Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

System Builder Marathon, Sept. 2011: $2000 Performance PC

Tags:
  • System Builder
  • Performance
  • Product
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
September 20, 2011 4:00:10 AM

Falling memory prices make it easier to spend our $2000 budget on the fastest available components. How much faster is a pair of GeForce GTX 580s than two Radeon HD 6970 cards? Noticeably. But is the value any more compelling? You're about to find out.

System Builder Marathon, Sept. 2011: $2000 Performance PC : Read more

More about : system builder marathon sept 2011 2000 performance

September 20, 2011 4:55:16 AM

Great article. I am wondering, if instead you had gone with the EVGA 3GB GTX 570 SLI, maybe OC would have been possible? 2000$ is quite a bit of money. I wonder how these babies would hold out for Nvidia's 3D experience? Personally I am not a big 3D fan in theatres(headache and stuff), but gaming has to have a chance. You had an article on projectors gaming experience? Do it with 3d performance\eyefinity with the system marathon builds? That would be really cool. :) 
Score
4
September 20, 2011 5:01:49 AM

I'm actually surprised that after the recent micro-stutter article you didn't opt for 3x 570's/6950's/6970's instead of 2x 580's. the First two should be cheaper than 2x 580's, while the third would cost very similarly.

All three should have provided at least equal performance, and been better on intangible benefits to micro stuttering.
Score
-1
Related resources
September 20, 2011 5:17:51 AM

... a bit of stagnation in performance department... no big difference in Q2 and Q3 models... gonna wait til bulldozer...
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 5:27:36 AM

Poor case decision. Inadequate PSU (did you seriously expect good overclocking results?). Nice graphics, but severely limited by the other components. Hence, "nice graphics" doesn't matter. It's like putting a V10 inside a Dodge Neon. Just... why? I make a point of using good cases even in less-expensive builds. Compromising on PSU and the case are two things I've learned are no-nos. We can see how this hurt the outcome, When any OC whatsoever results in instability, you've made a mistake (or several).

Now I know we'll see the usual "well this is meant to be a learning experience, learn from our errors and improve for next time" comments, but these are not mistakes I expect to see Tom's writers making. Even non-uber-enthusiast readers can probably see that some of the imbalances here. No result is horrible, but I'd have expected Tom's to look at that Newegg shopping cart and immediately think "nope guys, this isn't right. This gfx setup... in an Antec 300?" etc.

Always love these articles guys, keep them up! Even if I do disagree with some of the choices obviously ;)  Really looking forward to $1k and $500 builds in the coming days!
Score
-21
September 20, 2011 5:45:51 AM

decembermousePoor case decision. Inadequate PSU (did you seriously expect good overclocking results?).

No, this case cools better than many (most?) cases more expensive than it. 2x 120mm intake is more than adequate for SLI cards with room for air to flow between them. Did you even look at the power consumption numbers? The system when overclocked only consumed 697w at load from the wall (actual consumption is less), while the PSU is rated at 850w.
Score
15
September 20, 2011 6:10:48 AM

Where the heck did they get that SSD for $170????? It's $205 on Newegg, and that's after a $35 price drop. What a steal....
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 6:14:26 AM

These SBM keep becoming cheaper. At first was 5k, then 2.5k and now is 2k for the enthusiast one. The recession is beating hard.
Score
0
September 20, 2011 6:21:46 AM

All I can say is...WOW you guys have bad luck with overclocking.
Score
8
September 20, 2011 6:29:01 AM

maybe one of the 120mm fans should have been placed on the side panel? just wondering...
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 6:44:43 AM

all i have to say is, ditch the crappy Gigabyte motherboard and get sonething better, and for the price difference get the i5 2500k, its no real loss to the i7.
Score
9
September 20, 2011 6:47:39 AM

and also, there is no crysis 2 benchmark? why not? get some newer games to use for benching toms please.
Score
-4
September 20, 2011 6:50:47 AM

I have my i7 2600k @ 4,2 GHZ. But @ 4,4 my PC will shut down in Intel Burn test extreme setting. Try that aswell :) , without disabling the CPU protection in BIOS.
Score
2
September 20, 2011 7:11:48 AM

Personally, I would have gone with a 1.5 TB storage drive and used the extra cash on a motherboard with more overclocking potential. Still, it's good to see a GPU upgrade.

Thanks for the builds!
Score
4
September 20, 2011 7:16:51 AM

pawessum16Where the heck did they get that SSD for $170????? It's $205 on Newegg, and that's after a $35 price drop. What a steal....


It was purchased on Newegg about a month ago in preparation for this series, actually =)
Score
3
September 20, 2011 7:18:04 AM

YargnitI'm actually surprised that after the recent micro-stutter article you didn't opt for 3x 570's/6950's/6970's instead of 2x 580's. the First two should be cheaper than 2x 580's, while the third would cost very similarly.All three should have provided at least equal performance, and been better on intangible benefits to micro stuttering.


As you saw in that piece, micro-stutter was most apparent on more mainstream cards. Something like the GTX 580 isn't going to demonstrate the issues seen there, whereas a GTX 560/HD 6850 might.
Score
6
September 20, 2011 7:20:52 AM

iam2thecroweand also, there is no crysis 2 benchmark? why not? get some newer games to use for benching toms please.


Check out Scott Wasson's excellent story about Crysis 2 on The Tech Report. Tons of artificial geometry to favor Nvidia's tessellation-emphasizing architecture. Not sure that's something we want to fold into our benchmark suite. We are looking at new games, but bear in mind that as soon as we ditch these, we kill the comparison points from the previous quarter. That's why you don't see the SBMs shift benchmark suites as often!
Score
12
September 20, 2011 7:34:46 AM

Very educational. Thank you for the insight on what panned out and what didn't. (Tower CPU coolers like to feel ducted?)
Score
0
September 20, 2011 7:42:33 AM

decembermouseNow I know we'll see the usual "well this is meant to be a learning experience, learn from our errors and improve for next time" comments, but these are not mistakes I expect to see Tom's writers making.
No, because the only serious issue with the build was the motherboard VRM not outputting enough current to go to 1.38V. Everything else was great, which means everything else you commented on was wrong. You only need to look at the power and heat page to see how wrong. The big question is, what we should sacrifice to get the extra $100...in order to achieve an extra 5% O/C with another motherboard.
Score
6
September 20, 2011 7:43:12 AM

A question I have is why none of the system builder marathon PCs at any price level spend $15-20 on additional fans? More airflow usually equals a cooler system.

Score
1
September 20, 2011 7:58:49 AM

TBH i would've traded the 580s for 570s(or 6970s) and got a better case. The 300 is a nice case on a budget, but this is a high end enthusiast PC, we can spare a few extra $ for better cable management, more airflow, better water cooling support, more expansion slots...

Overall the build certainly wasn't bad, just not quite 10/10 for me :) 
Oh, and do you think the overclocking would've been improved with a cooler that blows over the vrms, like the Cooler master GeminII S?
Score
-5
September 20, 2011 8:02:07 AM

I can surely argue that those results are quite strange for me, because those GTX 580 has higher shader clock (1710MHz Shader Clock) and wider memory bandwidth (202.1 GB/s Memory Bandwidth ). I would like to know the exact reason why suddenly and quietly evga or nvidia might have decided to change the specs of the non overclocked cards without previous notice. (which I suppose) Because of that, you are reading and seeing a wide favorable margin against the other pair of cards and it might be the reason why the reviewers could not overclock them as they expected.. I own 2 gtx 580 with the same part number specs of my card are; 1544 Mhz Shader Clock and 192.4 Gb/s Memory Bandwidth, both of my cards were made on november 09, 2010. If any of you know why the difference, I ask you to share the info :D  .
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 8:15:31 AM

I do not approve of the ADATA SSD, horible brand... Unreliable at best...
Score
1
September 20, 2011 8:22:54 AM

jestersagemaybe one of the 120mm fans should have been placed on the side panel? just wondering...
The CPU and GPU temperatures were fine, and the CPU PWM isn't anywhere close to the side fan. Front-to-back airflow works fine, but the cards probably needed a little more voltage to O/C and this builder doesn't do graphics overvolting.
qwertymac93TBH i would've traded the 580s for 570s(or 6970s) and got a better case. The 300 is a nice case on a budget, but this is a high end enthusiast PC, we can spare a few extra $ for better cable management, more airflow, better water cooling support, more expansion slots...Overall the build certainly wasn't bad, just not quite 10/10 for me Oh, and do you think the overclocking would've been improved with a cooler that blows over the vrms, like the Cooler master GeminII S?
Probably, but then the CPU would have likely been warmer due to the modified air path.
Score
2
September 20, 2011 10:52:28 AM

Showing us your experiment and the (not quite successful) results was brave and informative. Thanks!
3 Sapphire HD6950 2GB Toxics unlocked and manually overclocked for $850 is $130 cheaper than GTX580 SLI.
Upgrade to NF200 tri-fire ready Asus P67 WS revolution for $105 more than the GA-Z68XP-UD3. A premium overclocker too!
Take away your $16 over the budget and you're at $1991.

I would also recommend to a friend attempting to build similarly to:
1) Replace i7 2600k with 15 2500k and save $95.
2) Switch Memory to low voltage such as G.skill Sniper 8GB for and save $25. I don't want to go over a 850W PSU
3) Switch HDD to Samsung F3 1TB for and save $20
4) Upgrade SSD to Crucial M4 128GB for $30 more since the money is there.
5) Upgrade case to Rosewill Blackhawk for $30 more. I'm not saying my choice of case is better, but I need more airflow for my choice of GPUs.
6) You now have $89 to spend on a Gold Efficiency PSU, a premium CPU cooler, or a blue-ray drive, in that order.
Score
6
September 20, 2011 12:15:28 PM

For a high end PC, I'd rather use 2 560ti's or some other cheaper graphics option and get faster hard drives. Whilst an SSD ir great, if you want to launch apps, I'd never use a "green" drive, they're rather slow. Something from the Caviar Black or some other high end drives would be a lot better, and you'd feel the difference when using it everyday.
Score
-7
September 20, 2011 12:45:08 PM

almost as if they took my dream build and built it for me... hope I win the drawing, it would save me an upgrade next year :) 
Score
-2
September 20, 2011 1:07:57 PM

nevertellFor a high end PC, I'd rather use 2 560ti's or some other cheaper graphics option and get faster hard drives. Whilst an SSD ir great, if you want to launch apps, I'd never use a "green" drive, they're rather slow. Something from the Caviar Black or some other high end drives would be a lot better, and you'd feel the difference when using it everyday.
No apps were on the "Green" drive, it's only there for storing crap---er, output files.
Score
2
September 20, 2011 2:00:57 PM

I see this as a $1000 PC plus $1000 of graphics cards.

Unless you exclusively game with your machine, if I had a budget anywhere between $1000 and $2000 I'd take the $1000 of components in this thing and then spend the rest on graphics (maybe downgrade to a core i5 if you must).

It's amazing that you can get all of those high end parts for that much now. This machine with even a 6850/6870 (instead of the sli 580s) would be an awesome all around machine that you could play games on and upgrade a few months down the road if you need more fps.
Score
-2
September 20, 2011 2:04:25 PM

Non-overclockable graphics cards, low performance/$ graphics setup, ugly barely overclockable motherboard with stability problems, great job tom's, great job. Keep it up.
Score
-12
September 20, 2011 2:41:30 PM

so what is a great p67/z68 boards that isnt lacking in VRM capacity? going to build a system soon.
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 2:52:09 PM

Asrock extreme4 gen3, I have that one and it hits 5ghz on a 2500k easily.
Score
0
September 20, 2011 2:55:49 PM

lozz08 said:
Asrock extreme4 gen3, I have that one and it hits 5ghz on a 2500k easily.


I wouldn't say "easily", but yes, a very good board.
Score
0
September 20, 2011 3:16:26 PM

I somewhat liked this build but It did make me think about your normal $1,500 PC. For the $1,500 PC I think it would be interesting to just pull out a GTX 580 and swap the motherboard for one that will OC a tad better say an ASRock Z68 Extreme4 gen3.

EDIT: Had not seen the mention of the Asrock extreme4 gen3 by loxx08 when I posted but I do agree that might be a good value choice.
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 3:51:09 PM

Or.... You can buy some gtx 480's for $300 - $350, which are still available at some reputable stores and save yourself 3 bills for other components. With some decent cooling and a lil overclocking you get the same performance..

Just putting out another option.
Score
-2
September 20, 2011 3:57:41 PM

This rig needs about $30 more spent on the mobo and just $20 more in GPUs for the SC versions. I hate it when things get so tight in these builds that obvious upgrades that have small cost would make significant differences in performance. They could have made up the $50 total difference in a pinch with a smaller SSD.
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 3:58:33 PM

Seems like the $2000 builds make for some strange part choices. I'm looking forward to the $1000 build - single GPU and 2500k and I bet it will hardly be outpaced by the $2000 in 1920 x 1080 benchmarks - that's the resolution I play at so I don't really care about resolutions above that.

Anyway I love these marathons, they're fun and thought provoking.
Score
0
September 20, 2011 3:59:39 PM

just spend $50 more on an Asus P8Z68 Deluxe and it would be all different...
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 3:59:50 PM

just spend $50 more on an Asus P8Z68 Deluxe and it would be all different...
Score
-8
September 20, 2011 4:00:09 PM

just spend $50 more on an Asus P8Z68 Deluxe and it would be all different...
Score
-9
September 20, 2011 4:00:50 PM

mayankleoboy1so what is a great p67/z68 boards that isnt lacking in VRM capacity? going to build a system soon.


Check out the Asus and AsRock boards in the $150 to $200 range...
Score
-2
September 20, 2011 4:07:27 PM

Disappointed, you guys went the wrong direction with the GPUs, instead of getting the 2 580GTXs you should of really went 3x 6970s. Those would of given you better performance and at that stage it's multi displays that really matter and that's where AMD seems to shine as of late (and that AMD has eyefinity). In any case 3 6970's comfortably outperform 2 580's and depending on the game will even outperform 3-way 580 SLI.

*To be honest enthusiast should really be more than 2k$, since enthusiast is suppose to be no compromise and I see plenty of them.
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 4:09:49 PM

I have no doubt that this machine is going to badly lose the value comparison.
It isn't that I necessarily believe that different parts "should have" been chosen (besides, it is not useful to say what someone "should have" chosen; only useful to figure out why he made the choices he did). As far as that goes, I wonder why an i5-2500K wasn't used (freeing money for a better mobo, cooler, or RAM; or OC-friendly GPUs).
This article rather confirmed some suspicions I've had for a while. Spending this amount of money on a PC only makes sense if it is a purpose-built machine with specific requirements (even if that requirement is minimum FPS in a game); otherwise, from a value perspective, only someone with more money than sense builds a machine like this.

Incidentally, if this general-purpose (i.e. not strictly gaming!) PC might be used for bitcoin mining, only AMD GPUs should be used. Before downvoting me, that wasn't a fanboy remark, but a fact. You'll spend more for power than you'll recover from mining with ANY nVidia GPU(s).

Score
0
September 20, 2011 4:58:38 PM

Here's to hoping that the $500 system has that Radeon HD 6870 and a Phenom II X4 or a Core i3. They can be easily fit into the budget. :) 

Why would you get the motherboard here over the AsRock P67 Extreme4, for example? They're the same price, and given that a relatively large SSD is used there's no need for IRST. I doubt someone with dual-GTX 580s would use the IGP, either, and only a few people use QuickSync. I'd think most enthusiasts would rather get an additional PCIe 2.0 X4 slot and a lot more back panel ports, as well as much better VRMs. I can't say I like the choice of case given the cost of the build, nor the Hard Drive: the Samsung EcoGreen F4 2TB is faster, more reliable and very quiet yet costs the same.
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 5:00:08 PM

I see a lot of thumbs-downs being given to most commenters who are suggesting that something isn't right with this build. I myself made a comment suggesting that maybe you shouldn't put two GTX 580's into an Antec 300, as well as a couple other things, and got 14 thumbs-downs (and that's only so far, lol). I was a little harsh in my wording, I admit, and I am sorry for that. I was feeling pretty sick last night, coughing up a storm and unable to get to sleep. I do still feel though that, ok, maybe you didn't know beforehand that the motherboard wouldn't be great for overclocking, that's an honest mistake and this mobo was worth a shot.

anonymous x, I know the Antec Three Hundred is not a bad case. I've used it in builds before, and Antec makes quality hardware. For an overclocked 2600k and two GTX 580's though... are you really telling me that it wouldn't have occurred to you that maybe a larger case would be a good idea? Yes, the Three Hundred can technically fit an SLI setup, otherwise of course they would have had to order another case, and wouldn't be using the Three Hundred. anonymous x, when you put effort into overclocking a GTX 580, a single card can pull up to ~380-400W under load. Even if the setup permitted overclocking these cards, the PSU would not have been able to handle the load. Also, yes, regardless of which case you use, it's good to keep enough space between GPUs if you are building an SLI setup :) 

But why...? Why would you put two of the fastest graphics cards on the market (and one of the fastest CPUs too) into Antec's *smallest* gaming case? Does this not raise a tiny red flag in anyone else's mind, am I the only one? I get 14 thumbs-downs for talking about it, which makes me less eager to draw attention to these things :(  how can we improve our knowledge and methods of PC building if we can't question our past decisions?

Crashman, you seem to be seeing things in black and white and that's partially my fault. It can be a good thing sometimes, but try to read my comment as things I've learned and how they clash with what was done here, rather than as an attack or insult directed at the article. You don't need to defend it, as I didn't mean my comment as an attack :)  I would appreciate more dialogue than just telling me I'm wrong though. The balance of the build here for instance. I'm more concerned with the GPU and case situation than the mobo, and for the price yeah maybe it wasn't worth upgrading that. But to say that it's the only problem with the build is a bit of a generalization. You say that "everything else you commented on was wrong." which is of course a bit disputatious of you, and in doing this you of course earn thumbs-ups for defending the article against me, the perceived troll/attacker/ignorant assailant. I get that, I did sound a bit like one, but did not mean my comment to sound that way. I just find it frustrating when things are imbalanced to the point of instability, in the quest for ultimate framerates. There are just some things I'm not comfortable compromising on, even if I have to get a smaller HDD or something to achieve a healthy overall build. When I see one like this that will literally crash if you raise the core clock on a GPU by the slightest amount, it makes me sigh and make this face http://bit.ly/ptrt7m
Score
3
September 20, 2011 5:21:47 PM

Quote:
from a value perspective, only someone with more money than sense builds a machine like this.

Or someone who doesn't want to have to build a new machine every time a new generation game comes out. The $500 builds are pretty much already out of date before you're even done putting them together.
Score
-1
September 20, 2011 5:40:19 PM

While you are waiting to declare a winner, drop in the asus maximus iv extreme-z and see what clocks you get! :D 
Score
-2
September 20, 2011 5:59:31 PM

Different MB and different GPU = GG
Score
-3
September 20, 2011 7:32:43 PM

I guess i don't understand this statement:

"Remember those tests where both systems were too slow at 2560x1600 to play smoothly, but the new build was the choppier of the two? Even though the performance delta was meaningless at frame rates that low, these results add high-end gaming to the new build’s list of value deficits. This editor again accepts the new build’s performance win as the consolation prize in lieu of poor value."

I read this as saying:

Both builds did bad.
The new build was worse.
The score was bad, so new build gets a negative.
Editor likes it although valueless.

Can someone explain this?
Score
2
September 20, 2011 10:19:01 PM

But you wouldn't be able to store your boatload of apps and games on a 120 gb ssd, would you ?

I wouldn't, as I would have the ssd split in half for dualbooting and I have games.

Otherwise, a great build.
Score
-2
      • 1 / 3
      • 2
      • 3
      • Newest
!