System Builder Marathon, Sept. 2010: $1000 Enthusiast PC
Tags:
- System Builder
- Performance
-
Graphics
Last response: in Reviews comments
In this quarter's System Builder Marathon, we balance out our CPU and graphics subsystems, rather than piling on the GPU performance like last time. The results are shocking, to be quite honest. Check out the performance of our $1000 enthusiast system.
System Builder Marathon, Sept. 2010: $1000 Enthusiast PC : Read more
System Builder Marathon, Sept. 2010: $1000 Enthusiast PC : Read more
More about : system builder marathon sept 2010 1000 enthusiast
sassan_88
September 7, 2010 6:34:09 AM
Anonymous
September 7, 2010 6:37:52 AM
Related resources
- System Builder Marathon, August 2012: $1000 Enthusiast PC - Forum
- System Builder Marathon, May '09: $1,300 Enthusiast PC - Forum
- WEIGH IN: $1200 AMD system for Sept. System Builder Marathon - 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
E_manWonder why the i5 vs the 1055t?
This isn't really an i5 vs. 1055T article, there aren't even any 1055T performance numbers here. It's focused on the current $1000 PC vs the previous $1000 PC.
Having said that, performance between all the builds will be compared in the upcoming conclusion article, and the ~$200 price of both the i5-750 and 1055T more than justifies a comparison. I'm certainly interested in seeing how they stack up against one another.
E_man I mean, the 1055t is pretty close to the i7 in multithreaded apps, and enthusiasts tend to run multithreaded programs.
Enthusiasts run a lot of stuff, heavily threaded and sometimes only using a processor. Enthusiasts play games, too, and those rarely take advantage of more than two or three cores...
Score
8
iamtheking123
September 7, 2010 7:42:58 AM
I think the question you guys are missing is: do you really need to spend $1000? As it stands you could build the June $1000 PC today for about $850 or so. And I have no doubt that a system like that would have no problem gaming a few years into the future. In terms of sheer performance, this build is better, but the June build is far more bang for the buck.
Score
-10
SpadeM
September 7, 2010 11:18:17 AM
Tamz_msc
September 7, 2010 11:22:06 AM
dauthus
September 7, 2010 11:24:00 AM
elel
September 7, 2010 11:43:57 AM
Anonymous
September 7, 2010 12:14:00 PM
willgart
September 7, 2010 12:31:51 PM
burnley14
September 7, 2010 12:40:08 PM
jgv115
September 7, 2010 1:00:44 PM
Marcus52
September 7, 2010 1:37:54 PM
iamtheking123I think the question you guys are missing is: do you really need to spend $1000? As it stands you could build the June $1000 PC today for about $850 or so. And I have no doubt that a system like that would have no problem gaming a few years into the future. In terms of sheer performance, this build is better, but the June build is far more bang for the buck.
Why spend more than $400? You can buy a computer for that. Why even buy a computer at all, you don't need one. In fact, imagine all the money you could save without having to pay for internet access and upgrading and all.
Get rid of the cell phone too - a land line is all you need. And, why do you need more than the TV you can get that's broadcast through the air for free? Forget cable and all that nonsense.
/end sarcasm
Score
7
Moores Law
September 7, 2010 1:40:14 PM
doron
September 7, 2010 1:48:34 PM
I never understand you reporters at toms, you barely show game benchmarks with the highest graphical details possible (with the exception of Mr. Soderstorm's review here). I can't think of any reason not to crank up graphics performance as much as I can in games, especially when I buy a 1000$ + system, unless I want to demonstrate my cpu prowess, but that's why all the other benchmarks are for aren't they?
Score
-2
Ubrales
September 7, 2010 1:52:15 PM
hemelskonijn
September 7, 2010 2:06:14 PM
Marcus52:
Though you where being sarcastic for the lot of us your right, i just bought a brand new prebuild system including a phenom II x6 (1055t) 4 gigs of ram a raid 0 disk setup (2x 1tb 7200rpm 32meg WD10EADS) and and a sad radeon 5450 and though the graphics card is out of style and needs replacement already i don't think i have much to complain about considering this build cost me little under 600 euro including shipping and handling.
I use a land line combined with voip (yes i use it on my mobile to) so i really only pay for my mobile internet and my DSL. And i get my TV from a combination of Free To Air DVB-S and DVB-T wich works well and gets me over 30 channels in full HD at the cost of a setop box two dishes 3 LNB and a DiSEq switch. No cable provider will give me that much HD content specially not for free!
The conclusion could be that i am an enthusiast on a budget and i don't need 2k or even 1k rigs. That is not to say i don't like reading up on them or would not accept one if it was send my way ... just that a lot of us can do with a lot less on a less extreme budget.
Though you where being sarcastic for the lot of us your right, i just bought a brand new prebuild system including a phenom II x6 (1055t) 4 gigs of ram a raid 0 disk setup (2x 1tb 7200rpm 32meg WD10EADS) and and a sad radeon 5450 and though the graphics card is out of style and needs replacement already i don't think i have much to complain about considering this build cost me little under 600 euro including shipping and handling.
I use a land line combined with voip (yes i use it on my mobile to) so i really only pay for my mobile internet and my DSL. And i get my TV from a combination of Free To Air DVB-S and DVB-T wich works well and gets me over 30 channels in full HD at the cost of a setop box two dishes 3 LNB and a DiSEq switch. No cable provider will give me that much HD content specially not for free!
The conclusion could be that i am an enthusiast on a budget and i don't need 2k or even 1k rigs. That is not to say i don't like reading up on them or would not accept one if it was send my way ... just that a lot of us can do with a lot less on a less extreme budget.
Score
-5
nerrawg
September 7, 2010 2:25:45 PM
Great build article - was informative to see what extent a stronger CPU platform can counterbalance a stronger GPU setup even in gaming performance. Everybody seems to be talking about the Phenom II X6, but it seems to me that everything AMD phenom II series with at least 4 cores; from an unlocked B50/55 to 965 and the X6 offer pre
Score
0
nerrawg
September 7, 2010 2:30:16 PM
... all overclock similarly (3.6-3.8 Ghz reliably) and offer the same tier of gaming performance when overclocked. Likewise the Intel quad core I5 and I7's appear to be one tier above at least - especially when overclocked. Then you just have to sit back and ask yourself what you budget is. In this regard the article appears to me to support the notion that if you are going to spend more than $1000 you should spend some extra cash on getting intel - even when going for a gaming build
Score
4
jestersage
September 7, 2010 2:35:38 PM
Very nice! Straightforward, simple to assemble and rock-solid value.
Too bad I can only afford the poor-man's (or -enthusiast's) system build which I am looking forward to reading tomorrow.
It seems to me this build will win out over yesterday's $2000 machine later this week when all 3 are compared. I hope the $400 build could actually squeak in an upset.
Thanks, Tom's Hardware! Nice evening reading tonight. I'm very patiently waiting for tomorrow's article... Barely...
Too bad I can only afford the poor-man's (or -enthusiast's) system build which I am looking forward to reading tomorrow.
It seems to me this build will win out over yesterday's $2000 machine later this week when all 3 are compared. I hope the $400 build could actually squeak in an upset.
Thanks, Tom's Hardware! Nice evening reading tonight. I'm very patiently waiting for tomorrow's article... Barely...
Score
0
enzo matrix
September 7, 2010 2:35:46 PM
chovav
September 7, 2010 2:39:22 PM
adonn78
September 7, 2010 2:51:17 PM
cleeve said:
In this quarter's System Builder Marathon, we balance out our CPU and graphics subsystems, rather than piling on the GPU performance like last time. The results are shocking, to be quite honest. Check out the performance of our $1000 enthusiast system.System Builder Marathon, Sept. 2010: $1000 Enthusiast PC : Read more
Why on Earth did they use a 750 when the 760 costs the same and is more available. the core i5 760 is the newer skew and is 200Mhz faster for the same price. Also you could ahve gotten a better case. Like the coolermaster elite 430.
Score
-10
scook9
September 7, 2010 2:56:42 PM
adonn78Why on Earth did they use a 750 when the 760 costs the same and is more available. the core i5 760 is the newer skew and is 200Mhz faster for the same price. Also you could ahve gotten a better case. Like the coolermaster elite 430.
I recommend reading....he made a comment that it was not out yet when they picked the parts for this system.
Score
9
mcvf
September 7, 2010 3:06:12 PM
IWC Member 23495867
September 7, 2010 3:24:30 PM
Very nice machine. The only thing it is missing is any upgrade room. I would likely have chosen a mobo with a second PCIE slot on it; even x4 would be useful for dedicated PhysX. On this budget though, that would have meant sacrificing something else and costing performance today.
I'd like to win this one.
I'd like to win this one.
Score
0
kilthas_th
September 7, 2010 3:30:33 PM
The 470 is a nice card, and much better at $300 than $350. Nvidia has really shored up its drivers and boosted performance quickly, and Fermi is looking like a hot, power-hungry, but effective architecture. It also doesn't hurt that Crossfire doesn't scale anywhere near as well as SLI and that the 5830 is closer to the 5770 than the 5850 in performance.
The disparity in platform is telling, too, though it is hardly a surprise that the 720BE only matches the 750 stock speeds. In most CPU comparison benchmarks I've seen pitting the 965BE and 750 together, they are neck and neck (aside from a few select titles) at stock speeds, despite the nearly 800MHz difference.
The disparity in platform is telling, too, though it is hardly a surprise that the 720BE only matches the 750 stock speeds. In most CPU comparison benchmarks I've seen pitting the 965BE and 750 together, they are neck and neck (aside from a few select titles) at stock speeds, despite the nearly 800MHz difference.
Score
1
SpadeM said:
Quick question: what's the setting for the gpu acceleration in adobe photoshop?For the tests, GPU acceleration is enabled. GPU acceleration doesn't help much with rendering as I understand though, it mostly accelerates screen redraws and there's not much of that in our benchmark. It's mostly made around applying strenuous filters.
Score
1
Shirosaki
September 7, 2010 4:15:14 PM
I'm regretting getting a 460 a month before the price drop in the 470 on my I5 build. It would have been much better. Hopefully, now when people come on the forums asking for new build advice for gaming with a budget of $1k, people won't be recommending an AMD build that is obviously going to perform worse than a I5 and 470 build.
I built a I5/460 system minus case for $850 after rebates. With a 470 it would be approx. $900, maybe less. I didn't get a combo with my 460.
I built a I5/460 system minus case for $850 after rebates. With a 470 it would be approx. $900, maybe less. I didn't get a combo with my 460.
Score
-2
Rayburn6H
September 7, 2010 4:55:41 PM
radiumburn
September 7, 2010 4:57:39 PM
coldmast
September 7, 2010 5:00:05 PM
buzznut
September 7, 2010 5:05:40 PM
ShirosakiI'm regretting getting a 460 a month before the price drop in the 470 on my I5 build. ...I built a I5/460 system minus case for $850 after rebates. With a 470 it would be approx. $900, maybe less. I didn't get a combo with my 460.
I wouldn't regret a thing. The gtx460 is a great card, and your system likely runs cooler and with a lower power draw. I think for $850 you built a very nice system.
I guess you could say I regret that I can't afford a X6 1090T right now. But really, it wouldn't offer enough of a performance increase over my X4 940 to justify a $300 expenditure. I am waiting for a significant increase in speed before plunking any more money down on my system. In the meantime I can play anything I like at 1680X1050 and I am quite happy and proud of the system I built.
Not that you aren't proud, I'm just saying you could regret something 5 minutes after you built the system, but what is the point? Recognize that you built the best system you could at the time and enjoy.
Score
5
buzznut
September 7, 2010 5:28:12 PM
Yes, its true the i5 750 is faster than a $100 processor. Maybe if you chose a 740BE, you could afford a gtx 480. Perhaps that isn't "balanced" enough for some..
Its an apples to oranges comparison and I don't think it diminishes the viability of using a triple core CPU for a budget build. I probably wouldn't choose the 740BE (or any triple core) for an enthusiast build in the first place.
In the forums I mostly see folks looking to build in the $600-800 range. I very rarely see folks wanting to build a $500 machine, maybe once a week. Then it tends to jump to the $1500 range for enthusiast builds.
Please don't think I am suggesting changes to the quarterly builds, I love what you guys do. I think many Tom's visitors point to the SBM articles for recommendations. I just think that someone reading this article may walk away thinking its a bad idea to recommend the 740BE for $100, I don't believe it is. For the right budget, it may be perfect.
I would recommend it to overclockers over an Athlon II x4, since it is a black edition.
Its an apples to oranges comparison and I don't think it diminishes the viability of using a triple core CPU for a budget build. I probably wouldn't choose the 740BE (or any triple core) for an enthusiast build in the first place.
In the forums I mostly see folks looking to build in the $600-800 range. I very rarely see folks wanting to build a $500 machine, maybe once a week. Then it tends to jump to the $1500 range for enthusiast builds.
Please don't think I am suggesting changes to the quarterly builds, I love what you guys do. I think many Tom's visitors point to the SBM articles for recommendations. I just think that someone reading this article may walk away thinking its a bad idea to recommend the 740BE for $100, I don't believe it is. For the right budget, it may be perfect.
I would recommend it to overclockers over an Athlon II x4, since it is a black edition.
Score
2
krogtheclown
September 7, 2010 5:40:57 PM
Not really sure why COD is always on these benchmarks other then so many people having the game. That's not much of a test! Graphic's benchmarks should be turned up just enough to keep it around 60fps or under, other wise it becomes more of a cpu benchmark...whats the point in that? AMD will all ways fall short there.
Score
8
IzzyCraft
September 7, 2010 6:02:23 PM
rwmunchkin12788
September 7, 2010 6:35:08 PM
nerrawg... all overclock similarly (3.6-3.8 Ghz reliably) and offer the same tier of gaming performance when overclocked. Likewise the Intel quad core I5 and I7's appear to be one tier above at least - especially when overclocked. Then you just have to sit back and ask yourself what you budget is. In this regard the article appears to me to support the notion that if you are going to spend more than $1000 you should spend some extra cash on getting intel - even when going for a gaming build
This article shows that even spending slightly less than 1000 dollars, you can still get that kind of performance. The other great thing about this article is that it used a single graphics card instead of two. This allows for a great upgrade option later on, which the i5-750 will still support without bottlenecking it much (if at all). The AMD processors just don't seem to measure up in that regard.
Score
0
rwmunchkin12788...single graphics card instead of two. This allows for a great upgrade option later on, which the i5-750 will still support without bottlenecking it much (if at all)...
I agree with this reasoning, but it would not work on this mobo, with its single PCIE slot. To go with my earlier comment, I would likely have chosen a different (perhaps pricier) mobo, even if it meant dropping back to a GTX460. Of course, I don't think they were available when this build was done, but that's probably what I would do if I were building today (but I'd rather wait for SB/Bulldozer to see what they bring).
Score
1
rwmunchkin12788
September 7, 2010 7:16:06 PM
jtt283I agree with this reasoning, but it would not work on this mobo, with its single PCIE slot. To go with my earlier comment, I would likely have chosen a different (perhaps pricier) mobo, even if it meant dropping back to a GTX460. Of course, I don't think they were available when this build was done, but that's probably what I would do if I were building today (but I'd rather wait for SB/Bulldozer to see what they bring).
Ahh ok. I kinda glazed over the motherboard on my first readthrough. It seems to me though that you would only need to spend another 20 dollars or so to get the added PCI-e slot and maybe a few more more minor upgrades to boot. This to me does not seem out of the question, especially if you want to build a computer that will last you 5+ years and still have functionality for newer games/programs.
Score
0
mosu
September 7, 2010 7:49:56 PM
Why do you compare a 2 year old processor with a recent one from Intel?What's the point?and why not a motherboard with a newer chipset like 890x, not from MSI but from Gigabyte.You should compare 200$ processors on similar priced motherboards with the same graphic card and memory.When you compare efficiency keep in mind that Intel uses more efficient 32 nm process
Score
-2
spirit123
September 7, 2010 9:01:34 PM
This tests just proves that Crossfire or SLI should be avoided for any new builds.There are single cards for the price of sli or crossfire that can do the same performance without any side effects 100% of the time.
SLI or crossfire are almost never 100% improvements for 100% more money.However on some oldder pc's it might be better to add second card.
SLI or crossfire are almost never 100% improvements for 100% more money.However on some oldder pc's it might be better to add second card.
Score
-7
youssef 2010
September 7, 2010 9:44:59 PM
mosuWhy do you compare a 2 year old processor with a recent one from Intel? What's the point?
In the system builder marathons we compare based on total system cost, not component cost. This is why the Phenom II system had the benefit of two graphics cards in CrossFire while the Intel system had a single card.
The i5-750 is a year old, by the way.
Score
3
duk3
September 7, 2010 11:03:19 PM
spirit123
September 7, 2010 11:15:07 PM
Cheaper not, faster a little .Single card can go with way cheaper motherboard,also cheaper PSU .Are this included in cheaper ?
I define cheaper by total cost of the system and this 2 items make single card cheaper for me .
"it does not prove that at all, and that's a sweeping assumption based on comparing only these two builds.
We recently proved that SLI'd GTX 460 cards are cheaper and faster than a single GTX 480."
I define cheaper by total cost of the system and this 2 items make single card cheaper for me .
"it does not prove that at all, and that's a sweeping assumption based on comparing only these two builds.
We recently proved that SLI'd GTX 460 cards are cheaper and faster than a single GTX 480."
Score
-5
- 1 / 2
- 2
- Newest
Related resources
!