Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

System Builder Marathon, Q1 2014: The $2400 People’s Choice PC

Tags:
  • Overclocking
  • Build Your Own
  • Desktops
  • Buyer's Guides
  • Gaming
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
a b K Overclocking
March 24, 2014 12:00:03 AM

I built a sweet system last quarter with Radeon R9 290s. But based on your feedback, the highest-priced build for Q1 2014 integrates several alternative components. Can this new system do more things right than the configuration I parted out myself?

System Builder Marathon, Q1 2014: The $2400 People’s Choice PC : Read more

More about : system builder marathon 2014 2400 peoples choice

March 24, 2014 12:18:20 AM

Interesting move, showing the nicest build 1st instead of last. Cant wait to see all the builds compared and see what you all come up with as the budget goes down.
Score
4
March 24, 2014 12:18:53 AM

Looks good. Surprised only went with a 750w PSU though. Considering 2x 780 ti's and overlocking
Score
2
Related resources
a b K Overclocking
March 24, 2014 12:40:06 AM

captain_jonno said:
Looks good. Surprised only went with a 750w PSU though. Considering 2x 780 ti's and overlocking
Yessir, two 780s and a bit of experience in part picking lead me to expect around 700W of required system power. And, it came out just a little less than 700W.

Power supplies of greater capacity and similar reliability at this price tend to be lower-efficiency units. And we like efficiency too.

Score
3
March 24, 2014 12:54:10 AM

I dont get the "W" usage?680+237 = 917w. Not 802w as meation above?
Score
-5
a b K Overclocking
March 24, 2014 1:06:14 AM

YellowBee said:
I dont get the "W" usage?680+237 = 917w. Not 802w as meation above?
It's not calculated power, it's measured power for the entire system (at the power plug). No addition or subtraction was used.

1.) Start the system, wait for all processes to load, take a measurement (Active, but idle)
2.) Load the CPU using eight thread of AVX-optimized Prime95, take a reading (CPU Load).
3.) Load GPUs with 3DMark 11 Test 1 in loop, take max reading as it heats up (GPU Load).
4.) Load both applications (CPU+GPU Load).

The "math problem" is that any program used to fully load the GPU also partly loads the CPU. So when test 4 is Prime95+3DMark, Prime95 can only use whatever CPU resources are left with 3DMark running.

So the most accurate system power reading is with "CPU+GPU Load" applied. The system measurement for "CPU Load" still includes the power of an idle GPU. And the system power measurement for "GPU Load" still includes the amount of CPU energy it takes to run the GPU's test application.
Score
10
March 24, 2014 1:08:47 AM

Crashman said:
YellowBee said:
I dont get the "W" usage?680+237 = 917w. Not 802w as meation above?
It's not a calculation, it's a reading for the entire system (at the power plug). Load the CPU using eight thread of AVX-optimized Prime95, take reading one. Load GPUs with 3DMark 11 Test 1 in loop, take max reading as it heats up.

The "math problem" is that any program used to fully load the GPU also partly loads the CPU. So when test 3 is Prime95+3DMark, Prime95 can only use whatever CPU resources are left with 3DMark running.

So the most accurate system power reading is with "CPU+GPU Load" applied. The system measurement for "CPU Load" still includes the reading of an idle GPU. And the system power measurement for "GPU Load" still includes the amount of CPU power it takes to run the GPU.


Very much appreciated and satisfying answer.
Thanks Crashman :) 
Score
1
March 24, 2014 2:19:39 AM

Quote:
YellowBee said:
I dont get the "W" usage?680+237 = 917w. Not 802w as meation above?
It's not calculated power, it's measured power for the entire system (at the power plug). No addition or subtraction was used.1.) Start the system, wait for all processes to load, take a measurement (Active, but idle)2.) Load the CPU using eight thread of AVX-optimized Prime95, take a reading (CPU Load).3.) Load GPUs with 3DMark 11 Test 1 in loop, take max reading as it heats up (GPU Load).4.) Load both applications (CPU+GPU Load).The "math problem" is that any program used to fully load the GPU also partly loads the CPU. So when test 4 is Prime95+3DMark, Prime95 can only use whatever CPU resources are left with 3DMark running.So the most accurate system power reading is with "CPU+GPU Load" applied. The system measurement for "CPU Load" still includes the power of an idle GPU. And the system power measurement for "GPU Load" still includes the amount of CPU energy it takes to run the GPU's test application.
Any chance of including these calculations in all future articles, so that we know exactly how the power graph is calculated? Ta.
Score
0
a b K Overclocking
March 24, 2014 3:05:06 AM

bemused_fred said:
Crashman said:
It's not calculated power, it's measured power for the entire system
Any chance of including these calculations in all future articles, so that we know exactly how the power graph is calculated? Ta.
Which calculations?

Score
1
March 24, 2014 3:28:38 AM

wow. such performance. many ram. they should've put in 16gb of ram for real high-end specs. ;) 
Score
-7
March 24, 2014 4:43:15 AM

As I'm into quiet enclosures, I'd go along this route:

http://pcpartpicker.com/p/3fuGw

Wondering how much of a difference would non-reference cards make. Obviously, CPU cooler and RAM could be different, BR drive optional, storage drive as well.
Score
0
March 24, 2014 5:25:37 AM

Quote:
G.Skill Ripjaws X F3-1866C9D-16GXM: DDR3-1600 C9, 16 GB (2 x 8 GB)


Shouldn't that be DDR3-1866?
Score
2
a b 4 Gaming
March 24, 2014 5:47:46 AM

Nice comparisons to last quarter's build. All things considered, I think this is the best build I've seen in this series for quite a while.
Score
1
March 24, 2014 6:30:24 AM

I like the new focus and high end review first. This build mirrors my own approach except I don't play games so save on multi-GPU costs and no need to water cool as no overclocking either – stability is key to me. My similarly parted machine in November less the water cooling and multi-GPU cost almost $800-900 less after rebates. Can you add sound/noise dB monitoring and include in results? Multimedia machines and home office machines need to account for noise.
Score
-1
March 24, 2014 6:31:38 AM

I like the new focus and high end review first. This build mirrors my own approach except I don't play games so save on multi-GPU costs and no need to water cool as no overclocking either – stability is key to me. My similarly parted machine in November less the water cooling and multi-GPU cost almost $800-900 less after rebates. Can you add sound/noise dB monitoring and include in results? Multimedia machines and home office machines need to account for noise.
Score
1
March 24, 2014 6:52:23 AM

Note: Arma 3 is largely CPU bound, and seems to favour IPC.
Score
1
March 24, 2014 7:02:21 AM

I enjoyed the article very much, and I appreciate the new direction you're going in for gaming value. However, you don't need to mention that the prices of the 290 spiked last year. Seriously, we get it and you only need to say it once or twice instead of seven or so. Aside from that, still a very informative and well-thought out article
Score
0
March 24, 2014 7:33:26 AM

When can we expect to see Tom's switch over to 4K gaming benchmarks? This build should be able to handle it and I want to keep tabs on both hardware and driver updates.Furthermore I think it is safe to say an enthusiast that is going to buy a multi-monitor setup probably already has one, but there are probably other like me that are waiting for reasonably priced hardware to be capable of handling 4K before buying a new monitor. Even though I haven't seen a 4K monitor that preforms like a "next Gen" technology should.Also now that Tom's has been very though covering multi-monitor resolutions I understand (and I hope other readers do as well) how they typically scale.I don't want to be a jerk I'm just trying to ask for an ETA, and if I don't ask, how will you know what I want?
Score
2
a b K Overclocking
March 24, 2014 7:58:30 AM

2400$ and hdd... pls
my fix is get a 700gb ssd, 780ti no sli problems, and a i5 4670, this is a much better gaming pc, and can go quiet build.
Score
-9
March 24, 2014 9:40:13 AM

^ An i5 with a 780 Ti? Come on you are asking to be bottle-necked! I bet you were one of the people that kept advocating a Pentium + 660 a couple years ago when people mistakenly thought dual cores would be the standard forever...
Score
-10
March 24, 2014 10:31:09 AM

Quote:
3.5-3.9 GHz, Quad-Core, 8 B Shared L3 Cache
8 B?
Score
3
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
March 24, 2014 10:38:14 AM

sea monkey said:
Quote:
3.5-3.9 GHz, Quad-Core, 8 B Shared L3 Cache
8 B?

8MB L3 cache.
Score
0
March 24, 2014 11:40:41 AM

As much as I agree about the surge in AMD GPUs, right now newegg is offering the PC 290x pcs+ for 579$ with BF4. It's barely 30$ above the retail price of a non custom heatsink version.You paid for those 780 GTX. I can have those for the same price in CAD$.
Score
1
March 24, 2014 12:57:57 PM

i5-4670k shows little to no improvement over 4770k in gaming. 90$ less.
Score
-1
March 24, 2014 2:39:07 PM

I'd throw through the windows that ODD unit. CDs are obsolete, people using CDs are obsolete, go back in 2005. Storage solutions are weak but this is a gaming machine. No good audio solution means you are going to use an external DSP and no good headset. I'd spend less on graphics and much more on music/audio. But I spent 2500 euros on my stereo, and 4000 on my PC. Stereo systems for audiophiles last much longer and never get obsolete. Investing a lot on graphics may leave you behind when new technologies come, and we have to be aware of diminishing return.
Score
1
March 24, 2014 7:09:09 PM

So you paid an extra $30 for the CPU, $50 extra for the MB and $110 for additional cooling all to go from 78.5fps to 83fps on 1080p Far Cry 3? That is an expensive 4.5fps. I didn't spend time to cherry pick an example, I just picked my favorite game and the resolution I run. Feel free to point out where the extra ~$200 was worth it.$200 for overclocking sounds like a deal compared to spending $20 to load drivers using spinning plastic rather than download them from the information super highway. At least overclocking is fun and rewarding.Finally, $170 + $90 + $20 for storage? How about Samsung 840 EVO 500MB for $260? Need more space, go for the 750GB. This is a performance machine and nothing improves performance more than good storage so don't waste money on slow storage.All suggestions kept the aim of the machine and with the exception of the SSD the same brand. I just used the Samsung SSD as an example because it is a top quality and no one could say I was picking a cheap SSD. My point is that I think you can't justify the overclocking costs or the storage choices.
Score
0
March 24, 2014 7:52:16 PM

Well be lucky I am not a Very Hard Core Gamer, but more like an Old School Classic Gamer, but there are some Emulators and Programs that do rely on my Video card(GeForce GT 620) and AMD A6 6400K A Series Duel Core 3.9 GHz CPU,It Runs at Full Speed, maybe even faster than usual.
Score
0
March 24, 2014 9:55:25 PM

Nice setup and smart build.. Just dont care for NZXT..
Score
-1
a b K Overclocking
a b 4 Gaming
March 25, 2014 8:35:39 AM

I don't think you can spend this amount of money on a PC without defining who its user is, to see that it is necessary to spend this much. Grokem makes some good points about the component choices. This machine is not a pure gamer, so other performance metrics need to be the focus; which ones cannot be determined unless you've identified the user. That, unfortunately, could render benchmark comparisons across SBM cycles irrelevant, since a Design Engineer will build for speed in different areas than will a Graphic Artist.
Score
2
March 25, 2014 10:38:12 AM

My only thing about this build is the choice of graphics cards. He could have gotten 4 GTX 770's and still been in the same price range. Or even just go with 2 GTX 770's at half the cost and get almost the same performance.
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
March 25, 2014 4:57:38 PM

I like this build. Though if you came in $90 under budget, how did you not find room for the BD? Did you have a $90 price drop after ordering parts? SLI 780s is a lot of overkill for anything I would do, but spending $2400 on a machine is pretty much overkill anyway.

Onus has a point: anytime you spend this much on a machine, there has to be some primary purpose to it. Sure, you can get a rig that does many things well ( and I think you've done fairly well at that in the past. ) But changing up focus does partly invalidate comparing benchmarks between quarters.

To others complaining about the storage, I have to ask why. Complain all you want about the supposed obsolescence of ODDs, they're still used quite a bit. And do tell what you'd rather do with $260 for storage. A single 500GB SSD? Right, great compromise there . . .
Score
1
a b K Overclocking
March 25, 2014 11:23:25 PM

RedJaron said:
I like this build. Though if you came in $90 under budget, how did you not find room for the BD? Did you have a $90 price drop after ordering parts?
Yes, and that's pretty well covered in the article content :) 

Score
0
March 27, 2014 10:58:45 AM

I like it all except the Seagate drive why not use an SSHD if you're going Seagate? Performance by dollar would be better than the Barracuda, and they're nearly the same price.Also, the PSU. I know there's a lot of Corsair love here at Tom's, but there's a few Seaonic options that would be better for the price, also some other brands like XFX (and other made-by-Seasonic options).Last, I think it's hilarious that you still went with an Extreme 4 motherboard when you totally stomped on my suggestion of that previously, but that's cool.
Score
0
a b K Overclocking
March 27, 2014 2:43:36 PM

Christopher Shaffer said:
I like it all except the Seagate drive why not use an SSHD if you're going Seagate? Performance by dollar would be better than the Barracuda, and they're nearly the same price.Also, the PSU. I know there's a lot of Corsair love here at Tom's, but there's a few Seaonic options that would be better for the price, also some other brands like XFX (and other made-by-Seasonic options).Last, I think it's hilarious that you still went with an Extreme 4 motherboard when you totally stomped on my suggestion of that previously, but that's cool.
No SSHD because that's just an extension of cache. It only really works if you're running programs from the drive, which we're not. That's why the SSD is 256GB instead of something lame like 128Gb.

Corsair because it was the best price on top brands of 750W 80 PLUS Gold power supplies on the day I ordered.


Score
0
March 28, 2014 7:39:33 AM

Crashman said:
Christopher Shaffer said:
I like it all except the Seagate drive why not use an SSHD if you're going Seagate? Performance by dollar would be better than the Barracuda, and they're nearly the same price.Also, the PSU. I know there's a lot of Corsair love here at Tom's, but there's a few Seaonic options that would be better for the price, also some other brands like XFX (and other made-by-Seasonic options).Last, I think it's hilarious that you still went with an Extreme 4 motherboard when you totally stomped on my suggestion of that previously, but that's cool.
No SSHD because that's just an extension of cache. It only really works if you're running programs from the drive, which we're not. That's why the SSD is 256GB instead of something lame like 128Gb.

Corsair because it was the best price on top brands of 750W 80 PLUS Gold power supplies on the day I ordered.




Cool. That makes sense. I do run less important apps from my SSHD, so it's getting used well :) 

I saw Bestbuy had a 256GB Samsung 840 EVO for $139 the other day. Too bad you couldn't have caught that deal, but the SanDisk is solid for sure.
Score
0
a c 170 K Overclocking
a c 248 4 Gaming
March 28, 2014 8:19:04 AM

Things I'd ponder before building that box...... not criticisms, just thoughts why I personally might go another way and considering I'm looking today rather than weeks ago when these items were selected. 1. I have two 780s and Furmark pulls 712 watts "at the wall" (at moderate OC) with CPU stock profile selected at boot, it's consuming CPU TDB of just just 40 watts. Add the 100 watts for a 4770k at 4.6Hz @ 1.4 v and that's 812. Allow for the 90% PSU efficiency and that's 731 watts. That's way too close for my comfort.....Keeping in mind that PSUs hit maximum efficiency at the 50% load mark, while ya might not be concerned about the power cost, the efficiency reduction also means more heat. Not a big thing .... just a few % points ... but still worth noting. Another thought .... if you allow for degradation of caps over time at say 15% as some recommend .... you at 840. Finally, the closer you get to full load, the greater the variance on voltage stability and increased ripple. The HX series contains some great units however, (except for the 1000 and 1050 which are dogs) and I'm sure the HX750 has plenty of headroom above it's rated capacity. Still ..... I'd feel more comfy spending an extra $20 for the HX850 which would still be well below budget.2. A reference GFX card at $520 ?. The Gigabyte Windforce, Asus DCII and MSI Gaming N series have consistently been at $520 or less since October. I'd want the custom PCB and multiphase VRMs on the non-reference cards so as to allow for lower VRM temps when overclocked.3. Often MoBo choices depend upon brand loyalty and feature sets that attract different users so its a very personal decision. When doing a $2k box, my recommended MoBo budget is generally $175ish (MSI GD65 is a popular choice among my users) which makes any comparison I'd make to the build a bit unfair. I also get a lotta users choosing the G45. But newegg combos. MIRs or other specials generally make this decision in the end.4. Memory is a bit of a PITA as prices and availability are all over the place. Again, I think more peeps buy on brand loyalty than on any detailed consideration of (Speed / CAS) specs and how either will change things in the particular usage scenario. This week was asked to use a 2400 CAS11 set from Mushkin for a user that was $150ish (price kinda surprised me).... Corsair's Vengeance Pro 1866 CAS 9 is usually $150ish of late (in some colors) but while higher end stuff has had attractive prices, it's very difficult to find in stock....so worth checking to see what's available on buy day .... I have sometimes found CAS 9 2133 at same price as 1866 at the same price.5. I have been getting lotsa e-mails from vendors in the last month regarding EVOs at $155 - $170 and Pros at $200 so that's something to consider buying today. My guess is however this build had parts selected before than. I use a lot of those Seagate drives, tho usually the 3 TB model..... no complaints. On may office lappies however, I started using Seagate's SSHDs a while back because got tired of peeps asking me to clean off the junk and make room on their C drives. We have found them completely indistinguishable (aside from benchmarks) from using separate SSDs and HDs with only about a second difference ion boot times (noticeable only with a stopwatch) and have started using them on desktops too.... Gamers who store games on their HD and OS on SSD may find benefit to the small price increase ($30)
Score
0
a b 4 Gaming
March 28, 2014 10:24:20 AM

JackNaylorPE said:
Things I'd ponder before building that box...... not criticisms, just thoughts why I personally might go another way and considering I'm looking today rather than weeks ago when these items were selected.

1. I have two 780s and Furmark pulls 712 watts "at the wall" (at moderate OC) with CPU stock profile selected at boot, it's consuming CPU TDB of just just 40 watts. Add the 100 watts for a 4770k at 4.6Hz @ 1.4 v and that's 812. Allow for the 90% PSU efficiency and that's 731 watts. That's way too close for my comfort.....Keeping in mind that PSUs hit maximum efficiency at the 50% load mark, while ya might not be concerned about the power cost, the efficiency reduction also means more heat. Not a big thing .... just a few % points ... but still worth noting. Another thought .... if you allow for degradation of caps over time at say 15% as some recommend .... you at 840. Finally, the closer you get to full load, the greater the variance on voltage stability and increased ripple. The HX series contains some great units however, (except for the 1000 and 1050 which are dogs) and I'm sure the HX750 has plenty of headroom above it's rated capacity. Still ..... I'd feel more comfy spending an extra $20 for the HX850 which would still be well below budget.

2. A reference GFX card at $520 ?. The Gigabyte Windforce, Asus DCII and MSI Gaming N series have consistently been at $520 or less since October. I'd want the custom PCB and multiphase VRMs on the non-reference cards so as to allow for lower VRM temps when overclocked.

3. Often MoBo choices depend upon brand loyalty and feature sets that attract different users so its a very personal decision. When doing a $2k box, my recommended MoBo budget is generally $175ish (MSI GD65 is a popular choice among my users) which makes any comparison I'd make to the build a bit unfair. I also get a lotta users choosing the G45. But newegg combos. MIRs or other specials generally make this decision in the end.

4. Memory is a bit of a PITA as prices and availability are all over the place. Again, I think more peeps buy on brand loyalty than on any detailed consideration of (Speed / CAS) specs and how either will change things in the particular usage scenario. This week was asked to use a 2400 CAS11 set from Mushkin for a user that was $150ish (price kinda surprised me).... Corsair's Vengeance Pro 1866 CAS 9 is usually $150ish of late (in some colors) but while higher end stuff has had attractive prices, it's very difficult to find in stock....so worth checking to see what's available on buy day .... I have sometimes found CAS 9 2133 at same price as 1866 at the same price.

5. I have been getting lotsa e-mails from vendors in the last month regarding EVOs at $155 - $170 and Pros at $200 so that's something to consider buying today. My guess is however this build had parts selected before than. I use a lot of those Seagate drives, tho usually the 3 TB model..... no complaints. On may office lappies however, I started using Seagate's SSHDs a while back because got tired of peeps asking me to clean off the junk and make room on their C drives. We have found them completely indistinguishable (aside from benchmarks) from using separate SSDs and HDs with only about a second difference ion boot times (noticeable only with a stopwatch) and have started using them on desktops too.... Gamers who store games on their HD and OS on SSD may find benefit to the small price increase ($30)

1) Furmark doesn't put a big load on the CPU, but it does put some so it's not sitting idle. You can't just add 100W for the CPU on top of a Furmark run to get a full load estimate.

Also, efficiency between 90% and 100% load on a Gold 80 PSU is spec'd around 87% ( though some models have better than spec efficiency. ) The 802 watts pulled is actually closer to 705 watts delivered to the internals. That particular PSU can handle up to 744W on the 12V rail alone. Yes, it's a heavy load, but that's only happening on a torture test. Heavy gaming is only drawing 682W, which is about 80% load on the PSU. If you were mining with this rig, or wanted it at full-tilt most of the time, then stepping up to an 850W PSU makes sense. Otherwise the 750W is adequate.

2) Tom has said multiple times in the past that he's a fan of blower GPU coolers because they fully exhaust heat. The blowers also serve two purposes in this particular build. First, since Haswell is such a finicky OCer, I can understand that he didn't want recycled exhaust heat from the GPUs in the case. Second, blowers make cooling less a headache with SLI configs due to the limited space between cards.

3) Fair enough, but if you're trying to cram as much as possible into the build, dropping to a $125 board makes sense. ASRock's Extreme4 line is very respectable and hardly a sacrifice in terms of mboard features.

4) Again, fair enough. RAM prices seem a little volatile right now. But as Newegg has to be the vendor for these, those are the prices you have to go by.

5) Hybrid drives offer some great trade-offs for people who want the simplicity. But hybrids are still limited by the size of the cache. Your boot sequence will always take up some of the cache, and if you bounce between a lot of programs, then you won't see as much gain since the cache is shifting a lot. In laptops with limited drive bays, they're a no-brainer. But in a desktop where I can easily fit multiple drives, I'll pay extra for separate boot and data drives. And if you don't want to bother with multiple drive letters, I'd rather get a 30GB - 60GB SSD and set it up as a HDD cache.
Score
1
March 28, 2014 2:53:47 PM

Christopher Shaffer said:
Crashman said:
Christopher Shaffer said:
I like it all except the Seagate drive why not use an SSHD if you're going Seagate? Performance by dollar would be better than the Barracuda, and they're nearly the same price.Also, the PSU. I know there's a lot of Corsair love here at Tom's, but there's a few Seaonic options that would be better for the price, also some other brands like XFX (and other made-by-Seasonic options).Last, I think it's hilarious that you still went with an Extreme 4 motherboard when you totally stomped on my suggestion of that previously, but that's cool.
No SSHD because that's just an extension of cache. It only really works if you're running programs from the drive, which we're not. That's why the SSD is 256GB instead of something lame like 128Gb.

Corsair because it was the best price on top brands of 750W 80 PLUS Gold power supplies on the day I ordered.




Cool. That makes sense. I do run less important apps from my SSHD, so it's getting used well :) 

I saw Bestbuy had a 256GB Samsung 840 EVO for $139 the other day. Too bad you couldn't have caught that deal, but the SanDisk is solid for sure.


Well it is too bad they don't have many SanDisk Extremes left since they are moving to the "Ultra-Plus" Version, but I have both of them on my system, a 120 GB Extreme, and a 128 GB Ultra-Plus, and they are holding up very well, I mean heck to add a tip most of the SSDs(if very lucky) can last up to almost 200 years in terms of how they are stored(when I managed to add how Many Hours before the SSD would Fail).
Score
0
!