If I was building a system and using a quad core, this is a lot like what i'd do."

Well done Toms.

 

[scryer_360]

Minus the case, $180 on a case isn't mainstream I think but then we're going around that again...

 

[nmrrja1]

Has anybody actually looked at the size of that behemoth? Mainstream or not, who would put that unsightly beast on, in, or next to their desk?

The water cooling feature is WAY over the top and adds complexity that is IMO not mainstream.

Mainstream to me means not only parts that someone may use, but also the finished product that one ends up with. Aesthetics play a huge role when people are spending any amount of money and that should probably be considered as well. Again, just my opinion, but I think the average or "mainstream" user would not want anything to do with the machine built this time around.

And since I am putting in my $.02, here is my take:

G33/35 or G45 Micro ATX board
Silverstone Micro ATX case
1 x LG Blu-Ray optical
1 x 320 GB Raptor
2 x 2gb DDR2-800/1066
1 x 600w Zalman PSU
1 x Q9300
1 x Sapphire 4870 (1GB toxic version)
1 x 3.5" card reader
1 x Silverstone CPU cooler
2 x ANTEC tri-flow 12cm fans

The above should come in around $1,200 to $1,300 from Newegg.com and would be fast, quiet, good looking and quite fast at 1680x1050 up to 1920x1200.

 

[malveaux]

[citation][nom]Cleeve[/nom][/citation]

For the cost of $99 per card, versus $150+, they perform at nearly the same level which is why I mentioned it. Anything cheaper that performs the same or near equal smokes it. The HD4850 is a great card. But for $99, the 9800gt, especially when overclocked, is disgustingly good for "old tech" compared to brand new stuff like the HD4850.

Cheers,

 

[sirloudman]

Nice article and an interesting build.
I think the gap between the low end and the midrange budget is quite high. Let's say you keep a midrange build for 3 years, you could buy 3 budget builds for that or 1 every year. I think you'd probably beat the midrange build already after the first year, giving the guy who built 3 budget builds the best PC for 2 out of 3 years (and save your electricity bill). Therefore I would say 400 dollar is budget, 750 would be mainstream in my book and everything over 1000 is for enthusiasts imho. PC's over 2000 dollar is just a lot of money throwing for little performance gains, taking into account the pace of hardware development.

 

[Wixman]

Who chooses the parts for these supposed "mid range" system builds? A core2 E8500 will run circles around the Q6600 using a P45 motherboard in nearly ALL instances when easily OC'd to 4.0GHz+ on AIR. The 1000W PSU is overkill when you can easily get away with a nice 700 for a pair of HD4850s. Even better, you should have gone with an 850w, a pair of HD4870s and a Gigabyte EP45-UD3P x-fire motherboard. The Antec Nine Hundred is an unbeatable case for silence, cooling and cost. For just under 1500 SHIPPED I built a nearly silent dual HD4870 1GB, E8500, Xigmatek cooler, 500GB, 22x burner, 4GB 1066, 850W Xfire, Vista home premium 64, air cooled system... all bought from the same location paying retail prices. Whoever wrote this story doesn't know what the heck he/she/it is doing. Next time call me and I'll write you a story that's worth more than the pixels it took to print.

 

[TeraMedia]

I think a reasonable way of looking at the H2O water cooler discussion is to determine how cool the CPU runs under load (and inside the closed case), versus an air-cooled solution. If the water cooler keeps the CPU cooler, allows for higher OCing, and keeps the system quieter, then it might be able to pay for itself. If an air-cooled solution provides the same OC with similar noise levels, then the H2O is a waste of $ that would be better spent elsewhere. I also wonder how much airflow is getting onto the NB and VRs, since this isn't discussed much in the article?