System Builder Marathon, Q3 2013: $1300 Enthusiast PC
Last response: in Reviews comments
With access to new components like the Haswell-based Core i5-4670K and Nvidia's GeForce GTX 770, we're confident that we can build a $1300 enthusiast-class system that beats last quarter's. How does the previous mini-ITX PC stand up to this new hardware?
System Builder Marathon, Q3 2013: $1300 Enthusiast PC : Read more
System Builder Marathon, Q3 2013: $1300 Enthusiast PC : Read more
More about : system builder marathon 2013 1300 enthusiast
rolli59
September 23, 2013 9:49:21 PM
chaospower
September 23, 2013 10:04:17 PM
I think this just shows that you don't really need more than a GTX 760 if you play on the most popular resolution of 1080p. Look how small the benefits of an Haswell are, compared to the 650$ build (HALF THE PRICE!) in games that mainly rely on GPU power.
Overclocking haswell is a waste of money considering the amount of money you need to invest in a good MB and a good cooling, only to reach a rather tame 4.3ghz OC...
Just buy the cheapest I5 you can buy and pair it with a GTX 760, if you play on 1080p, I doubt you'll be disappointed.
Overclocking haswell is a waste of money considering the amount of money you need to invest in a good MB and a good cooling, only to reach a rather tame 4.3ghz OC...
Just buy the cheapest I5 you can buy and pair it with a GTX 760, if you play on 1080p, I doubt you'll be disappointed.
Score
3
Related resources
- System Builder Marathon, May '09: $1,300 Enthusiast PC - Forum
- System Builder Marathon, August 2012: $1000 Enthusiast PC - Forum
- why is the system builder marathon 2013 based on mini itx plat form? - 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
DelightfulDucklings
September 23, 2013 10:12:26 PM
silverblue
September 23, 2013 11:30:05 PM
bemused_fred
September 24, 2013 1:23:27 AM
cmartin011
September 24, 2013 1:40:08 AM
Larry Bob
September 24, 2013 3:27:09 AM
This is a complete waste of money. You spend way more on the 4670K than you would on a 3570K, and a really expensive motherboard, then you pair it with a crappy CLC where even a 212 Evo or Respire T40 would do better. You then WAY overpay on the graphics card when a 7970 offers exactly the same performance (according to Tom's research) for $60+ less.
Score
7
persuse
September 24, 2013 3:27:30 AM
the vengence ram Worst chip in all the model and brands !
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Team Vulcan 8GB (2 x 4GB)DDR3 2400 best P/p memory with same price better choice.
and corsair H50 not is better whan aircooler.
the Phanteks PH-TC12DX or V6GT with same price range the beat performance.
for ssd i,m recomend Kingston HyperX 3K 120G with same price and beter speed.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Team Vulcan 8GB (2 x 4GB)DDR3 2400 best P/p memory with same price better choice.
and corsair H50 not is better whan aircooler.
the Phanteks PH-TC12DX or V6GT with same price range the beat performance.
for ssd i,m recomend Kingston HyperX 3K 120G with same price and beter speed.
Score
-7
Novuake
September 24, 2013 5:04:33 AM
MANOFKRYPTONAK
September 24, 2013 5:52:28 AM
MANOFKRYPTONAK
September 24, 2013 5:55:06 AM
ojas
September 24, 2013 6:10:52 AM
BulkZerker
September 24, 2013 6:25:49 AM
slomo4sho
September 24, 2013 6:37:02 AM
drul
September 24, 2013 6:48:08 AM
Amdlova
September 24, 2013 6:57:16 AM
cknobman
September 24, 2013 6:58:07 AM
cknobman
September 24, 2013 7:06:34 AM
I consider this build a wash compared to last quarters and think your skewed gaming value chart is very misleading. You chose a resolution no one plays at because it just so happens to hide this build memory bandwidth issues and makes it look better than it really is at more common playable resolutions.
Not a terrible build, but no better. Should have saved some cash by skipping haswell for the cpu and getting a 7970ge for the gfx card.
Not a terrible build, but no better. Should have saved some cash by skipping haswell for the cpu and getting a 7970ge for the gfx card.
Score
-2
TeraMedia
September 24, 2013 7:20:53 AM
The superiority of this build over the last one is more deeply marred by the cheap memory than the author admits, once that memory is OCed. Given the supposed IPC arch improvements of Haswell and the higher clock of the 770, this system should be consistently faster.. but it's not. F1, Adobe, synthetics... all testing areas exhibited at least some cases in which last Q's specialized ITX build was faster while using older products and less power. To me, that paints this Q's generalized ATX build in a bad light. It's not that it wasn't good; it's that it wasn't as much better as it should have been.
Score
2
JamesSneed
September 24, 2013 7:27:34 AM
Im assuming TH had various spare parts from vendors and decided wth lets toss um into the system builder. Seems like a rather random choice of parts to pair together. I cant help but think if you downgraded the motherboard and used a cheaper CPU cooler you could have went SLI with two gtx 760's for only $100 more than the gtx 770 they chose. They certainly had enough power supply to do it as most systems with 2x gtx 760's are only pulling 450 watts at load.
Score
-1
envy14tpe
September 24, 2013 8:13:26 AM
You had me until I saw the H50. Noooooooo! Why did you ruin this build?
A $200 mobo is meant for great overclocking. A H50 is nowhere near adequate for this. If you put a $50 Dark Knight on this build I'm sure you would have gotten to 4.5GHz. It's a shame seeing a $200 mobo and only overclocking to 4.3GHz.
A $200 mobo is meant for great overclocking. A H50 is nowhere near adequate for this. If you put a $50 Dark Knight on this build I'm sure you would have gotten to 4.5GHz. It's a shame seeing a $200 mobo and only overclocking to 4.3GHz.
Score
-1
fat_panda
September 24, 2013 8:23:47 AM
KelvinTy
September 24, 2013 8:24:27 AM
I thought Toms released an article not long ago explaining how "high performance" ram yields negligible performance gain... and now a 1866MHz ram? Given that it's "only" $70, still...
And do people still buy DVD-burner thingy? I haven't put any optical media in my PCs for well over 3 years... and the last one I use, was to reinstall Win7.
And do people still buy DVD-burner thingy? I haven't put any optical media in my PCs for well over 3 years... and the last one I use, was to reinstall Win7.
Score
-2
mapesdhs
September 24, 2013 8:53:37 AM
Yet more proof if any were needed that a used 2700K is still far better value
when it comes to an oc'd setup. 5GHz no problem, no need for water
cooling, leaves the 4670K way behind. Ditto 2500K (I notice there are
loads on eBay US); why anyone would buy a 3570K or HW is beyond me.
I'll consider a newer quad-core when Intel finally releases something that's
worth bothering with. Heh, 4.3 with a newer chip... what a farce.
Ian.
Score
0
geok1ng
September 24, 2013 8:57:46 AM
This build is a very instructive example of how to pick the wrong parts and waste someone's time and money. Pick up a processor that every single showed showed that can't overclock as well as a 3570k, combine it with an overpriced motherboard and VGA and you end up with this.
The old and trsty way is better: 3570k+ CF 7950. You may even save some cash to get a bigger SSD.
The old and trsty way is better: 3570k+ CF 7950. You may even save some cash to get a bigger SSD.
Score
-2
slomo4sho
September 24, 2013 9:08:29 AM
mapesdhs said:
Yet more proof if any were needed that a used 2700K is still far better value
when it comes to an oc'd setup. 5GHz no problem, no need for water
cooling, leaves the 4670K way behind. Ditto 2500K (I notice there are
loads on eBay US); why anyone would buy a 3570K or HW is beyond me.
I am unsure where this misconception arises from...
4670K average on air is 4627 MHz
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i5_4670K/
2500K average on air is 5041 MHz
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i5_2500k/
Clock for clock, the 4670K is roughly 10-15% faster than the 2500K so a 4627 MHz Haswell is equal to a 5089-5370 MHz Sandy...
Score
1
SvRommelvS
September 24, 2013 9:49:02 AM
slomo4sho
September 24, 2013 10:07:38 AM
persuse said:
the vengence ram Worst chip in all the model and brands !http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Team Vulcan 8GB (2 x 4GB)DDR3 2400 best P/p memory with same price better choice.
and corsair H50 not is better whan aircooler.
the Phanteks PH-TC12DX or V6GT with same price range the beat performance.
for ssd i,m recomend Kingston HyperX 3K 120G with same price and beter speed.
Really, you think a terrible off brand with a high speed is better than Corsair Vengeance?
And that Kingston drive you recommend is based on the old, slow, and very problematic Sandforce 2.0 controller. The Samsung 840 and 840 Pro are far better choices.
Score
3
slomo4sho
September 24, 2013 10:30:31 AM
Yuka
September 24, 2013 11:23:41 AM
I read this SBM article before 7:00a this morning, and have contemplated it (and these remarks) at some length before commenting. This place sounds like an echo chamber, and IMHO for good reason. I believe in "targeted overkill" to obtain future-resistance, but this build used an excessive motherboard and a CLC cooler to no clear purpose. Was the author relying on a 4.6+ OC that didn't materialize in order to "sell" this build? That might be some excuse, but illustrates the folly of relying on the silicon lottery. I believe that a $50-$60 cheaper mobo and a $20-$25 cheaper air cooler could have matched these results. The extra money could have bought better RAM which, in this case, seems to have made a difference, or a larger SSD. I'm not going to niggle at all on the graphics card; prices are different today from what they were when this was ordered, so comments on HD7970 prices are moot. This build also reinforced my belief that anyone running an i5-3570K has no performance-based reason to upgrade.
I prefer SBM builds that really squeeze the value out of every dollar spent, and I'm a little disappointed that this one failed to do so, despite otherwise good performance.
I prefer SBM builds that really squeeze the value out of every dollar spent, and I'm a little disappointed that this one failed to do so, despite otherwise good performance.
Score
-2
egowhip69
September 24, 2013 1:16:19 PM
I think you have too much money for a build like this...
I cookie cuttered a very similar build over in newegg, and managed to shave a couple hundred dollars off.
You need to look to do the build with something like $600, 750, and $900.
With those kind of budgets, you could actually show what spending an additional $150 would get you. That will show what upgrades you can get fairly cheaply, and give people a realistic number to save a bit more money for.
I mean, really, who in the heck starts at a $650 budget, and then goes, "Fack it! I'll double it to $1300!"?
I cookie cuttered a very similar build over in newegg, and managed to shave a couple hundred dollars off.
You need to look to do the build with something like $600, 750, and $900.
With those kind of budgets, you could actually show what spending an additional $150 would get you. That will show what upgrades you can get fairly cheaply, and give people a realistic number to save a bit more money for.
I mean, really, who in the heck starts at a $650 budget, and then goes, "Fack it! I'll double it to $1300!"?
Score
-2
would have liked to see less spend on CPU and motherboard, and certainly remove the crappy liquid cooling solution you used. Put more into the GPU(s). Crappy build. I disagree with all the comments about the 7970 instead of the 770, your saying to spend less on the gpu, and then complain they spent too much on the cpu/motherboard cooling......wouldn't you want to spend more on the gpu for the same price point......
Score
-1
mapesdhs
September 24, 2013 5:53:09 PM
Score
0
slomo4sho
September 24, 2013 5:57:54 PM
mapesdhs
September 24, 2013 6:27:53 PM
slomo4sho said:
You do realize what an average is right... The greatest number of people will be within a standard deviation of the average. I've just been trawling through a bunch of launch reviews; most could not get remotely
that high, or needed damn good cooling to do it, eg. H100i. Not necessary with SB.
hwbot is likely a biased sample anyway, those submitting more likely to do so because
they've achieved good results, been lucky with their samples. It's not a fair survey of
all those who've oc'd the chip, by definition it's a selective sample.
Go read the reviews, looks pretty clear cut to me.
Ian.
Score
0
rayden54
September 24, 2013 6:50:02 PM
slomo4sho
September 24, 2013 6:50:34 PM
mapesdhs said:
I've just been trawling through a bunch of launch reviews; most could not get remotely
that high, or needed damn good cooling to do it, eg. H100i. Not necessary with SB.
hwbot is likely a biased sample anyway, those submitting more likely to do so because
they've achieved good results, been lucky with their samples. It's not a fair survey of
all those who've oc'd the chip, by definition it's a selective sample.
Quite a few reviews of the 4770K have overclocks of 4.5GHz or higher (yes, most use water cooling):
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-4770k-haswe...
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/06/01/intel_haswell...
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_4670K_...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7003/the-haswell-review-i...
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/intel_core_i7_4...
http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/core_i7_4770k_revi...
It all comes down to the silicon lottery honestly. As long as your chip is capable of hitting 4.5 or 4.6 GHz with 1.25V or less, you can achieve those clocks with a good air cooler. The issue with Haswell is the how hot the chip gets once voltage is increased.
My current 4770K build is stable at 4.6GHz at 1.195V and I can install a ZALMAN CNPS9900MAX that I have sitting around to test temps on an air cooler this weekend to determine load temps on air instead of my CM Seidon 240M. Unfortunately, the caveat is that the chip is delidded with CLU applied so the temp readings would not reflect true factory temps.
Score
0
Max_x2
September 24, 2013 8:34:48 PM
Crashman
September 24, 2013 9:15:49 PM
Max_x2 said:
chaospower i got my 4670k at 4.8GHz, stable, on air cooling (thermaltake frio). But hey, don't let facts blind you.A toast to magic samples!
Score
0
chaospower
September 25, 2013 12:40:04 AM
slomo4sho said:
mapesdhs said:
Yet more proof if any were needed that a used 2700K is still far better value
when it comes to an oc'd setup. 5GHz no problem, no need for water
cooling, leaves the 4670K way behind. Ditto 2500K (I notice there are
loads on eBay US); why anyone would buy a 3570K or HW is beyond me.
I am unsure where this misconception arises from...
4670K average on air is 4627 MHz
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i5_4670K/
2500K average on air is 5041 MHz
http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i5_2500k/
Clock for clock, the 4670K is roughly 10-15% faster than the 2500K so a 4627 MHz Haswell is equal to a 5089-5370 MHz Sandy...
Max_x2 said:
chaospower i got my 4670k at 4.8GHz, stable, on air cooling (thermaltake frio). But hey, don't let facts blind you.Fact is, the person who made this article got it to 4.3ghz with water cooling.
Fact is, I was talking about the results he got from OCing it. Was I supposed to talk about your OC which I was not aware of?
Score
-1
slomo4sho
September 25, 2013 1:20:48 AM
chaospower said:
Fact is, the person who made this article got it to 4.3ghz with water cooling.Fact is, I was talking about the results he got from OCing it. Was I supposed to talk about your OC which I was not aware of?
Not sure where you got the idea that I was talking to you or correcting your misconceptions but now that you have brought your illogical and ignorant reply to my attention...
Fact is that any Z87 board will provide roughly the same overclock capacity as the biggest variable in the overclock capacity is the CPU itself so the $200 motherboard provides almost zero benefit when it comes to overclocking headroom for this build.
Fact is that the H50 performs worst than most quality air cooler.
Fact is that Don lost the silicon lottery when when purchased the 4670K for this writeup.
Fact is that a sample size of one does not provide an accurate depiction of overclock capacity of the Haswell lineup.
Fact is that Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge counterparts also had a substantial percentage of the of chips that didn't overclock well (albeit the proportion may be larger in Haswell).
Score
-2
Crashman
September 25, 2013 1:30:53 AM
slomo4sho
September 25, 2013 2:02:00 AM
ojas
September 25, 2013 2:06:03 AM
Hey nice build. Similar to what i'd build for myself given $1300, except the RAM and maybe the case.
Not sure whether the higher temperatures are Haswell's problem or the cooler's, but i'm surprised that a lower voltage at the same clocks is leading to such temperatures, but i guess it's the FIVR doing that.
I'd probably go with an Asus board too, but i dunno, really. Maybe the PSU was excessive?
p.s. Didn't see any efficiency charts! Hope we get them for the final comparison.
Not sure whether the higher temperatures are Haswell's problem or the cooler's, but i'm surprised that a lower voltage at the same clocks is leading to such temperatures, but i guess it's the FIVR doing that.
I'd probably go with an Asus board too, but i dunno, really. Maybe the PSU was excessive?
p.s. Didn't see any efficiency charts! Hope we get them for the final comparison.
Score
0
rwinches
September 25, 2013 4:08:05 AM
Haswell OCs differently. Going too far with mem OC can hurt CPU OC and overall performance. Reading these threads will show you the right approach to get the most performance overall from the silicon you got. The current stock OCs better.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1411077/haswell-overclocking...
http://www.overclockers.com/3step-guide-to-overclock-in...
Running burnin apps for long periods is pointless (Prime95 et al) no real world use would ever tax a system that way. If it runs for 10-20 minutes you're good just watch the temp and when it levels off run a few more minutes that's it, going further proves nothing.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1411077/haswell-overclocking...
http://www.overclockers.com/3step-guide-to-overclock-in...
Running burnin apps for long periods is pointless (Prime95 et al) no real world use would ever tax a system that way. If it runs for 10-20 minutes you're good just watch the temp and when it levels off run a few more minutes that's it, going further proves nothing.
Score
0
Narcissistic_Martyr
September 25, 2013 6:49:38 AM
Siddhartha gb
September 25, 2013 8:43:27 AM
The main problem I have with your system builds is that they are directed to the needs of the gamer. I am not a gamer and have no intentions of using my system to play games. It would help if you provided video card recommendations for other uses besides gaming.
I would not spend more than around $150 to $200 for a video card and use the savings in the budget on the other components.
I would not spend more than around $150 to $200 for a video card and use the savings in the budget on the other components.
Score
0
- 1 / 2
- 2
- Newest
Related resources
- With Tom's System Builder Marathon in mind: Build a Infinite Budget PC Forum
- System Builder Marathon: Sub-$4000 PC Forum
- More resources
!
Nevertheless, another good article, keep it up