Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

System Builder Marathon, August 2012: Alternative $2000 Gaming PC

Tags:
  • System Builder
  • Gaming
  • Benchmark
  • Product
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
August 24, 2012 3:46:09 AM

Starved by the limits of our System Builder Marathon benchmark suite, Thomas decides to explore what happens when he really uncorks the graphics system. A helping of 5760x1080 across three monitors is being added to the complete four-course test set.

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

More about : system builder marathon august 2012 alternative 2000 gaming

August 24, 2012 5:00:47 AM

now THAT'S a real 2000$ PC, not the other 2000$
Score
25
August 24, 2012 5:01:32 AM

Now this is a $2000 machine. The 3930k is a nice-to-have, but not a need-to-have. If you need more horse power, swap the 3570k for a 3770k.
Score
24
Related resources
August 24, 2012 5:03:43 AM

idroidnow THAT'S a real 2000$ PC, not the other 2000$
Actually, this one is the fake, as in the experimental PC designed specifically for gaming. The other one was picked by reader recommendations, and that's why it made it into the "main event".

That is to say, as much as this one costs, it's still pretty much worthless to the majority of high-end users. Basically it's a $1000 PC with a bunch of extras.

To put it another way, money "wasted" on the other one went towards making it more flexible and practical. Money "wasted" on this one went towards supporting future upgrades to its SLI array. It's nothing more than an expensive toy.
Score
6
August 24, 2012 5:07:43 AM

I enjoyed the article and am glad Tom's ran it. I agree with Crashman though about this being an experimental system: while I may rarely have call to exercise six cores, it is something that would come in handy from time to time. Meanwhile, I will never be gaming at 5760x1080. I'd get more value out of the original system.
Score
12
August 24, 2012 5:09:37 AM

Why aren't they in portrait mode?
Score
1
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 5:15:58 AM

orz, using blue ares ram and an antec eleven hundred together makes me think back to my wishlist changes I wish I could have gotten instead.(albeit im still deficient on other parts)
Score
0
August 24, 2012 5:16:32 AM

hmp_gooseWhy aren't they in portrait mode?
Too narrow. The wide bezels are a major distraction when they're that close together. I think manufacturers should make some 5x4 or at least some 4x3 mid-sized displays specifically for this purpose.
dudewitboworz, using blue ares ram and an antec eleven hundred together makes me think back to my wishlist changes I wish I could have gotten instead.(albeit im still deficient on other parts)
Ares is cool because it lets you run pretty much any CPU cooler you want, without sacrificing memory frequency or timings.
Score
4
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 5:17:38 AM

Crashman said:
Actually, this one is the fake, as in the experimental PC designed specifically for gaming. The other one was picked by reader recommendations, and that's why it made it into the "main event".

That is to say, as much as this one costs, it's still pretty much worthless to the majority of high-end users. Basically it's a $1000 PC with a bunch of extras.

To put it another way, money "wasted" on the other one went towards making it more flexible and practical. Money "wasted" on this one went towards supporting future upgrades to its SLI array. It's nothing more than an expensive toy.


Really? If it were me, I'd pick this one over the original $2000 PC. There are a lot more people gaming at 5760x1080 and 2560x1600 than they used to be so having more GPU performance is much more beneficial. Although that's primarily for the gamers, for other 3D purposes, video editing, etc the 6-cores 3930K and single GPU might be the best choice
Score
14
August 24, 2012 5:20:48 AM

Would have went with crossfire 7970 for that res.
Score
20
August 24, 2012 5:29:32 AM

they are both great machines!! i personally think the sweet spot is somewhere around 1500 if you can get acceptable 5760x1080 performance
Score
2
August 24, 2012 5:32:19 AM

bawchicawawaWould have went with crossfire 7970 for that res.
You might be onto something. But Don's an ATI guy and he thought 670 SLI was a good choice. I know why I listen to Don on GPUs, I wonder why he doesn't listen to me on motherboards...
killabanksthey are both great machines!! i personally think the sweet spot is somewhere around 1500 if you can get acceptable 5760x1080 performance
Yeh, this machine could have been done for $1800 by dropping to a 2-way SLI motherboard and smaller power supply. Subtract another $200 if you're willing to give up the SSD, and it's a sweet $1600 gamer.
Score
22
August 24, 2012 5:56:18 AM

Definitely think the motherboard picked was too expensive- your really unlikely to make use of all 4 pcie slots unless you're gaming at say 5x1 at 1080p or 3x1 at 1440.

At 3x1 1080p money is wasted on the mobo. If you're going to sli or even tri sli look at the gigabyte ud5h it supports 3 gfx at 8x 4x 4x which should be more than enough for a triple monitor set up.

Also, shoulda gone with the 7970's!


Score
-12
August 24, 2012 6:24:10 AM

You know, this might be an odd question but is there a benchmark that runs multiple games at the same time?
I feel like having additional cores and going up to i7 would help if you're the type of gamer that likes to alt tab while running/flying to a destination and play some sort of FPS in the foreground. Or since we're talking about 3 monitors here, playing different games on each monitor.

I ask this because I don't think having an i5 on a $2000 feels right. It's a really nice quad core yes, but most if not all the benchmarks run on a clean windows and whatnot. I know for a fact as a gamer I have a million different things open and most of the times I get lazy in closing one game so I just have different games open.
Score
-1
August 24, 2012 6:52:48 AM

I was originally going to use a Core i7-3930K until I read your review seen how bad the thermo and power requirements where. I was then going to wait until there was an IB replacement for the Core i7-3930K, but my computer (6 years old) started to malfunction. Based on your reviews I choose the i7-3770K and any processor with lesser capabilities was not acceptable.

For those of you who may wonder as to the CPU in my computer, it was the first version of the Duo Core processors. Due to the thermo characteristics of that Duo Core processor, (which also functions in my basement as a space heater, a pretty good one at that) I did not want to replace one space heater with another space heater (i7-3930K).
Score
-8
August 24, 2012 7:30:15 AM

Is there any chance for alternative $500 and $1000 PC articles? I do hope so.
Score
8
August 24, 2012 7:59:11 AM

blackball3242Definitely think the motherboard picked was too expensive...If you're going to sli or even tri sli look at the gigabyte ud5h it supports 3 gfx at 8x 4x 4x...
Thumbs down for the bad advice, sorry, UD5H doesn't support 3-way SLI. Like the article said, the board used here IS the least expensive Z77 3-way SLI motherboard that Newegg had in stock. And it also supports 4-way SLI.
sixdegreeIs there any chance for alternative $500 and $1000 PC articles? I do hope so.
If you can get the guys building those machines to find a potential flaw that they'd like to examine, then yes. But it wouldn't happen until the next SBM, sorry.
Score
6
August 24, 2012 8:27:39 AM

Since you're using 2 instead of 3 graphics cards, how do you find the microstutter?

(you earlier ran another story about how microstutter was caused by having 2 GPU's in SLI, and how it was solved by adding a third card...)
Score
2
August 24, 2012 8:29:25 AM

Quote:
anyone with a $400 graphics card (or an $800 SLI setup) won't touch 1280x1024, or even 1680x1050


meaning no offense here but you don't need a $400 (or an $800) GPU to snub the 1280 and 1680 resolutions. most gamers use the 1920 resolution (21.5" - 24" is a very popular monitor range) while not bothering to buy expensive toys either (like you labeled your $2k alt build and i agree on the definition).

i haven't read of any statistics or surveys but most people i know play on 1920x1080 and when they build a p.c. or try to upgrade their aim is a good CPU (1st gen i5 was the i750, 2nd gen the 2500k and 3rd the 3570k) and the best GPU the price range of $150-$250 can buy (depending of their budget at the given time). at the same time the only good peripheral most gamers want is a good laser mouse. toys like mechanical keyboards, 2 or 3 screen setups, $150-$200 PSU's, insanely priced cases and headsets are most of the times out of the question. and to be honest that's only sensible since every couple of years any setup is rendered useless so why spend $2k when you can get satisfaction with $800-$1000.

bottomline, it would make much more sense seeing 3 rigs running on the following specs (or similar);

a. i3-2120 & hd6850 (or gtx560) @ 1920x1080
b. i5-3470 (or 3450) & hd7850 (or gtx560ti) @ 1920x1080
c. i5-3570k (or 3770 is the budget allows) & gtx670 (or similar) @ 1920x1080

p.s. i'm not an expert nor do i pretend of being one, just talking out of experience and what i see from my friends (myself included) and internet acquaintances
Score
8
Anonymous
August 24, 2012 9:28:51 AM

Nice article!

This series of System builders series has been the best, you have listened to readers and followed the general thoughts and tested them out.

Seems to me everyone on here though thinks they could do better, so what I suggest it creating a forum category for people to post their builds in the budget range with pics and setup specs alongside the full benchmark runs to see if it is actually better. Money where the mouth is and all that!

On this build, its the choice I would have over the previous $2000, simply because gaming is the greatest use of my PC and running some games in 3d on my 50" with all settings maxed still brings my FPS down and I am using Sabertooth Z77 with 3570k @ 4.6Ghz but have only Crossfire 2 X 5850 @ 950 Mhz! (Which bench the same as a stock 670)

Saving time for a couple of 670 cards I guess!
Score
6
August 24, 2012 9:53:16 AM

There is always optimizations that we seem to find.

For me I would of swapped the Mobo and Case for a ASRock Z77 Extreme4 and a Corsair 300r, then added 2 120mm intake fans on the side, blowing cool air straight on the 670's that now have 1 slot of space between them, instead of stacked right on top of each other.

Other than that I would have gone with this 2k build over the other.
Score
1
August 24, 2012 10:21:13 AM

itzsnypahThere is always optimizations that we seem to find.For me I would of swapped the Mobo and Case for a ASRock Z77 Extreme4 and a Corsair 300r, then added 2 120mm intake fans on the side, blowing cool air straight on the 670's that now have 1 slot of space between them, instead of stacked right on top of each other.Other than that I would have gone with this 2k build over the other.
Uh, d00d, the review system has TWO slots between cards.
Score
2
August 24, 2012 10:45:19 AM

Quote:
We had to keep our room below 35° Celsius to keep them from throttling.


I don't know many people that game in a 95 F room to begin with.
Score
6
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 11:47:19 AM

Crashman...as much as this one costs, it's still pretty much worthless to the majority of high-end users. Basically it's a $1000 PC with a bunch of extras.To put it another way, money "wasted" on the other one went towards making it more flexible and practical. Money "wasted" on this one went towards supporting future upgrades to its SLI array. It's nothing more than an expensive toy.

I couldn't agree more. This build taught nothing about how to spend $2K wisely. If anything it showed how trying to focus the budget for a productivity machine more on gaming really hurts the productivity benchmarks. If you're building a GPGPU-based productivity beast, the CPU can be cut back even more, as can the SSD and perhaps the case in order to fit the third graphics card. If you're building for CPU-based productivity tasks, cut the graphics down to a single HD7750 (so you can still play some games during down time), go down to a 400W-450W PSU, a much cheaper mobo, then splurge on a monster CPU; then blow out everything else on the productivity benchmarks. Back in the real world, take the additional money the productivity beast earns, and then go build the gamer.
Score
-4
Anonymous
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 11:51:10 AM

wait for $2000 they put in 8gb of ram? I have 64gb and my total system cost was $1600. though I'm not running 3 screens, still 16gb is only $60 instead of $55 and it very much needed.
Score
-5
August 24, 2012 12:04:16 PM

5760X1080 is way overkill, but this build is definately what I am aiming for to support a 120Hz monitor.
Score
0
August 24, 2012 12:10:46 PM

That being said, the Mobo is way over kill, I'd rather spend $134.99 on a ASrock Extreme 4 and build this system in a more spacious full tower(Thor V2 for example).

People who claimed "money were wasted on SLI" is blind to not see money is wasted on the pointless Mobo and overshooting the necessary PSU by 200W(Seasonic 850W).
Score
0
August 24, 2012 12:50:22 PM

menigmandSince you're using 2 instead of 3 graphics cards, how do you find the microstutter?(you earlier ran another story about how microstutter was caused by having 2 GPU's in SLI, and how it was solved by adding a third card...)

That story said that microstutter was pretty much only apparent on lower end cards (6850/gtx460 and below.) So I don't think it should be much of an issue.
Score
1
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 1:05:38 PM

CrashmanActually, this one is the fake, as in the experimental PC designed specifically for gaming. The other one was picked by reader recommendations, and that's why it made it into the "main event".That is to say, as much as this one costs, it's still pretty much worthless to the majority of high-end users. Basically it's a $1000 PC with a bunch of extras.To put it another way, money "wasted" on the other one went towards making it more flexible and practical. Money "wasted" on this one went towards supporting future upgrades to its SLI array. It's nothing more than an expensive toy.

:o  WOW, I am surprised you actually admitted what I was thinking, your conclusion is right. Respect is earned - You've got balls!

Futuremark's Hall of Fame says it all -> http://www.3dmark.com/hall-of-fame/

Regarding the build, a couple changes that will still keep you within budget:
1. HDD - the Samsung is discontinued and 500GB is too small. So for 1TB/7.2K either the Samsung Spinpoint F3 HD103SJ or Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003.
2. RAM - the Ares have a horrible VCCIO/VCCSA profile on most from their cheap IC's sets. So either the Mushkin Enhanced Blackline 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1600 (8-8-8-24) Model 997043 or Corsair Vengeance 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3 1866 (9-10-9-27) Model CMZ8GX3M2A1866C9
Score
2
August 24, 2012 1:11:42 PM

For about $200-250, you could get one GTX 690 that would be faster then the 2 GTX 670's. I would be half tempted to use 2 7970's for this build but over all its a good build.
Score
5
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 1:24:04 PM

personally, I like this build as a solid 3-screen gamer (but notice th single 670 + 3960 manages a playable 30fps.

My view given the complaints about 1280x1024 being cpu bound, why not drop this as a tested resolution?

I'd suggest 1920x1080 being the default tested resolution of all machines. most people aren't buying anything lower resolution except maybe $90 1600x900 screens, leaving the 1680x1050 as a reasonable low-end test.

Score
2
August 24, 2012 1:25:56 PM

Man i feel like posting a few builds...when's BestConfigs happening?
Score
0
August 24, 2012 1:46:40 PM

Correct me if I am wrong, but isnt a 1050W power supply overkill for SLi 670s? I would think that 850W should be more than enough with plenty of headroom. Maybe they were just trying to get a good quality gold PSU or something...
Score
-2
August 24, 2012 1:51:21 PM

Cool build.

Personally I would have gone with Crossfire 7950's which would have been $100+ cheaper and used that extra money to get the 3770k.

Crossfire tends to scale a little bit better(for the most part) than SLI anyways.
Score
4
August 24, 2012 1:53:01 PM

On paper I actually liked the build, too bad you didn't have luck with the processor/mobo this time, getting a smaller OC. I just wish you gave the Thermalright TRUE Spirit 140 a chance on one of your builds, I think its the best cooler under $50 (and costs only $39!), comparable to the $80 range coolers in performance and a much lower price tag.
Score
0
August 24, 2012 1:56:15 PM

Great series of articles and I really liked the alternative build's comparison. Tom's always saves me so much time by testing the builds I was wondering about.

With my current setup I can do some video editing and still play Skyrim @1920x1200 with over 60 FPS 'cause of CPU muscle and the SpursEngine card. I definitely see a reason to spend more $ on CPU muscle to retain a useful "enthusiast" PC. A motherboard that would allow QuickSync use with discrete GPU (single) would be fantastic for this level of build.
Score
1
August 24, 2012 2:08:20 PM

With AMD's new focus on Sleeping Dogs instead of Dirt 3, is there any chance that future benches will use that title instead of Dirt 3?
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 2:20:38 PM

dalmvernCorrect me if I am wrong, but isnt a 1050W power supply overkill for SLi 670s? I would think that 850W should be more than enough with plenty of headroom. Maybe they were just trying to get a good quality gold PSU or something...

Let's compare, the 1050W is a no brainer and will allow for expansion. SeaSonic are excellent PSU's and the cost difference is $10 for 200W which leaves you some head room for water cooling, a 3rd GPU, etc. You could barely get by with 750W~800W, but when you factor in CPU & GPU(s) OC'ing I prefer the headroom and expansion vs tossing a PSU due to lack of foresight.
$189.99 SeaSonic X Series X-850 Gold Certified 850W
$199.99 SeaSonic Platinum-860 Platinum Certified 860W
$199.99 SeaSonic X-SERIES X-1050 Gold Certified 1050W
Score
1
August 24, 2012 2:37:22 PM

CrashmanActually, this one is the fake, as in the experimental PC designed specifically for gaming. The other one was picked by reader recommendations, and that's why it made it into the "main event".That is to say, as much as this one costs, it's still pretty much worthless to the majority of high-end users. Basically it's a $1000 PC with a bunch of extras.To put it another way, money "wasted" on the other one went towards making it more flexible and practical. Money "wasted" on this one went towards supporting future upgrades to its SLI array. It's nothing more than an expensive toy.

I disagree, I prefer this build over the other one. How much difference are you gonna see? 2.2%???
Score
-1
August 24, 2012 2:46:40 PM

very good computer (i'd save the de money from the 256gb ssd, get a 128gb),i'd get a better cooler and better ram but this one is very good and makes sense...

Good job
Score
1
August 24, 2012 2:52:16 PM

Great article and build, I am glad to see some 5760x1080 performace numbers. I am one of those freaks that has a 3 monitor setup and I will be building a new system soon. It will be nice to be able to play games with all 3 monitors. I would take this build over the earlier one any day of the week and twice on Sundays.
Score
1
August 24, 2012 3:13:22 PM

I like the build very much. Would have been interesting to see how triple 7950 would have gone. Maybe better value for performance with the new boost feature.
Score
3
August 24, 2012 3:19:16 PM

It still seems ODD to see GTX670 being used instead of 7970.
Score
5
August 24, 2012 3:19:39 PM

It seems about $140 was spent to get a mobo that supports 4 GPU slots, in the name of future expansion. The EVGA 04G-P4-2690-KR is currently available on NewEgg for 999 (don't know what the price was at purchase time). If you could save that $140 with a cheaper 2-slot (x8/x8? Or with a PCIe splitter?) 1155 mobo, and save an additional $50 *somewhere* (case? PSU?) you could try out an even faster (presumably) GPU configuration, still be under budget, and still have that expansion room you want. That would have been an even bigger surprise.

As is, I hope the winner of this rig adds a third card, 3 x 3D displays and tries out 3D surround gaming. Just to say it was done, if nothing else.

That said, I don't know if a 690 can be SLI'd with something like a 680 to get Tri-SLI, or if you'd need to fork out for another 690 (yikes).
Score
0
August 24, 2012 3:22:47 PM

in ''Test Hardware Configurations'' section you did not mentioned that there are 2 gtx670 in SLI
Score
-1
August 24, 2012 3:49:33 PM

I knew it! This is the machine I've been waiting to see!
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 4:31:47 PM

TeraMediaIt seems about $140 was spent to get a mobo that supports 4 GPU slots, in the name of future expansion. The EVGA 04G-P4-2690-KR is currently available on NewEgg for 999 (don't know what the price was at purchase time). If you could save that $140 with a cheaper 2-slot (x8/x8? Or with a PCIe splitter?) 1155 mobo, and save an additional $50 *somewhere* (case? PSU?) you could try out an even faster (presumably) GPU configuration, still be under budget, and still have that expansion room you want. That would have been an even bigger surprise.As is, I hope the winner of this rig adds a third card, 3 x 3D displays and tries out 3D surround gaming. Just to say it was done, if nothing else.That said, I don't know if a 690 can be SLI'd with something like a 680 to get Tri-SLI, or if you'd need to fork out for another 690 (yikes).


I don't think that a 690 can do SLI with a 680 like a 6970 can with a 6990 and the 7970 would with the 7990 (if it ever gets released) and the 7970X2 (if it ever gets released).
Score
1
August 24, 2012 4:59:34 PM

I always enjoy the SBMs (unlike some ppl who only seem to enjoy the chance at an "I could do better"), I am wondering though, if the winner of this rig also gets the 3 screen set up? :D 

Also, because some ppl can't read an article before they start asking stupid questions (your teacher in grade school lied to you, get over it) the 1050W PSU is to support expansion, as well as the mobo with more PCIe slots than the build [currently] has cards.
Score
2
a b 4 Gaming
August 24, 2012 5:00:52 PM

buzznut said:
I disagree, I prefer this build over the other one. How much difference are you gonna see? 2.2%???


The other build would have nearly twice as much highly threaded CPU performance and that's fairly similar to the graphics performance advantage that this build has. Prefer whichever build that you want, but Crashman is correct. This build is a high-end toy in comparison to the other build, granted that other build would have been even more flexible given a Radeon 7970 instead of a GTX 670.
Score
2
      • 1 / 3
      • 2
      • 3
      • Newest
!