Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

System Builder Marathon, August 2012: $2000 Performance PC

Tags:
  • System Builder
  • Performance
  • Product
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
August 22, 2012 3:46:12 AM

We took our highest-priced build back to the drawing board to focus on features, rather than price. Can I compete with the less expensive configurations without spending all of my time worrying about benchmark results? Tomorrow's analysis will be telling.

System Builder Marathon, August 2012: $2000 Performance PC : Read more

More about : system builder marathon august 2012 2000 performance

August 22, 2012 4:45:02 AM

Interesting setup. I would have favored a way beefier single GPU or a nice dual GPU setup, but I mainly only game, and dont do a lot of encoding or whatnot.
Score
12
August 22, 2012 4:59:17 AM

Quote:
The contest opens on August 20, 2012 9:00 PM PDT and closes on September 3, 2012 9:00 PM PDT.

So... i notice now that it opens at August 20, not August 19 when the $500 SBM appeared. I submitted my entry at August 19 10:30 PM. So that means that i haven't entered into the sweepstakes, or did i? I am confused, cause only one entry can be accepted.
Score
4
Related resources
Anonymous
August 22, 2012 5:14:06 AM

Nice quality build! Enough said!
Score
5
August 22, 2012 5:47:22 AM

That has got to be one of the luckiest GTX 670s I've ever seen.
Score
6
August 22, 2012 6:12:42 AM

i5-3570k/i7-3770k
Gigabyte G1 Assassin Z77
120GB SSD
500GB HDD
2xGTX 670
2x4GB DDR3 1866

And still probably cheaper with obviously better performance.
Score
-10
August 22, 2012 6:16:43 AM

sarinaidei5-3570k/i7-3770kGigabyte G1 Assassin Z77120GB SSD500GB HDD2xGTX 6702x4GB DDR3 1866And still probably cheaper with obviously better performance.
Probably not, unless you're only testing games. But we should probably test that anyway. Does anyone else want to see it?
Score
21
August 22, 2012 6:30:53 AM

Ditch the BR Writer, get a BR combo drive and save yourself $60
Score
-4
August 22, 2012 6:40:07 AM

zander1983Ditch the BR Writer, get a BR combo drive and save yourself $60
Sorry, I don't see any combo drives for $30 so the savings would be much less than $60. Plus, you'd lose BD-RE backup capability, which can be handy.
Score
13
August 22, 2012 7:02:06 AM

CrashmanProbably not, unless you're only testing games. But we should probably test that anyway. Does anyone else want to see it?


It would be very interesting, the IvyBridge chips in productivity numbers hold quite well with the SB-E chips that is the only area which should be a contest.
Score
2
August 22, 2012 7:06:51 AM

16GB ram pointless imo. 2 TB 5400rpm hdd? ...i rather get a 1 TB 7200 rpm hdd. i7 3970k ... i rather get the i7 3770k. From theese i would squeeze in a gtx 680.
Score
-1
August 22, 2012 7:28:14 AM

CrashmanProbably not, unless you're only testing games. But we should probably test that anyway. Does anyone else want to see it?


2x670 is overkill for 1920x1080.
But a 2000$ build is already overkill. So this SLI setup is OK
Score
3
August 22, 2012 7:38:07 AM

Should have cut some corners on some 'overkill' items and gone with sli 660 ti's or a single 680.
Score
-11
August 22, 2012 7:42:38 AM

I am sorry. This is one of the dumbest builds I have seen in a long time. It is almost as if the person who put this together was just a complete noob to PC building. Its like they just went to CPU and found a really expensive one and decided to get it.

I just tossed a build together on PC Partpicker that would absolutely DESTROY this build.

CPU - 3570K
CPU Cooler - Corsair H100
Mobo - ASUS P8Z77-V
RAM - Corsair Dominator Platinum 8GB (2x4GB) 1600
SSD - Corsair Force GS 360GB
GPU - ASUS GTX670 x2 in SLI
Case - Corsair 550D
PSU - Corsair AX750
Optical - Asus whatever

If you purchased everything from Newegg it would be $2070. Yes, a bit over the budget, but I am sure I could trim that off somewhere without too much difficulty. I definitely didn't go with the best valued products in my build. The Platinum ram is double the price of their normal RAM, but it fit with the theme espoused by the author of this article of having a QUALITY build, which I totally agree with.

On the subject of quality, I have chosen a better cooler, better case, and better PSU. How can anybody seriously justify buying a non-modular PSU for a $2k build? That is insane to me. I wish I had the $2k to actually put this build together with a couple of tweaks and put it up against Soderstrom's build and watch him weep as his system gets destroyed.

Also, I realize I haven't selected a storage drive. I just went with one big SSD. Yes, the 2TB is nice, but I don't think most people actually need that kind of storage, and if you are somebody that does need it, it is a separate cost that should be part of the main build, IMO. Similarly, we typically don't include monitor, keyboard, mouse, etc. pricing into builds. I think mass storage needs to join this category.
Score
-15
August 22, 2012 7:54:13 AM

namelesstedI am sorry. This is one of the dumbest builds I have seen in a long time...
No, it's just you (the noob thing). These gaming resolutions are too low to take advantage of SLI, and this one DESTROYS yours in this benchmark set.

Your config would only be better if there were significant changes to the benchmark set.
Score
20
August 22, 2012 7:57:17 AM

CrashmanNo, it's just you (the noob thing). These gaming resolutions are too low to take advantage of SLI, and this one DESTROYS yours in this benchmark set.Your config would only be better if there were significant changes to the benchmark set.
You were right the first time, you can tell by the language he's trolling
Score
3
August 22, 2012 8:04:19 AM

Mac_McManYou were right the first time, you can tell by the language he's trolling
OK then, ignoring the hate and going back to rational response, Sarinaide recommended a PAIR of GTX 670's, a 3570K, a Gigabyte Z77 board and 8GB RAM. But this still needs to be a $2000 PC or else it becomes an "enhancement" of yesterday's $1000 build.

I'm going to take a long shot and say, blow the leftover money on quad SLI support. That could lead to even more tests down the road, no?

Of course an Ivy Bridge SLI build would still lose under this benchmark set, so it would need to be tested at higher gaming resolutions. Is everyone OK with 5760x1080?
Score
12
August 22, 2012 8:14:32 AM

CrashmanOK then, ignoring the hate and going back to rational response, Sarinaide recommended a PAIR of GTX 670's, a 3570K, a Gigabyte Z77 board and 8GB RAM. But this still needs to be a $2000 PC or else it becomes an "enhancement" of yesterday's $1000 build.I'm going to take a long shot and say, blow the leftover money on quad SLI support. That could lead to even more tests down the road, no?Of course an Ivy Bridge SLI build would still lose under this benchmark set, so it would need to be tested at higher gaming resolutions. Is everyone OK with 5760x1080?


Have you looked at the test results? The old build with a GTX680 beats the current build when you look at maximum settings at 2560x1600. Let me say this again, at the highest settings and full resolution the old build with the GTX680 beats the current build on every single game tested in this article. Every single game.

A 670 SLI setup would only further the performance gap.
Score
-3
August 22, 2012 8:36:58 AM

namelesstedHave you looked at the test results? The old build with a GTX680 beats the current build when you look at maximum settings at 2560x1600. Let me say this again, at the highest settings and full resolution the old build with the GTX680 beats the current build on every single game tested in this article. Every single game.A 670 SLI setup would only further the performance gap.
Games make up 30% of the benchmark set. 2560x1600 makes up 25% of gaming scores. Therefore, 2560x1600 performance makes up 7.5% of the overall value score.

On the other hand, heavily-threaded programs make up 50% of the encoding and 75% of the productivity benchmarks. That's 37.5% (15%+22.5%) of the benchmark totals. 37.5% is a much larger portion than 7.5%, so 3930K+GTX 670 beats 3570+SLI. It's simple math, and the only way to change that math is to change the benchmarks.

Really, dropping the 3930K only furthers the performance gap.
Score
8
August 22, 2012 9:07:44 AM

CrashmanGames make up 30% of the benchmark set. 2560x1600 makes up 25% of gaming scores. Therefore, 2560x1600 performance makes up 7.5% of the overall value score.On the other hand, heavily-threaded programs make up 50% of the encoding and 75% of the productivity benchmarks. That's 37.5% (15%+22.5%) of the benchmark totals. 37.5% is a much larger portion than 7.5%, so 3930K+GTX 670 beats 3570+SLI. It's simple math, and the only way to change that math is to change the benchmarks.Really, dropping the 3930K only furthers the performance gap.


First, I would argue that when it comes to a $2k build, the only thing that matters in terms of gaming benchmarks are the max settings and resolution. When you are spending that much, it literally doesn't matter how well it can do on mid settings and 1080p. Completely irrelevant.

Secondly, I might have to argue that the benchmarks should be changed to better reflect real-world scenarios instead of reporting Sandra numbers.

It is just extremely frustrating to see a build like this. With $2k there is so much potential to put together a truly great and balanced machine. This build is far from that. Soderstrom had all that money, and it just feels like he picked out a crazy CPU and then just went down the line and picked random other hardware. I also realize some of the choices are personal preference. I personally think the Phantom 410 just looks awful. When I see a case that looks like that, it makes me think of a 14 year old kid building a "cool" PC.

There is also that fact that every single component in this build all come from different companies. For budget builds that absolutely makes sense. You have to find deals where they are and that pretty much always means buying different brands. But, he had $2000. It is just something that makes no sense to me, to open up a PC and see that every single component not matching up in any way.

The whole build just feels like Soderstrom picked a CPU, and then just added the rest of the parts to the cart and he just didn't save the proper budget for a GPU and decided to downgrade it instead of figuring out where money was just being wasted.
Score
-1
August 22, 2012 9:22:29 AM

namelesstedThe whole build just feels like Soderstrom picked a CPU...
Soderstrom didn't pick any of the major components. Back in the Q2 SBM, readers complained that they wanted an SB-E and LGA-2011 in the $2000 machine. Readers also complained about the price of its GTX 680, since the GTX 670 performed almost as well for much less money (the GTX 670 wasn't available when the order was placed). Readers also complained that the SSD should not have been shrunken from the Q1 system's 240GB. So you're complaining about reader picks in the 3930K, single GTX 670 (not enough money left for two), and 240 GB SSD.

So your real beef is with your fellow readers, not the builder of this machine.
Score
13
August 22, 2012 9:34:53 AM

Who will spend 2000$ on PC good enough for encoding a f*cking video clip... for this kind of money you'd like to hook up 3 monitors and play!
Score
3
August 22, 2012 9:39:19 AM

should just rename these to intel buildoffs. I thought the purpose of these builds were to show different configurations and what you can do differently to see the end results. Here we have an entire year of builds and one AMD build using a mediocre quarter-disabled cpu. Thats right, 12 builds 11 of wich are intel. Not to mention the AMD build was before windows scheduler repairs that are now part of the windows automatic update.

If you guys hate FX that much, there are still phenoms that can be purchased cheap, show how they stand up a year after they were replaced with the new video cards. Especially the $500 build. I wouldn't even try BF3 online with a dual core cpu. you should load it up and see just how low you have to run the graphics. sure, single player will work, thats it.
Score
-9
August 22, 2012 9:44:07 AM

noob2222should just rename these to intel buildoffs. I thought the purpose of these builds were to show different configurations and what you can do differently to see the end results. Here we have an entire year of builds and one AMD build using a mediocre quarter-disabled cpu. Thats right, 12 builds 11 of wich are intel. Not to mention the AMD build was before windows scheduler repairs that are now part of the windows automatic update.If you guys hate FX that much, there are still phenoms that can be purchased cheap, show how they stand up a year after they were replaced with the new video cards. Especially the $500 build. I wouldn't even try BF3 online with a dual core cpu. you should load it up and see just how low you have to run the graphics. sure, single player will work, thats it.
That response should go into the $500 build's thread. AMD isn't competing at the top right now.
Score
10
August 22, 2012 9:49:27 AM

CrashmanThat response should go into the $500 build's thread. AMD isn't competing at the top right now.

you mean at all? actaully it probably should be in tomorrow's roundup. I was trying to get a feel of why you guys hate amd so much or if these builds are just for intel only from here on out.
Score
0
August 22, 2012 10:01:41 AM

noob2222you mean at all? actaully it probably should be in tomorrow's roundup. I was trying to get a feel of why you guys hate amd so much or if these builds are just for intel only from here on out.
No hate: Don got reamed by the readers for putting an AMD CPU in a $1000+ build around a year ago (as I recall, my time might be off though). Paul's last $500+ AMD build was a failure as well, but not as bad a failure. If anyone could make AMD coincide with the performance/price perspective, it would be Paul.
Score
1
August 22, 2012 10:38:33 AM

I think the lack of AMD-based CPU builds is fair enough, considering what's available right now. But three builds and not a single AMD GPU? That can't be right surely.
Score
2
August 22, 2012 10:38:34 AM

noob2222This is the last AMD cheap buildhttp://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 32-10.htmlI wouldn't call that a failure. The only loss was on crysis at the lowest resolution. There hasn't been one since then.
This is the feedback thread for the $2000 PC, not Paul's $500 PC, and he's the best one to answer your questions. In fact, he's probably not even reading this. Have you posted your question in the feedback for his $500 PC?
Score
4
August 22, 2012 11:26:43 AM

medium settings , 1280 and 1680 resolution in a 2000$ PC are irrelevant.
Score
7
August 22, 2012 12:02:01 PM

Enough of the hate. This was a very good build. The people who have problems are really only complaining because this build wasn't optimized for THEM. I mean a 320SSD but no storage HD? Come on. For a general build that will satisfy the majority of people, this is very good.


On a larger issue, we have to ask, what is the monitor size and resolution of the person who will spend $2000 on a computer system? I have a 1920x1080 monitor and my budget is $1200 max. I think that the average person who can spend $2000 on a computer will still be stuck with a 1920x1080 resolution because prices get crazy if you go larger. Any other thoughts on this?
Score
3
August 22, 2012 12:34:32 PM

For consistency's sake, I would not have varied he video card, but it's good to see the comparison of builds Q2 and Q3 builds.
Score
-1
August 22, 2012 12:35:24 PM

CrashmanSoderstrom didn't pick any of the major components. Back in the Q2 SBM, readers complained that they wanted an SB-E and LGA-2011 in the $2000 machine. Readers also complained about the price of its GTX 680, since the GTX 670 performed almost as well for much less money (the GTX 670 wasn't available when the order was placed). Readers also complained that the SSD should not have been shrunken from the Q1 system's 240GB. So you're complaining about reader picks in the 3930K, single GTX 670 (not enough money left for two), and 240 GB SSD.So your real beef is with your fellow readers, not the builder of this machine.

Don't reason... trolls will be trolls...
Score
5
August 22, 2012 12:37:08 PM

If I win I would sell some parts from my current rig and build a nice rig for simple internet browsing for the wife and make a killer gaming machine for myself. Been entering these for about 4 yrs now, maybe this is the one for me!!!
Score
0
August 22, 2012 12:42:08 PM

Crazy to see the O/C on the Q3 machine adds over 200W of max power consumption. That's pretty significant.
Score
6
August 22, 2012 1:27:03 PM

Put it this way, you could have OC'ed higher if you had liquid cooling. Correct me if I'm wrong. O:) 
Score
0
August 22, 2012 1:38:52 PM

Hmmm...interesting, interesting. I'm surprised to see that you've not used the Tom's recommended Gigabyte GTX 670. That was overclocked and for the same price, with a better cooler.

I would be interested to see a 3770K + Z77 + 2x7970 (or 7950 3GB) cards, for 60 fps minimum @ 2560x1600, plus astronomical GPGPU performance (since IVB can do compute too)...keep everything else the same. :o 
Score
4
August 22, 2012 1:47:59 PM

BTW, i'm not bashing your build. I recognize that you've built a machine that does almost everything exceptionally well (except maybe game at 2560x1600), was just surprised by the EVGA card instead of the Gigabyte, and the other build was just a suggestion.
Score
2
August 22, 2012 1:49:34 PM

Other than generic office PCs, every system I build gets a name, usually one that reflects on the person for whom it was built. This PC I would name "Wastrel." It is not a professional's system, but might be built by the professional's spoiled kid.
This machine was a gamer, that can also handle [some] professional work; it needs to be a professional's PC that can also play games. To that end:
1. The shape of the case did otherwise say "Engineer," but please lose the window.
2. Make sure the graphics card can handle GPGPU processing. Kepler isn't it.
3. Provide for greater data safety, such as with RAID1.
4. Not mentioned in the article (so it may have been), but make sure it is quiet.
5. No high overclock. Efficiency got short shrift with this build, and I'd be concerned about stability over long days of work.

To repeat something I mentioned in a past 2K SBM article, please provide context. Before the build, describe the person who will be using it; be as arbitrary as you like, but please describe the user. That will ensure a fitness for purpose. My personal interpretation of this one, which could easily be different from someone else's, is that this PC may not be the best fit for its purpose.

Finally, it would be interesting to see what sort of purpose-built bitcoin miner you could create; e.g. high-end mobo with at least four PCIe slots for graphics cards, as many high Mhash/$ cards as will fit, likely coordinated by a Celeron or Pentium (or AMD; the determining factor will be the mobo, whatever can hold the most high-end graphics cards).
Score
3
August 22, 2012 1:57:18 PM

There is a problem with the way these PCs are evaluated.

When it comes to productivity tests, faster is always better. Any second shaved off of any application is very welcome and should be included to boost a PC's score.

But when it comes to gaming, what is the difference between 120 FPS and 250 FPS? Nothing.

So I would either:

1. Ditch the low resolutions
2. Place an FPS cap. Make it such as any number over 120 FPS is just considered 120 FPS.

my two cents....
Score
8
August 22, 2012 1:58:42 PM

I feel that a triple 1080p resolution needs to start being the norm. At least on the $2k builds. Monitor prices have dropped over the years, I'm sure it's becoming more feasible for those in the "enthusiasts" category, such as myself.
Score
0
August 22, 2012 2:05:56 PM

Interesting build and I completely agree with the sentence in the article:
Quote:
But, given the option to combine the best parts of our two configurations, we'd mix last quarter's efficient motherboard and CPU with the other components from today's setup. That'd likely provide the best balance of power, efficiency, and value.


The cost of the hexa core Sandy Bridge is just too much money that could either be saved or applied to other components in the build.

(Queue AMD haters)
Heck I might even get rid of that 670 and replace it with a 7970(non reference) overclock the snot out of it to get more performance (at the cost of some efficiency).
Score
1
August 22, 2012 2:11:01 PM

godfather666...when it comes to gaming, what is the difference between 120 FPS and 250 FPS? Nothing....Place an FPS cap...

Agreed. I made a comment similar to this on the $1K build. In fact, if it's not 3D, I'd suggest 60FPS is a sufficient cap. For scoring purposes, a machine getting 120FPS should not score any higher than one getting 80FPS; my suggestion there would be to consider awarding points to a new category called "Future Resistance" for exceeding this cap.

Score
1
August 22, 2012 2:11:41 PM

ojasI would be interested to see a 3770K + Z77 + 2x7970 (or 7950 3GB) cards, for 60 fps minimum @ 2560x1600, plus astronomical GPGPU performance (since IVB can do compute too)...keep everything else the same.

just checked on newegg, it's coming to $1997 with two of those IceQ Turbo 7950 cards (yes, it seems the Turbo in the US now).
Score
0
August 22, 2012 2:19:28 PM

Wow not bad Thomas! :) 

I'd say I was totally surprised that you used a SB-E so IMO Day 3 is the 'Surprise' -- 'Day 5: The Surprise $2000 Alternative Build'

On mine add a RAM drive and run a large SQL job and you'll quickly appreciate a 6-core. Plus it games!

I've never met a SB-E that I couldn't get to 4.8GHz with 1.40v~1.42v vCore...
Score
0
August 22, 2012 2:32:23 PM

At first, like some other people on here, I was thinking why not go with IB and save some major dough? But, given that gaming benchmarks make up only a third of the entire suite, I guess it makes sense to go SB-E. This is an enthusiast PC after all, not a budget one. Also, I'm neutral on the choice of GPU. While it's a great value compared to other high-end GPUs, shouldn't we be going for the GTX 680 since, as already stated, this is an enthusiast PC? It may not help a ton in benchmarks, but neither will the choice of SB-E over IB IMHO (It would, just not overwhelmingly so I don't think). I think the SSD choice was spot on, the HDD choice was a great value for the price, I freakin love that case/cooler combo, and everything else looked pretty good too.
Score
0
August 22, 2012 2:41:39 PM

"Better yet, the case itself is an award-winning product."

The case, itself, is plug ugly.
Score
4
August 22, 2012 2:50:42 PM

These system builder articles crack me up with the amount of vitriol and negativity. They build computers to test how well they do.... and then give them away for free. Some people need to chill if they don't use a specific part.
Score
9
Anonymous
August 22, 2012 2:55:50 PM

I would like to see 3 monitor gaming get a place in the testing. On a 2,000 dollar build I think you will see many people have 3 monitors. I know I am looking at a new system soon and will want something that can support gaming on a triple set up.
Score
0
August 22, 2012 3:23:48 PM

HargertI would like to see 3 monitor gaming get a place in the testing. On a 2,000 dollar build I think you will see many people have 3 monitors. I know I am looking at a new system soon and will want something that can support gaming on a triple set up.

I agree with this, but likely not on the $2K build. Certainly do it on the $1K gamer, but I still think that the $2K Performance PC should be a work PC first, and a gamer second. This is the one where you use a monster CPU (or GPGPU cards) for rendering or some other professional task, then test to see if it also provides playable performance on a single 1920x1080 or 2560x1600 screen.
Score
0
      • 1 / 3
      • 2
      • 3
      • Newest
!