System Builder Marathon: Sub-$2000 PC
Tags:
- System Builder
Last response: in Reviews comments
Anonymous
June 30, 2008 1:00:06 PM
It’s day two of our SBM, and our mid-range system is ready to show what a reasonable amount of money buys a PC enthusiast in today’s market.
System Builder Marathon: Sub-$2000 PC : Read more
System Builder Marathon: Sub-$2000 PC : Read more
More about : system builder marathon 2000
Malovane
June 30, 2008 1:49:15 PM
Take back the 8800's and swap them for 4850's, which you can get for $170 now. Get a high end air cooler on the CPU for 1/3 of the price. Use 100 of the extra bucks to buy an X38 and an E8500 Core 2 Duo instead, which will perform much better in games, and often outperforms the Q6600 on the programs optimized for multiple cores (and does it for 40W less). The $60 in savings may not get you hookers and blow, but grab a couple bottles of Cuervo to celebrate your purchase.
Score
3
zenmaster
June 30, 2008 1:55:44 PM
The E8500 will not outpeform the Q6600 in programs optimized for Quad Cores and more and more games are quad optmized.
The 4850's make sense, but I suspect they were not an option due to the time to get the article together. If the article was another month out, then that likely would have been their choice.
The 4850's make sense, but I suspect they were not an option due to the time to get the article together. If the article was another month out, then that likely would have been their choice.
Score
2
Related resources
- System Builder Marathon: Sub-$4000 PC - Forum
- Looking at System Builder Marathon (or any other PC) for New Build - Forum
- Help! System Builder Marathon, Q2 2014: Our Budget Gaming PC - Forum
- System Builder Marathon, August 2012: $1000 Enthusiast PC - Forum
- With Tom's System Builder Marathon in mind: Build a Infinite Budget PC - Forum
Malovane
June 30, 2008 2:32:43 PM
Score
0
yoneffoo maaan, It seems that TH are being paid well by Nvidia to come with this extremely stupid Graphics cards, especially when HD4800 series are out now.
It would make a lot more sense to you if you would read the article: as I mentioned, the 4850 wasn't available when this system was assembled and tested. Of course I would have used them if they were available.
If I was being paid by Nvidia, I wouldn't have recommended the 4850 over the 9800 GTX+ in the upcoming July "Best Graphics Cards for the Money" article, would I?
But as I mentioned, the 8800 GTS 512s we used are around $150 after rebates - still a viable option in the post-4850 world... if you don't think so, how much is Ati paying you?
Score
2
MalovaneIf you take a look at Tom's own charts, the E8500 does indeed outperform the Q6600 in many multi-core optimized software packages. The E8500 outperforms it solidly in games. The few software packages it doesn't outdo the Q6600 doesn't really justify the loss of gaming performance. Just IMHO.
I hear your point. I never said the E8500 is bad, but it's more expensive and I'm not convinced it's worth the extra $$. Also, this isn't a system builder marathon for dedicated gaming machines, it's a multipurpose machine, so I weighed all aspects of performance and I think the Q6600 still has a nice balance.
We'll probably go with an E8400 or E8500 the next time around for comparison purposes, but I don't think the Q6600 is a bad choice. I think the Penryns are a good choice actually and mentioned that in the article.
Score
1
MoeDaKilla
June 30, 2008 3:04:41 PM
If I had a $2000 budget, I would not buy a crappy MSI 750i motherboard. I would but a good X38 or X48 mobo or even a P45 and buy a 9800 GX2. It would overclock better, run a lot faster and justify the need for a water cooler. And they could have swapped out the Q6600 for a Q9450 this time around. The new 45nm Quads have yet to be showcased in any of their builds (except for the QX9650). And one 9800GX2 costs less than 2 8800GTS. The only thing I would take from the review would be the NZXT Tempest and the A-Data RAM. And btw THG good luck overclocking that system with only a 600 watt power supply.
Score
-2
I'd have to disagree with you, Moe. The motherboard was fine for an SLI system as we spec'd; although if I were to do it over, I'd choose a and two 4850's and an Intel X38 board instead of the GX2 anyway.
The GX2 is actually a lot more expensive than two 8800 GTS 512MB cards after rebate; both of our cards were $312, GX2 is in the $425 neighborhood the last time I checked, and you can bet the GTS prices will drop like rocks now that the new cards are out.
Q9450 - too expensive for the performance increase we'd see, like I said I'd probably choose a dual-core Penryn if I wnated an alternative.
As far as the PSU, it didn't seem to slow us down when it came to overclocking...
The GX2 is actually a lot more expensive than two 8800 GTS 512MB cards after rebate; both of our cards were $312, GX2 is in the $425 neighborhood the last time I checked, and you can bet the GTS prices will drop like rocks now that the new cards are out.
Q9450 - too expensive for the performance increase we'd see, like I said I'd probably choose a dual-core Penryn if I wnated an alternative.
As far as the PSU, it didn't seem to slow us down when it came to overclocking...
Score
0
eurodj
June 30, 2008 4:12:56 PM
Well i THink u did a pretty good job on the article, as for the video card, i guess time wasnt on your side when it came ot it as it is true that the 4850 is a better choice in my opinion but then again it wasnt available then, heck i was always PRO ATI, loved them since the rage era, switched to nvidia after my x1900xtx got replaced witha 8800GTS 640 now im running an SLI 9800GTX setup but thats because ati took a while to bring the firepower now i want to go back but i guess il have to stick wiht what i got for now. One thing id like to know is how easy and reliable is the swiftech cooler ive always been hesitant of watercooling due to the obvious risks, it would be great to see a full review or long term review on this cooler i also have a q6600 and love it. HEre are my specs in my some might say 2000 dollar PC, keep in mind i only use this computer to play and have had the q6600 for a while now:
EVGA 780i $220
4gb Corsair DDR2 C4 $120
2x250gb WD SE16 Raid 0 $150
2x9800GTX SLI $440
Intel Q6600 $200
Coolermaster HYPER TX $35
Coolermaster 690 $80
Coolermaster Real Power Pro 750 $130
Pioneer DVDRW $30
500gb WD SE16 $90
XFI XTREMEGAMER 86
TOTAL:$1581
Thats what i have right now and the prices are todays prices for the same system hope this helps. Just throwing my 2 cents in there, id probably go with ddr3 now but if u are on a budget ddr2 would do just fine, me im planning on going to ddr3 in a couple of months once mem prices go down as my ddr2 is more than enough right now for current games and apps. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK AND THANKS
EVGA 780i $220
4gb Corsair DDR2 C4 $120
2x250gb WD SE16 Raid 0 $150
2x9800GTX SLI $440
Intel Q6600 $200
Coolermaster HYPER TX $35
Coolermaster 690 $80
Coolermaster Real Power Pro 750 $130
Pioneer DVDRW $30
500gb WD SE16 $90
XFI XTREMEGAMER 86
TOTAL:$1581
Thats what i have right now and the prices are todays prices for the same system hope this helps. Just throwing my 2 cents in there, id probably go with ddr3 now but if u are on a budget ddr2 would do just fine, me im planning on going to ddr3 in a couple of months once mem prices go down as my ddr2 is more than enough right now for current games and apps. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK AND THANKS
Score
1
zenmaster
June 30, 2008 4:13:55 PM
I doubt they will need luck to OC.
The Wattage needed for systems is GREATLY overestimated in this forum.
I find it amazing that nobody reads the portions of reviews that show actual system power consumpotion.
The 9800GX2 does not match the performance of (2) 8800GTS cards.
The Q9450 may have been nice, but they were also apparently shooting for cost effective spending. The extra $150 was likely not worth the money.
The Wattage needed for systems is GREATLY overestimated in this forum.
I find it amazing that nobody reads the portions of reviews that show actual system power consumpotion.
The 9800GX2 does not match the performance of (2) 8800GTS cards.
The Q9450 may have been nice, but they were also apparently shooting for cost effective spending. The extra $150 was likely not worth the money.
Score
3
kman7607
June 30, 2008 4:49:06 PM
kijix84
June 30, 2008 5:00:40 PM
There is an article on tweaktown that shows that there is a significant difference when running two graphics cards in crossfire when one slot is running in x8. The link is here:
I'm not sure how it transfers over to Nvidia and SLI, but I imagine it would be similar. If anyone has some benchmarks i'd like to see them. Also, that sony drive you mention when I look it up it would appear that is a DVD-ROM, not a DVD-Writer like you mentioned in the description.
Otherwise it is pretty informative. Though I'm disappointed you decided not to go the Radeon 4850 Crossfire route
I'm not sure how it transfers over to Nvidia and SLI, but I imagine it would be similar. If anyone has some benchmarks i'd like to see them. Also, that sony drive you mention when I look it up it would appear that is a DVD-ROM, not a DVD-Writer like you mentioned in the description.
Otherwise it is pretty informative. Though I'm disappointed you decided not to go the Radeon 4850 Crossfire route
Score
0
navvara
June 30, 2008 5:13:36 PM
gaiden
June 30, 2008 5:40:38 PM
E8400 overclockable to at least 3.6ghz+ with aid from Thermalright U120 HS. 4850x2 in CFX should run BETTER than 8800gts in SLI under x48 board, Gigabyte is probably on par to ASUS and it has better pricing. Gskill has consistently bringing out great rams and competitive price. WD 640gb in RAID 0 will fly with 1.28 TB! Samsung has the quietest burner to my experience - Asus was the loudest. Corsair makes premium PSU and no one should pick anything else if they can help it. So there you go. I think in terms of all the aspects, this configuration would slightly out do most of the components mention in the article. Prices are est. to nearest dollar. TH config $1381, My config $1390, quality and performance wise i will take my configuration any day
Spec:
Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower ------------ $120
GIGABYTE GA-X48-DS4 LGA 775 Intel X48 ATX --------------- $225
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale 3.16GHz OEM ------------- $220
POWERCOLOR AX4850 512MD3-H Radeon HD 4850 512MB (x2) ---- $340
G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) ------ $90
CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply --- $120
Western Digital Caviar 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0 (x2) ----- $190
Thermalright Ultra 120 Heatsink ------------------------- $60
Samsung 20x DVD+- Burner -------------------------------- $25
total: -------------------------------------------------- $1390
regardless to the above average product selection, it was an interesting article though.
Spec:
Antec Nine Hundred Black Steel ATX Mid Tower ------------ $120
GIGABYTE GA-X48-DS4 LGA 775 Intel X48 ATX --------------- $225
Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale 3.16GHz OEM ------------- $220
POWERCOLOR AX4850 512MD3-H Radeon HD 4850 512MB (x2) ---- $340
G.SKILL 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 1066 (PC2 8500) ------ $90
CORSAIR CMPSU-750TX 750W ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply --- $120
Western Digital Caviar 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0 (x2) ----- $190
Thermalright Ultra 120 Heatsink ------------------------- $60
Samsung 20x DVD+- Burner -------------------------------- $25
total: -------------------------------------------------- $1390
regardless to the above average product selection, it was an interesting article though.
Score
1
Crashman
June 30, 2008 5:47:06 PM
Quote:
oo maaan, It seems that TH are being paid well by Nvidia to come with this extremely stupid Graphics cards, especially when HD4800 series are out now. Take a look: http://www.ebuyer.com/product/146415 and http://www.ebuyer.com/product/138416If you see, 2x HD4870 is £10 CHEAPER than 2x8800 GTS !!! And much much faster than Nvidia; You should be crazy to go for 8800GTS .
You're wrong, Here's a Link to show why. These systems were built in May. Grab a couple cards for the man, hop into the wayback machine, and hand them to him.
Score
2
BSMonitor
June 30, 2008 5:48:32 PM
Why not keep the Q6700?..... So your new system is $70 cheaper. You already paid for it in the other article. Why is the $70 not worth it now?
Maybe swap it for the Q9300 as the same price as Q6700. Midrange buyers probably look to the newer tech for the same price/slightly higher cost.
Or since you still have $500 in the budget, why not show us what $300 gets us for the Q9550. Give benchies for both. Once you have the platform picked out, the CPU is the easiest part to adjust based on how much cash you have left.
Maybe swap it for the Q9300 as the same price as Q6700. Midrange buyers probably look to the newer tech for the same price/slightly higher cost.
Or since you still have $500 in the budget, why not show us what $300 gets us for the Q9550. Give benchies for both. Once you have the platform picked out, the CPU is the easiest part to adjust based on how much cash you have left.
Score
0
giovanni86
June 30, 2008 5:50:57 PM
I prefer them to use nvidia over ATI. But if they had all the time in the world it would be great to see a AMD/ATI build over a INTEL/NVIDIA build, and the other way around as well AMD/NVIDIA and INTEL/ATI and see the differences if there are any at all. Great article, i was actually planning on getting a 8800GTS this might have just sealed the deal. How long in terms of life will this RIG hold out for, just thought i would ask since typically a life span for a mid range PC for me is roughly 2 years, if not 3 but that's stretching it a bit. Anyways great article once again.
Score
-1
zenmaster
June 30, 2008 6:05:47 PM
BSMonitorWhy not keep the Q6700?..... So your new system is $70 cheaper. You already paid for it in the other article. Why is the $70 not worth it now? Maybe swap it for the Q9300 as the same price as Q6700. Midrange buyers probably look to the newer tech for the same price/slightly higher cost.Or since you still have $500 in the budget, why not show us what $300 gets us for the Q9550. Give benchies for both. Once you have the platform picked out, the CPU is the easiest part to adjust based on how much cash you have left.
The reason to not show results for multiple CPUs is because this is nto a CPU review article. There are many of those around that compare the stock and overclocking potential of many diffent CPUs.
This is designed to give you an idea of what a decent build would look like in different ranges.
Often different parts are selected so you get different ideas with each selection of parts.
Yes the Q6700 may be better but then again with the selection of Water Cooling, OverClocking is coming into the equation. The Q6700 is not expected to OC that much more.
Why not the Q9300? Well if you are OverClocking it will likely not OC as high. Perhaps not even the Q9550 or Q9650. The reason are FSB walls that are more often his by Quad Core CPUs. To reach very high OC's with 1333FSB Quads you will need a far more expensive motherboard.
So the price differce that is small to start begins to grow quite a bit.
And the lower end 1333 FSB Quad Cores may still not be able to out do the Q6600 by much.
Just because they have $2000 to spend, if it does not make sense to spend it, they are not going to spend it.
And the reason they did not spend the $70 on the Q6700 this time was based on user feedback which was thatthe $70 bought you nothing. If you were not going to OC and were buying a Retail system then it could be worth it. But for an enthusiast who will adjust the speed themselves, it does not make sense to pay more for a slightly higher multiplier when the 1066 FSB chips generally don't hit a wall due to the multiplier.
Score
0
BSMonitorWhy not keep the Q6700?..... So your new system is $70 cheaper. You already paid for it in the other article. Why is the $70 not worth it now?
If they're boith the G0 stepping, a Q6700 and Q6600 should over clock to pretty much the same top speed. So when you look at it that way, the $70 is kind of wasted.
UNFORTUNATELY the Q6600 we ended up using was an older sample without the G0 stepping, but you can read more about that in the upcoming overclocking article. But the point is still valid, if you're buying new and plan to overclock the Q6600 is a better bet for the $$ because they'll both overclock the same.
Score
0
The_Blood_Raven
June 30, 2008 6:42:06 PM
zenmasterI doubt they will need luck to OC.The Wattage needed for systems is GREATLY overestimated in this forum.I find it amazing that nobody reads the portions of reviews that show actual system power consumpotion.The 9800GX2 does not match the performance of (2) 8800GTS cards.The Q9450 may have been nice, but they were also apparently shooting for cost effective spending. The extra $150 was likely not worth the money.
Actually it is not so much the wattage, that's fine, but the PSU is not good for the price, when it comes to PSUs quality is almost everything. Yes a 9800 GX2 would outperform 2 8800 GTS G92s... easily, but the price difference really is not worth it going off what cleeve said. The Q6600 works I suppose, but a decent dualcore would have been cheaper and more often then not, would have outperformed it, however that will (eventually) change. The build is fine, except the PSU I would not have chosen it, especially considering you can get a PC P&C 610w for the same.
Score
-1
funnyman06
June 30, 2008 7:15:52 PM
I think it was a excellent build, i like the addition of water cooling in a mid range system. Personally i am not a fan of SLI or X-fire, as not every game benefits from it. But i guess at this point any high end computer now a days has some form of multi-GPU.
To the people complaining about not using all 2000 dollars, or looking to spend a little bit more money. This was about getting the best bang for the buck. If you have 2G's to spend on a computer and you end up not needing it all, do you feel you have to spend more?
To this guy:
FSP is a respected PSU manufacture that creates power supplies for many other "respected" brands including OCZ, Antec, Nexus and Zalman. Only recently have they started manufacturing PSU's under their own brand name; Fortron Source, which use high end components like Yate Loon fans.
To the people complaining about not using all 2000 dollars, or looking to spend a little bit more money. This was about getting the best bang for the buck. If you have 2G's to spend on a computer and you end up not needing it all, do you feel you have to spend more?
To this guy:
Quote:
Actually it is not so much the wattage, that's fine, but the PSU is not good for the price, when it comes to PSUs quality is almost everything.FSP is a respected PSU manufacture that creates power supplies for many other "respected" brands including OCZ, Antec, Nexus and Zalman. Only recently have they started manufacturing PSU's under their own brand name; Fortron Source, which use high end components like Yate Loon fans.
Score
0
Noya
June 30, 2008 7:35:03 PM
Crashman
June 30, 2008 7:46:24 PM
Noya said:
Built the systems in May and this article comes out at the very end of June? This is an online review site, not print...pathetic.Sorry d00d, the article was supposed to go up three weeks ago, just before the GTX280 launch, but the high-end system builder was laid up in the hospital from reconstructive surgery following an accident. I'll make sure he knows he's an idiot for spending time in the hospital when he should have been running benchmarks instead.
Pathetic for sure, he could have waited to go to the hospital. What a wimp.
Score
1
zenmaster
June 30, 2008 8:28:50 PM
millisecDon't get me wrong I do like Swiftech but.. Tom's keeps pushing this Swiftech watercooling that has been shown inferior by anandtech and others(corsair nautilus too) to air cooling with a top heatpipe heatsink like the Thermalright 120 Ultra & others. Makes me wonder about the advertising money and if I can trust anything I read on Tom's. Even for a "quiet" setup you need a decent fan which makes noise and the water pump is not exactly silent. Not to mention the install they did in this article was hideous...
And here is a link to that section.
This water cooling unit is nice, but better and cheaper air solutions were available.
In regards to the PSU comments by others, that would not have been my first choice, but it's not a bad brand. A step down from the Seanic OEM models most likely but I suspect it is just a unit that had in for some reason so they used it in the review. I'm not sure they would have purchased that unit to use.
Score
0
rhysee
June 30, 2008 8:35:40 PM
Shadow703793
June 30, 2008 11:26:07 PM
zenmasterI doubt they will need luck to OC.The Wattage needed for systems is GREATLY overestimated in this forum.I find it amazing that nobody reads the portions of reviews that show actual system power consumpotion.The 9800GX2 does not match the performance of (2) 8800GTS cards.The Q9450 may have been nice, but they were also apparently shooting for cost effective spending. The extra $150 was likely not worth the money.
Well said!
Score
0
Shadow703793
June 30, 2008 11:29:45 PM
funnyman06 To this guy:FSP is a respected PSU manufacture that creates power supplies for many other "respected" brands including OCZ, Antec, Nexus and Zalman. Only recently have they started manufacturing PSU's under their own brand name; Fortron Source, which use high end components like Yate Loon fans.
+1
Score
0
Anonymous
July 1, 2008 4:29:22 AM
Gigabyte X48T $309
OCZ ReaperX 4GB PC3-10666 1333MHz 6-5-5-20 DDR3 Kit $380
2x250gb WD SE16 Raid 0 $150
eVGA 8800 GT AKIMBO SC Edit 512MB DDR3 (512-P3-N808-AR) $199
Intel E8400 $189
ZEROtherm BTF92 $35
Thermaltake W0116RU Toughpower 750W $173
Samsung 20x DVDRW $35
Mid-Tower Case of your choice $120 (there's a ton out there)
$1590
OC to your hearts content!
If you think you're needing more power than this in a mid-level machine your smokin a fatty and not sharing. CPU runs nominally below 45'C whilst gaming without the need for any esoteric H20 cooling. Memory has a sick amount of head room but blazes as it is @ 1333 MHz coupled with low latency. Vista Ultimate boot times are around 35 secs and applications open upon clicking.
This board has all you'll ever need built-in for a good 4 years and you can always move up to a newer Intel next gen Q-core and price rational graphics as prices fall if Quad is where it's in near future and gaming to the edge is your gig.
OCZ ReaperX 4GB PC3-10666 1333MHz 6-5-5-20 DDR3 Kit $380
2x250gb WD SE16 Raid 0 $150
eVGA 8800 GT AKIMBO SC Edit 512MB DDR3 (512-P3-N808-AR) $199
Intel E8400 $189
ZEROtherm BTF92 $35
Thermaltake W0116RU Toughpower 750W $173
Samsung 20x DVDRW $35
Mid-Tower Case of your choice $120 (there's a ton out there)
$1590
OC to your hearts content!
If you think you're needing more power than this in a mid-level machine your smokin a fatty and not sharing. CPU runs nominally below 45'C whilst gaming without the need for any esoteric H20 cooling. Memory has a sick amount of head room but blazes as it is @ 1333 MHz coupled with low latency. Vista Ultimate boot times are around 35 secs and applications open upon clicking.
This board has all you'll ever need built-in for a good 4 years and you can always move up to a newer Intel next gen Q-core and price rational graphics as prices fall if Quad is where it's in near future and gaming to the edge is your gig.
Score
-1
Crashman
July 2, 2008 3:46:48 AM
p4l1ndr0m3Other things that are different:CasePSUMotherboardCPUHeatsinkType and Amount of MemoryHard DriveLeave their graphics cards in the setup for all I care, the other changes will STILL perform better (yes, even the CPU heatsink)
I don't think the Case, PSU, Heatsink, and hard drive changes will make any diffrence in performance.
Your CPU choice is a little better but costs $80 more, so that cancels out. Memory MIGHT overclock better I guess, but 4GB is nice to have for non-benchmark stuff like loading times. Mobo is diffrent but we'd probably have picked something similar if the 4850's were available for our spec anyway.
All & all, it's not a bad system but it's more expensive... a tradeoff. I don't see something that's so compelling it's like "Wow! that'd be hellaawesome!" Except maybe the 4850s, but we've covered that point a hundred times now...
Score
0
seanmeister
July 3, 2008 2:24:35 PM
The other bottle neck IMHO is the $150 RAID 0 configuration with just 8megs cache each on an integrated chipset. RAID 0 using integrated controllers are generally under-performers since southbridges have historically slower components which (can) get in the way of data transfers. Some primary and rudimentary BIOS calls via a southbridge are slowed significantly versus a PCIx16 raid controller. There's a reason why better PCI16x raid controllers are 300$ sometimes
These drives also weakened the deal since they do not employ perpindicular technology ( PMT) and if some aren't familiar you might want to WIKI it as it may have cost the rig some performance points. Most likely just 1 RAPTOR X ( 2.9 latency vs 8 on WD = fast and 16MB vs 8MB cache = faster yet) would yield a better result simply due to the spin rate (10k)allowing for much greater data transmissions for both read and write and might provide wattage overhead vs 2 HDs for overclocking needs. In addition, RAID 0 performs better with tighter sector formatting (16k which prevents any wasted sector space) which must be input at setup and is not the default option most of the time. The E8400CPU Wolfdale might have been a better choice as Quad cores are still like teets on a bull - the system isnt using them so they are bypassed 'function calls' probably resulting in lost cpu thread cycletimes for the sake of gaming of course. QUAD COREs wont really matter until apps and OSes are threaded for it. The only real reason why a QUAD core ever outperfroms a quality CoreDUo is the cache banks which is sometimes as much as 12megs on a QUAD vs 4 or 6megs on a Duo. The changes I mentioned IMHO would be worth the extra 50$ in terms of overall performance. In the humble words of Bill Murray in Stripes " thats a fact Jack!" .
These drives also weakened the deal since they do not employ perpindicular technology ( PMT) and if some aren't familiar you might want to WIKI it as it may have cost the rig some performance points. Most likely just 1 RAPTOR X ( 2.9 latency vs 8 on WD = fast and 16MB vs 8MB cache = faster yet) would yield a better result simply due to the spin rate (10k)allowing for much greater data transmissions for both read and write and might provide wattage overhead vs 2 HDs for overclocking needs. In addition, RAID 0 performs better with tighter sector formatting (16k which prevents any wasted sector space) which must be input at setup and is not the default option most of the time. The E8400CPU Wolfdale might have been a better choice as Quad cores are still like teets on a bull - the system isnt using them so they are bypassed 'function calls' probably resulting in lost cpu thread cycletimes for the sake of gaming of course. QUAD COREs wont really matter until apps and OSes are threaded for it. The only real reason why a QUAD core ever outperfroms a quality CoreDUo is the cache banks which is sometimes as much as 12megs on a QUAD vs 4 or 6megs on a Duo. The changes I mentioned IMHO would be worth the extra 50$ in terms of overall performance. In the humble words of Bill Murray in Stripes " thats a fact Jack!" . Score
0
mjclevenger
July 3, 2008 5:07:52 PM
Crashman
July 3, 2008 5:44:27 PM
mjclevengerIf I wanted to build a similar system based on your specs, is there another cooling kit that you could suggest that would avoid the hardware issue you encountered when you installed it in the case?
Swiftech has a box-shaped spacer that might have solved the problem, you should ask him about that!
Score
0
kanthu
July 4, 2008 7:14:34 PM
Already looking forward for the next SBM.
Coz in the $1000 & $2000 systems 750i SLI chipsets were chosen.
Considering that @ the time of writing this article ATI 48** werent available, that decision can be forgiven.
But next time around looking forward to see ATI 48** in place of nVidia GPUs & P45/X48 in place of those 750i SLIs.
I would also suggest TH(toms)to include a couple of P45s if & when theres the next mobo (X48 - i dont see the point of SLI now) shootout to see if they lose out considerably due to their PCIe 2.0 *8 bandwidth(CF). Throw in midrange & high end(4870) for good measure for those CF tests
Coz in the $1000 & $2000 systems 750i SLI chipsets were chosen.
Considering that @ the time of writing this article ATI 48** werent available, that decision can be forgiven.
But next time around looking forward to see ATI 48** in place of nVidia GPUs & P45/X48 in place of those 750i SLIs.
I would also suggest TH(toms)to include a couple of P45s if & when theres the next mobo (X48 - i dont see the point of SLI now) shootout to see if they lose out considerably due to their PCIe 2.0 *8 bandwidth(CF). Throw in midrange & high end(4870) for good measure for those CF tests
Score
0
sarkastikartist
July 11, 2008 10:33:02 AM
personally i woulda gone with something similar to what i have below.. tell me what you think..
Case + Accessories
NZXT Alpha ATX Mid Tower Case w/ Window $64.99
ZALMAN ZM850-HP 850W PSU $184.99
Mobo
ASUS M3A32-MVP Deluxe 790FX $189.99
CPU + Accessories
Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 3.0GHz 125W $113.99
ZALMAN CNPS9700 110mm CPU Cooler $59.99
Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound $5.99
Video
ASUS EAH4850 Radeon HD 4850 512MB $199.99 x 2 = $379.98
Audio
8CH ASUS AI Audio 2 Realtek HD Audio Onboard $0
Memory
OCZ Reaper HPC Ed. 4GB (2 x 2GB) PC2 6400 $91.99
Drives
WD SE16 WD6400AAKS 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s HDD $94.99 x 2 = $179.98
SAMSUNG 20X DVD±R w/ LightScribe SATA SH-S203N $26.99
SABRENT CRW-UINB 65-in-1 Card Reader $13.99
Total (without shipping) $1,322.87
Case + Accessories
NZXT Alpha ATX Mid Tower Case w/ Window $64.99
ZALMAN ZM850-HP 850W PSU $184.99
Mobo
ASUS M3A32-MVP Deluxe 790FX $189.99
CPU + Accessories
Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 3.0GHz 125W $113.99
ZALMAN CNPS9700 110mm CPU Cooler $59.99
Arctic Silver 5 Thermal Compound $5.99
Video
ASUS EAH4850 Radeon HD 4850 512MB $199.99 x 2 = $379.98
Audio
8CH ASUS AI Audio 2 Realtek HD Audio Onboard $0
Memory
OCZ Reaper HPC Ed. 4GB (2 x 2GB) PC2 6400 $91.99
Drives
WD SE16 WD6400AAKS 640GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s HDD $94.99 x 2 = $179.98
SAMSUNG 20X DVD±R w/ LightScribe SATA SH-S203N $26.99
SABRENT CRW-UINB 65-in-1 Card Reader $13.99
Total (without shipping) $1,322.87
Score
0
TwoGrizz
August 12, 2008 7:47:14 PM
Cleeve, in responding to Moe's post, you started to say that you "would buy a..." and continued on to say you would go for an Intel x38 and two 4850's. I'm curious as to which component didnt quite get said and which models of the 4850's and x38 you would choose. I'm asking because Im looking to build a system in this price range and would love to hear your recommendations.
Thanks
Thanks
Score
0
Related resources
- System Builder Marathon, May '09: $1,300 Enthusiast PC Forum
- Solvedwhy is the system builder marathon 2013 based on mini itx plat form? Forum
- SolvedNo Newegg SuperCombo for the current System Builder's Marathon? Forum
- System Builder Marathon, Q1 2014? Forum
- SolvedAre System Builder Marathon Rigs Suitable for a First Build? Forum
- System Builder marathon $500 Forum
- New $1000 gaming system or System Builder Marathon, Q4 2012: $1,000 Forum
- Real Winners of the System Builder Marathon marc. 2012? Forum
- System Builder Marathon Giveaway Winner announcments? Forum
- "System Builder Marathon" $1200 Rig? Forum
- How to enter the System Builder Marathon competition ? Forum
- Next System builder Marathon Forum
- System Builder Marathon Contest Forum
- System builder marathon notebook edition Forum
- Card Alternative from the System Builder Marathon Article Forum
- More resources
!