Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2009: $1,300 Enthusiast PC

Tags:
  • System Builder
  • HD
  • Radeon
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
December 23, 2009 5:01:17 AM

Last quarter, we presented you with four Radeon HD 4850s under $1,250. This time around, we put together a very respectable Core i5 system with a couple of Radeon HD 5850s in CrossFire. Let's see how it compares against the previous "QuadFire" system.

System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2009: $1,300 Enthusiast PC : Read more

More about : system builder marathon dec 2009 300 enthusiast

December 23, 2009 5:09:20 AM

Great build Don! The only thing I'd change is to use the RAM from the $2500 system! It's too bad you didn't have enough money left over to buy a big cooler.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 5:22:41 AM

Very smoothe build, pretty limited with the 5850s with the pricing once past that, but this thing handles it well, esp since the cpu was lucky enough to stay fast while undervolted.

Not all cpus are the same, this one compared to the $2500 build definatly shows it. Takes a bit of luck sometimes or bad luck.
Score
8
Related resources
December 23, 2009 5:39:57 AM

Just a thought, but why not use an I7 920 CPU, with an asrock x58 Extreme motherboard? I see a lot of people bought their I7 920 CPU for 199 dollars and the motherboard costs 170 dollars.
Pair that up with OCZ 1333 platinum 7-7-7-24 memory, that can easily be overclocked to 1600 7-7-7-24 and you'll have a powerful system with 36 PCI-e lanes and loads of CPU overclocking room thanks to asrock's great motherboard.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 6:06:36 AM

Good article, and yes the quadfire setup was sweet back then!! I just have a question/suggestion to make, and if you find worthy of a replay I'd much appreciate it.

Since you are willing to experiment with different setups, and since we see the problem with the Phenom in the application suite, why not try something more exotic like pairing a nvidia based card with the crossfire cards to act like a PPU / video transcoding accelerator (TMPEng supports CUDA at least to act as a filter). I don't know if this makes sense in a marathon build, but I'd like to see something like this benchmarked.
Score
2
December 23, 2009 6:27:39 AM

Those delta T over ambient figures worry me. We don't all live in Fairbanks, AK.
Score
2
December 23, 2009 6:53:31 AM

This is an excellent build.
With an aftermarket cooler this build will be flawless.

Power Draw,Performance all were nice.

The case looks nice too.
Score
4
December 23, 2009 6:54:40 AM

I'm not especially interested in the gaming results per se, but this build certainly solidifies my choice to go with an Intel processor over AMD based on productivity benchmarks.
Score
2
December 23, 2009 7:19:27 AM

Aside from the video cards, this is essentially the same build as the $2,500 build recently posted performance-wise. What is the point?
Score
-6
December 23, 2009 7:41:23 AM

Good system over all… an extra hard drive for backup is essential and the wiring needs some tiding up.

Score
-1
December 23, 2009 10:30:09 AM

More specifically, these guys are trying different things each time we do a round of SBMs--sometimes the results are great, and sometimes they're not as good. The point is that we're putting the machines together and reporting on the results so that you can decide if you want to do the same or not. And hopefully, when we come across a result that doesn't look so hot, we'll call out where our mistake was in building the box.

Just think how boring these would be if every quarter we did a Core i7-920-based machine at $2,500, a Core i5-750 machine at $1,500, and a Phenom II-based box at $700! =)
Score
9
December 23, 2009 10:30:58 AM

Thank you for this build. Can't wait for the comparison of all the December builds. My last computer was significantly influenced by a previous enthusiast build, and it has worked well so far.

Score
0
December 23, 2009 11:00:54 AM

That looks like a Corshair tx750 to me
Score
-1
December 23, 2009 11:40:49 AM

I really don;t understand the choice of using 2X 5850 when you could have gotten a 5970 for $20 less. Yea, i know, the day you built it they were not in stock, but the waiting list was down to a week or less a month ago, and they're readily available now... That $20 would have upgraded the CPU to an i7 or the RAM past 4GB.


Otherwise, great build.
Score
-2
December 23, 2009 11:48:31 AM

zelanniiI really don;t understand the choice of using 2X 5850 when you could have gotten a 5970 for $20 less. Yea, i know, the day you built it they were not in stock, but the waiting list was down to a week or less a month ago, and they're readily available now... That $20 would have upgraded the CPU to an i7 or the RAM past 4GB. Otherwise, great build.


Actually availability was still a guess when these were ordered. They were ordered a week before the 5970 launched, and it was guessed that the 5970 wouldn't be available for several weeks after launch based on availability of 5870's.

What I'd love to see is a comparison of "every possible" 58xx/59xx configuration :) 
Score
1
December 23, 2009 12:12:17 PM

nice build, but does anybody know why the build got raped on Hawx
Score
0
December 23, 2009 12:21:50 PM

A Great big thank you for including mainstream application benchmarks. Much appreciated.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 12:21:57 PM

Wow, this thing totally pwned the Sep. AMD build. Power consumption is way less too. Best bang for buck today.

The only thing I didn't like is the cable management. I'm a cable management freak and to see Tom's just shove the cables in there like that disappoints me.
Score
-1
December 23, 2009 12:32:27 PM

"we have to wonder what four of the new Radeon HD 5750s could do in quad-CrossFire. And with a price tag as low as $480" -- THe cheapest 5750 on NewEgg is $139 x 4 = $556. You had me all excited too.. bout ready to do a new build, was gonna switch my two 5850's to four 5750's but I'd rather pay the extra $50.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 12:37:56 PM

cangeliniMore specifically, these guys are trying different things each time we do a round of SBMs--sometimes the results are great, and sometimes they're not as good. The point is that we're putting the machines together and reporting on the results so that you can decide if you want to do the same or not. And hopefully, when we come across a result that doesn't look so hot, we'll call out where our mistake was in building the box. Just think how boring these would be if every quarter we did a Core i7-920-based machine at $2,500, a Core i5-750 machine at $1,500, and a Phenom II-based box at $700! =)


ARGGGH!!! Chris! Don't put those thoughts in my head!! :p 

This was cool to see what that Intel CPU could do. I am kinda jealous now...kinda. Of course, I got a PII 550BE to go 3.7GHz@1.375 on air for $99. So, I can't be too sad...except...C3 stepping came out 3 weeks later. lol

Another great read and something to consider down the line in building my next rig. I actually am seeing value for the buck now in a line of Intel CPUs. I just wish that i7-920 had been $50 cheaper. I might have gone with them.

Thanks for another good article, guys.
Score
1
December 23, 2009 12:46:22 PM

Very impressive I might add. Makes me wish I had kept my i5 and purchased a new MB. Just recently I had an MSI BIG BANG with a i5 750. I tried to run a 4970x2 and a GTX 295 together for some reason both cards, the board and the processor were fried. For the life of me I havent a clue what happened, but it is all good as I have RMA'd all parts but my wall mounted 4870x2. The rest were sold:( 
Score
0
December 23, 2009 1:01:45 PM

zelanniiI really don;t understand the choice of using 2X 5850 when you could have gotten a 5970 for $20 less.... That $20 would have upgraded the CPU to an i7 or the RAM past 4GB. Otherwise, great build.

I totally agree, The same idea came to me once I started reading the specs. Besides,With the 5970 Don could have saved another 20-25 USD by switching to a single PCI-e 2 16x slot mobo (e.g ASUS P7P55D). This way the build could've sticked to the 1300 USD mark! My only concern is that the PSU then might not be enough if the GPUs are OCed to 5870 clocks, which most 5970s are able to reach!
Score
-1
December 23, 2009 1:10:00 PM

zelanniiI really don;t understand the choice of using 2X 5850 when you could have gotten a 5970 for $20 less.... That $20 would have upgraded the CPU to an i7 or the RAM past 4GB. Otherwise, great build.

I totally agree, The same idea came to me once I started reading the specs. Besides,With the 5970 Don could have saved another 20-25 USD by switching to a single PCI-e 2 16x slot mobo (e.g ASUS P7P55D). This way the build could've sticked to the 1300 USD mark! My only concern is that the PSU then might not be enough if the GPUs are OCed to 5870 clocks, which most 5970s are able to reach!
Score
-3
December 23, 2009 1:27:38 PM

The "study" you guys did a while back shows that 3 cores seem to be the sweet spot for gaming right now. The build I'm about ready to buy from NewEgg is an AMD 720 with a 5850 vid card, apogee extreme watercooling, that crucial 1333 memory, gigabyte mb, case, DVDRW, WD black edition HD, and an 850w ps for under a grand after combo discounts, so one more 5850 = $1300 and I'm betting a 720 running at 4.4ghz on water would kick the snizzle out of this thing.
Score
-1
December 23, 2009 1:29:08 PM

One of the best builds yet great job!!!

Overall a much better use of money than what was done with the $2500 build.
Score
4
December 23, 2009 1:39:41 PM

fozzie76The "study" you guys did a while back shows that 3 cores seem to be the sweet spot for gaming right now. The build I'm about ready to buy from NewEgg is an AMD 720 with a 5850 vid card, apogee extreme watercooling, that crucial 1333 memory, gigabyte mb, case, DVDRW, WD black edition HD, and an 850w ps for under a grand after combo discounts, so one more 5850 = $1300 and I'm betting a 720 running at 4.4ghz on water would kick the snizzle out of this thing.

Your joking right ?
Score
2
December 23, 2009 1:47:37 PM

notty22Your joking right ?


I don't think he/she was. lol

And...a 720BE @ 4.4GHz? Hm. I only got mine to 3.4 on air. If water is that much better, I'm gonna start shoppin around for a WC solution lol
Score
-1
Anonymous
December 23, 2009 2:16:43 PM

For the same build on Newegg's wattage calculator, Newegg is suggesting about 300 watts more than the max CPU/GPU load that Tom's showed on the power/temperature benchmarks. Is Newegg always off on this?
Score
0
December 23, 2009 2:17:25 PM

I just built one for a friend, got it to 4ghz on air using a zalman 120mm heatsink. 3.8 to 4ghz seems to be the standard for air on the 720be, just read the reviews on newegg. If you only pulled 3.4 you must be using that crap stock AMD heatsink. Took me all of 5 minutes.. bumped up the vcore and adjusted the multiplier.. runs about 59C with all 3 cores maxed.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 2:26:41 PM

While the build id impressive, I think it missed the point of a "Mid-range" gaming machine. Graphics performance is outstanding, but this setup just wants a 2560x1600 monitor, which is almost the price of the machine itself! Even with eyefinity, three half decent 1080P monitors with the Displayport to DVI adapter, you're talking $700 worth of monitors, which is half the cost of the machine itself. I'm not saying it's a bad build, it's just the graphical preformance is way beyond the call of duty. I do think the machines should include monitors, keyboard, mouse, speakers, etc. to reflect a much better idea of how much it would cost to play a game at a specific resolution.
Score
4
December 23, 2009 2:42:14 PM

AmaneeFor the same build on Newegg's wattage calculator, Newegg is suggesting about 300 watts more than the max CPU/GPU load that Tom's showed on the power/temperature benchmarks. Is Newegg always off on this?


Newegg has lots of "padding" in its numbers to help account for having too much power on the wrong rail and not enough on the rail you need.
Score
2
December 23, 2009 2:45:49 PM

Well, it really point out that 2 5850 are mostly the same as 2 5870. The result are almost the same on the 2500$ PC and the 1300$ PC.

The thing is, would a 5970 be a wiser choice?
Score
0
December 23, 2009 2:47:49 PM

meh

that's how I feel about this machine
Score
-4
December 23, 2009 2:50:04 PM

uh_nomehthat's how I feel about this machine


Well, you can't get much more performance than that... so I don't buy the meh...
Score
1
December 23, 2009 3:05:08 PM

I still say its a good build for the cash spent. Most of our REAL gamers would probably be very happy with this build. Although I do agree with the above comments on monitors, I dont agree that they are a must at this point in life.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 3:11:51 PM

Nice build and write up. A few comments:
- No one builds a $1300
Score
-6
December 23, 2009 3:15:45 PM

Nice build. But no one builds a $1300 pc, and suddenly discovers they don't have another $50 for a good cooler. That's irritating, because everyone who built this pc would have put in a cooler and got a much better overclock.

I wish you guys would worry less about meeting an exact budget, and instead build 3 different pcs in the 500-700, 1000-1400, and 2000-3000 range.

Not including a aftermarket cooler in this build is just rediculous.

Score
0
December 23, 2009 3:18:40 PM

AmaneeFor the same build on Newegg's wattage calculator, Newegg is suggesting about 300 watts more than the max CPU/GPU load that Tom's showed on the power/temperature benchmarks. Is Newegg always off on this?


I always use the thermaltake PSU calculator: http://www.thermaltake.outervision.com/
Score
0
December 23, 2009 3:20:19 PM

someguypersonWhile the build id impressive, I think it missed the point of a "Mid-range" gaming machine. Graphics performance is outstanding, but this setup just wants a 2560x1600 monitor, which is almost the price of the machine itself! Even with eyefinity, three half decent 1080P monitors with the Displayport to DVI adapter, you're talking $700 worth of monitors, which is half the cost of the machine itself. I'm not saying it's a bad build, it's just the graphical preformance is way beyond the call of duty. I do think the machines should include monitors, keyboard, mouse, speakers, etc. to reflect a much better idea of how much it would cost to play a game at a specific resolution.



Maybe even the OS (even thought that is easy for someone to add) if we are going that far. I agree with the idea of building one 2560x1600, one 1920x1200 and one 1650x1050 one month and just let us know what other goodies like water cooling, TV cards, SSD, big storage, etc. you can get and still stay in budget and make great performance in the respective resolution tier. Maybe even bump up the budget to 1,2 and 3K or more to make it work with the peripherals and whatnot. 120 FPS is nice, but I really can't process information that fast, even if my PC can.

Great articles, always. Research is always interesting, especially since Tom's keeps it fresh by mixing it up.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 3:28:05 PM

mainstream?!?! mainstream my ass...
Score
0
December 23, 2009 3:45:13 PM

BY god I think we have gotten slightly more obnoxious in my absence...... hmmmmm!
Score
0
December 23, 2009 4:10:12 PM

mistake on the first page, it should be the TX under the power supply... the HX series is much better.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 4:18:30 PM

AmaneeFor the same build on Newegg's wattage calculator, Newegg is suggesting about 300 watts more than the max CPU/GPU load that Tom's showed on the power/temperature benchmarks. Is Newegg always off on this?


yeah, according to newegg you need 1100 W power supply for yesterdays $2500 machine - and clearly it doesn't; but hey it's newegg and when you go up 200W that usually means your getting dinged for an extra $50, plus their are a lot of PSUs that can't deliver their advertised wattage or adequate clean power even on a good day.

sincreatorI always use the thermaltake PSU calculator: http://www.thermaltake.outervision.com/


thanks for the tip
Score
0
December 23, 2009 4:37:32 PM

@Coldmast. I usually put the CPU utilization(TDP) to 100%, and I also put the system load to 100%. I always put the capacitor aging to 25% as well. I always recommend going about 100w above what the PSU calculator says. So if the calculator says 550w, I would recommend a 650w usually. As you can tell from the suggested PSU's that pop up, Thermaltake themselves recommend one a bit higher as well. Most likely to cover future upgrades I would guess.
Score
-1
December 23, 2009 4:41:14 PM

It would be nice if we could see something more demanding than Fallout as the RPG choice. Isn't The Witcher or even Mass Effect more demanding than Fallout? What about Dragon Age?
Score
-1
December 23, 2009 5:06:18 PM

fozzie76I just built one for a friend, got it to 4ghz on air using a zalman 120mm heatsink. 3.8 to 4ghz seems to be the standard for air on the 720be, just read the reviews on newegg. If you only pulled 3.4 you must be using that crap stock AMD heatsink. Took me all of 5 minutes.. bumped up the vcore and adjusted the multiplier.. runs about 59C with all 3 cores maxed.


Nah. I have a ZeroTherm Nirvana NV120 on it with AS5. But, I don't get near 59C. I'd never run a CPU that hot. Mine is running 3.4GHz@26Cidle/44Cfull. Plus, mine's unlocked on 4 cores, not 3.

I'm sure I could bump the CPU-V more and raise the mult and the ref clock. Or maybe not. I might just have a weak chip. I really didn't try to OC the 720 that much. 3.4 worked for me at the time.

As for my 550BE in the new rig I just built, I unlocked it to 4 cores and overclocked it to 3.7 right now with a 92mm Zalman HSF and it's only at 1.375V and not hitting 50C full load either. That took me all of 30 mins, with rebooting for fine tuning and all...and of course, 7+ hours of Prime95 64-bit testing to ensure stability.

Besides, I don't have lots of time to sit around and tweak for 4-6 hours and compare CPU-V and its translation to increased clock or mult benefit.

I get a good stable clock right out of the chute, then I'm happy.

But...4.4GHz? C'mon. Guys on OC sites aren't even getting that on water, and they are guys who are overclocking experts.
Score
0
December 23, 2009 5:09:59 PM

Stock cooler??? Stock cooler!!! #^*()&*%$ budgets! (I think I would have figured out a way to get a better cooler.) It was a clever poly to undervolt in order to maintain some overclock. The i5 seems to be a great chip even at stock speeds just by virtue of its turbo mode.
Score
-1
December 23, 2009 6:00:53 PM

That Far Cry 2 benchmark shows a 99% performance gain from overclocking at 2560x1600 with AA enabled, that is ridiculous.
Score
-1
December 23, 2009 7:14:51 PM

I'm looking at an add for a local retailer who's name sounds like "French Fr*'s". I see an MSI X58 motherboard with a Core i7 920 for $279.00. I wonder how something like this would affect the budget build :) 
Score
0
December 23, 2009 7:17:01 PM

Hum, can you post company names here... Let's see. The above mentioned store was Frys Electronics.
Score
-1
      • 1 / 2
      • 2
      • Newest
!