System Builder Marathon, Q1 2014: The $750 Gaming PC
Tags:
-
Overclocking
- Build Your Own
-
Desktops
- Buyer's Guides
-
Gaming
Last response: in Reviews comments
pauldh
March 26, 2014 12:00:03 AM
After building two successful gaming-oriented configurations under $1000, rising prices force Paul to switch up the composition of his $750 machine. But can a compromise in processor performance be made up for by a faster GeForce GTX 770 graphics card?
System Builder Marathon, Q1 2014: The $750 Gaming PC : Read more
System Builder Marathon, Q1 2014: The $750 Gaming PC : Read more
More about : system builder marathon 2014 750 gaming
blackmagnum
March 26, 2014 12:14:39 AM
hmp_goose
March 26, 2014 12:46:39 AM
Related resources
- Help! System Builder Marathon, Q2 2014: Our Budget Gaming PC - Forum
- System Builder Marathon, Q1 2014? - Forum
- Request: Budget Gaming PC Q1 2014 - Forum
- Looking at System Builder Marathon (or any other PC) for New Build - Forum
- System Builder Marathon, August 2012: $1000 Enthusiast PC - Forum
nice build, and a good example of how even modern multi-threaded games are STILL at their heart primarily single or dual threaded games. We see this in BF4 most clearly, as the advantage of MOAR CORZ vanishes once you pass the 3rd core on the cpu... meaning a dual cored and hyperthreaded intel is still a viable gaming option; and though you can get an fx8320 for the same price as that i3, almost nothing truely makes use of 8 cores yet. I say yet, because the next gen game consoles will force games to become truly multithreaded in the future. Purhaps down the road the old piledriver chips will start to look like a great gaming value, but the situation today is still largely the same problem facing AMD 3 years ago... which is games simply don't really need MOAR CORZ. Not really anyway. I'm sure some people will have issues with using an i3, but really i think it was a fantastic read; and quite informative. Its important we keep things in perspective... and as things stand now you really don't need much more cpu power then a dual cored pentium or i3... or i guess quad core phenomII or piledriver fx.it all comes down to what you can afford to build around it.
Score
1
pauldh
March 26, 2014 2:03:29 AM
bemused_fred
March 26, 2014 2:04:39 AM
Quote:
The i3 was a bad choice, why not get an i5-3330 which is about the same in price and it offers 2 more fully enabled cores, which really would help in applications and the 'newer' games.The MOBO would also be cheaper as it is last gen. When I first saw the parts list for this build, I expected myself to be in full agreement with you. I mean, can you imagine someone suggesting paring a GTX 680 with an I3? Ludicrous. They'd be laughed out the forums. However, looking at the benchmarks for the highest settings in 1920x1080 and 4800x900, I found there were 2 types of results
1. Those where the I3 and the GTX 770 build beat, or were within a few FPS of the I5 and R9-280X build:
Battlefield 3
Battlefield 4
Arma 3
Far Cry 3
2. Those where the I5 and R9-280X beat the I3 and GTX 770 build by a significant margin, but where all frame rates were well above 60FPS:
F1 2012
Grid 2
Skyrim
So, while overall performance percentage charts might put the I3 and GTX 770 behind the I5 and R9-280X behind in certain games, in a real-life setting, it seems that the I3 and GTX 770 is an equally good build. Which is really not what I was expecting.
Quote:
nalmost nothing truely makes use of 8 cores yet. I say yet, because the next gen game consoles will force games to become truly multithreaded in the future. Citations desperately needed. The XBOX 360 had 3 hyper-threaded CPUs and the PS3 had a 7-core cell CPU, but this didn't push PC games during this period beyond dual cores. Indeed, as late as January 2012, Tom's hardware was finding it impossible to recommend any Quad-core AMD processors over intel Dual-core processors and as late as December 2012, dual-core Intel pentiums were taking the low-end recommendations, as they were still better at gaming at this point than 4-core AMD processors. Indeed, it wasn't until February 2013 that they reversed this recommendation, so any assumption that consoles having more cores will result in P.C. games using more cores doesn't really stand up to scrutiny, I'm afraid.
Score
9
pauldh
March 26, 2014 2:14:46 AM
Quote:
The i3 was a bad choice, why not get an i5-3330 which is about the same in price and it offers 2 more fully enabled cores, which really would help in applications and the 'newer' games.The MOBO would also be cheaper as it is last gen. As explained on page 1, the whole idea here with this build was to spend less on the platform, more-than covering the premiums on graphics, RAM, and ODD vs. our last purchase.
Sure we'd go i5 if priced the same. But the -3330 is $60 more @ $190, just like the -3470 used last quarter. The -3350P saves $10 off that. H61 doesn't save much, starting $5-10 below H81, and then we'd give up capitalizing on the i5's limited overclocking.
Score
3
pauldh
March 26, 2014 2:43:28 AM
@bemused_fred - Yes, exactly! Good post.
I was surprised to see i3 didn't yield any meaningful drop in minimum fps, at all! In fact, minimums often appeared GPU-bound, and the new GTX 770 rig won out, especially OC'ed. System bound at 70+ fps and up full-time in Skyrim or F1 2012 is hardly a loss, but an extra 3-8 fps consistently down low in ARMA III and Far Cry 3 could come in handy.
I was surprised to see i3 didn't yield any meaningful drop in minimum fps, at all! In fact, minimums often appeared GPU-bound, and the new GTX 770 rig won out, especially OC'ed. System bound at 70+ fps and up full-time in Skyrim or F1 2012 is hardly a loss, but an extra 3-8 fps consistently down low in ARMA III and Far Cry 3 could come in handy.
Score
4
redgarl
March 26, 2014 2:59:19 AM
pauldh
March 26, 2014 3:01:14 AM
hmp_goose said:
"The games we just added are unquestionably less processor-bound." This sounds like a major oversight, I fear …Well, not really. While I favored keeping Skyrim around this long for popularity, truth is it and F1 2012 (both out and both CPU/system limited) were now a bit long in the tooth and unable to challenge our cheapest rigs for a while now. I expected ARMA III to be more processor bound than it is.
Considering we do average in all resolutions, I think CPU-muscle is more than getting it's fair share of attention. What we lack I guess is a super-strenuous new CPU-bound game sequence able to exploit a weak CPU. Parts of Tomb Raider can do that actually, but not the in-game benchmark or our normal GPU-bound save-game. The TR test I use for CPUs is a bit tedious for SBM use. (EDIT: And actually some of the games we use like FC3 do exploit a WEAK CPU, it's just Core-i3 isn't weak.)
Hey we are always open to suggestions though, but for SBMs have to scale back to four easily comparable & repeatable games. Unfortunately this typically rules out MP testing.
Score
1
redgarl
March 26, 2014 3:31:25 AM
pauldh...I totally disagree. The use of gaming bench here on tomshardware is ridiculous. Even if I like the fact the community is active and interesting, when it comes to benching graphic cards, you guys are not good. You making all this work to build machines but only test one or two games which provoke a huge false unbalance toward one card or the other.For example, hardwarecanucks, use at least 8 games... and lets not talk about anandtech making a bench for everything. It's always the same games! Where are the bench for the witcher 2 with ubersampling... just saying.
Score
-1
pauldh
March 26, 2014 3:47:56 AM
One or two games? Don't most Tom's graphics reviews typically use at least 6-8? That's my norm for a game-related feature. I even double up on sequences at times to factor in the varied loads some games create on the system. See here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ivy-bridge-wolfdale...
SBMs we just can't pull off more than four games, ( I have tried.
) and we keep them around for a while to retain comparable data to the previous quarter. But it's just too time consuming, as coordinating these often become a time crunch as it is.
Like I said, we are always open to benchmark suggestions. They'll need to be newer than the Witcher 2 though. =)
SBMs we just can't pull off more than four games, ( I have tried.
) and we keep them around for a while to retain comparable data to the previous quarter. But it's just too time consuming, as coordinating these often become a time crunch as it is. Like I said, we are always open to benchmark suggestions. They'll need to be newer than the Witcher 2 though. =)
Score
2
This build is cheaper, faster and it has more headroom in terms of watts. I don't know why you praise the i3 so much, when it's possible to get better performance, while saving money. I just don't get it.
CPU: Intel Core i5-3350P 3.1GHz Quad-Core Processor ($179.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H61M-S1 Micro ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($34.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Kingston HyperX Blu 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1333 Memory ($64.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda ES 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card ($339.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Corsair 200R ATX Mid Tower Case ($39.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair Builder 500W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Samsung SH-224DB/BEBE DVD/CD Writer ($15.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $735.93
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 07:50 EDT-0400)
CPU: Intel Core i5-3350P 3.1GHz Quad-Core Processor ($179.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H61M-S1 Micro ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($34.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: Kingston HyperX Blu 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1333 Memory ($64.99 @ Newegg)
Storage: Seagate Barracuda ES 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card ($339.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Corsair 200R ATX Mid Tower Case ($39.99 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Corsair Builder 500W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Samsung SH-224DB/BEBE DVD/CD Writer ($15.99 @ Newegg)
Total: $735.93
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 07:50 EDT-0400)
Score
-1
bemused_fred
March 26, 2014 5:00:27 AM
Quote:
This build is cheaper, faster and it has more headroom in terms of watts. I don't know why you praise the i3 so much, when it's possible to get better performance, while saving money. I just don't get it. CPU: Intel Core i5-3350P 3.1GHz Quad-Core Processor ($179.99 @ Newegg) Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-H61M-S1 Micro ATX LGA1155 Motherboard ($34.99 @ Newegg) Memory: Kingston HyperX Blu 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1333 Memory ($64.99 @ Newegg) Storage: Seagate Barracuda ES 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card ($339.99 @ Newegg) Case: Corsair 200R ATX Mid Tower Case ($39.99 @ Newegg) Power Supply: Corsair Builder 500W 80+ Bronze Certified ATX Power Supply ($59.99 @ Newegg) Optical Drive: Samsung SH-224DB/BEBE DVD/CD Writer ($15.99 @ Newegg) Total: $735.93(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 07:50 EDT-0400)Quote:
Nailing down my ideal list of components required an almost comical amount of tuning to hit $750. Significant fluctuations in pricing and availability stymied my efforts throughout the day our orders were to be placed. In fact, every single component I selected, aside from the Core i3, was eventually swapped out (in some cases, multiple times), including no less than four different GeForce GTX 770s at $330. When it came time to submit, I lucked out and snagged Zotac's offering for $20 less than any of the competing cards.Score
1
@lostgamer03's build - the hdd price isn't included in the final tally. and the corsair 200r costs $60 on newegg.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
the msi gfx card is $20 more than paul's selected zotac now.
and... non modular, cwt-built, 80+ bronze (not even silver) cx500 is a better choice than superflower-built rosewill capstone.. how?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
the msi gfx card is $20 more than paul's selected zotac now.
and... non modular, cwt-built, 80+ bronze (not even silver) cx500 is a better choice than superflower-built rosewill capstone.. how?
Score
1
Overall really good information between the 3 builds. The i3 has been my go-to processor for budget builds ever since the AMD Phenom II X4 965 left the scene. You can save a ton of money by going with a lower-end motherboard, lower capacity PSU, and no CPU cooler and apply that toward higher quality components or even an SSD.
The one thing these charts don't reveal, however, is the real impact of some of the productivity activities. Many of the single-threaded apps really don't take that long, so the overall impact of a lower performing CPU in that case is felt less by the user.
Contrast that to some of the multi-threaded apps. Try transcoding a 2 hour blu-ray movie or 7zipping a backup of a 20GB Skyrim Data folder. The difference in wait times between the i3 and i5 for the Skyrim Data folder zip would be over 13 minutes and for the blu-ray transcoding can take as much as an hour longer. These time differences have serious impact, and more cores/threads will definitely be appreciated in these situations.
So overall I agree with the results. The i3 is a great budget-build CPU, and this article shows you can stretch that all the way up to a GTX 770 - nice! But it's also easy to lose sight of the impacts some of the other activities can have on the time away from gaming.
The one thing these charts don't reveal, however, is the real impact of some of the productivity activities. Many of the single-threaded apps really don't take that long, so the overall impact of a lower performing CPU in that case is felt less by the user.
Contrast that to some of the multi-threaded apps. Try transcoding a 2 hour blu-ray movie or 7zipping a backup of a 20GB Skyrim Data folder. The difference in wait times between the i3 and i5 for the Skyrim Data folder zip would be over 13 minutes and for the blu-ray transcoding can take as much as an hour longer. These time differences have serious impact, and more cores/threads will definitely be appreciated in these situations.
So overall I agree with the results. The i3 is a great budget-build CPU, and this article shows you can stretch that all the way up to a GTX 770 - nice! But it's also easy to lose sight of the impacts some of the other activities can have on the time away from gaming.
Score
5
pauldh
March 26, 2014 5:49:17 AM
@ lostgamer_03 - I think you are missing the point. We just tested Core i5 last quarter. And if you are going to use that $35 (after $10 rebate) H61, you could still save $60 (or $70 factoring the current instant promo code) going with i3-3240. No matter how you slice it, we are paying that much more to outfit Core i5. Only special combo-prices would impact this.
Score
2
CaptainTom
March 26, 2014 7:00:18 AM
pauldh
March 26, 2014 7:08:13 AM
As usual, the bottom build was the most interesting one, IMHO. My takeaways:
1. The i3 does very well for itself. Although it is beaten at some things, the margins are small, and it is clearly "good enough." Where the margins are not small, the application isn't a game, so entirely different selection criteria should be used anyway.
2. On a budget, ongoing operating costs really should not be ignored. The FX-6300 may be a competent general-purpose processor, also "good enough" for anything, but its power use makes it a poor budget choice. I'm going to feel a lot better about recommending the i3 in the forums, knowing there's a solid upgrade path to i5 or i7 later. Furthermore, on a budget, many of the cheap AM3+ boards are really subpar. My only complaint about this H81 (although it is severe) is the lack of USB3.0 header.
3. The costs of building a solid gaming system seem to be climbing along with everything else. As well as this one performed at High-Ultra settings, I'd still like to see what it would take to play well (60+FPS) on Medium-High settings; i3+R7 260 or i3+GTX750Ti ?
4. Once again, it doesn't take a monster PSU to run a good gaming system. Even if you used an overclocked i5, the 450W Rosewill Capstone would have been sufficient.
I used that Rosewill Line-M case for my father's new PC last year, and that front fan is a howler; the first stock Rosewill fan I felt compelled to replace for noise. I used an 800rpm Scythe instead.
I did not use side fans, and with no hot parts in it (I used an i3 + HD7750), I covered the side vents on the inside with corrugated cardboard to reduce noise. I'd use this case again.
1. The i3 does very well for itself. Although it is beaten at some things, the margins are small, and it is clearly "good enough." Where the margins are not small, the application isn't a game, so entirely different selection criteria should be used anyway.
2. On a budget, ongoing operating costs really should not be ignored. The FX-6300 may be a competent general-purpose processor, also "good enough" for anything, but its power use makes it a poor budget choice. I'm going to feel a lot better about recommending the i3 in the forums, knowing there's a solid upgrade path to i5 or i7 later. Furthermore, on a budget, many of the cheap AM3+ boards are really subpar. My only complaint about this H81 (although it is severe) is the lack of USB3.0 header.
3. The costs of building a solid gaming system seem to be climbing along with everything else. As well as this one performed at High-Ultra settings, I'd still like to see what it would take to play well (60+FPS) on Medium-High settings; i3+R7 260 or i3+GTX750Ti ?
4. Once again, it doesn't take a monster PSU to run a good gaming system. Even if you used an overclocked i5, the 450W Rosewill Capstone would have been sufficient.
I used that Rosewill Line-M case for my father's new PC last year, and that front fan is a howler; the first stock Rosewill fan I felt compelled to replace for noise. I used an 800rpm Scythe instead.
I did not use side fans, and with no hot parts in it (I used an i3 + HD7750), I covered the side vents on the inside with corrugated cardboard to reduce noise. I'd use this case again.
Score
2
ojas
March 26, 2014 7:56:38 AM
@Paul: Arma 3 is ridiculously processor bound overall, it's possible that the scenario you're running is more GPU bound.
If you want, i could mail a few (or optionally, lots) of performance logs and charts of the game.
There are a few benchmark runs available in the Steam workshop, I've used benchmark_0.51 and Benchmark Altis.
Both give a fairly accurate overall performance picture of the game.
EDIT: There's also "Heavy Rain .22" and "frag85's Memory Benchmark", which you may want to check out.
If you want, i could mail a few (or optionally, lots) of performance logs and charts of the game.
There are a few benchmark runs available in the Steam workshop, I've used benchmark_0.51 and Benchmark Altis.
Both give a fairly accurate overall performance picture of the game.
EDIT: There's also "Heavy Rain .22" and "frag85's Memory Benchmark", which you may want to check out.
Score
1
2Be_or_Not2Be
March 26, 2014 10:42:53 AM
Mini-ITX cases tend to be disproportionately expensive, especially ones large enough to allow for the cooling that a gaming PC may need. Micro-ATX seems like a comfortable size for most builds, the more I think about it.
This case has room in it for an optical drive, a pair of mechanical drives (e.g. for RAID1), and a SSD boot drive, plus a hefty graphics card and a 120mm tower cooler.
This case has room in it for an optical drive, a pair of mechanical drives (e.g. for RAID1), and a SSD boot drive, plus a hefty graphics card and a 120mm tower cooler.
Score
0
Since I personally tend to do a blend of gaming + multithreaded apps (Ex: x264 encoding) and the author mentioned the FX 6300 came close to making the cut on this build, I wondered:How much extra would I need to spend to get a comparable gaming PC that could also overclock well and run all my apps?So I tinkered around, kept some of the same parts, went with a better Case, CPU Cooler and Motherboard (8+2 power for OC), and came up with this:PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / BenchmarksCPU: AMD FX-6300 3.5GHz 6-Core Processor ($109.99 @ Amazon) CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO 82.9 CFM Sleeve Bearing CPU Cooler ($29.99 @ NCIX US) Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3P ATX AM3+ Motherboard ($89.99 @ Micro Center) Memory: A-Data XPG V1.0 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory ($67.99 @ Newegg) Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($59.23 @ OutletPC) Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card ($319.99 @ Newegg) Case: Cooler Master HAF 912 ATX Mid Tower Case ($49.99 @ Micro Center) Power Supply: Rosewill Capstone 450W 80+ Gold Certified ATX Power Supply ($49.99 @ Newegg) Optical Drive: Asus DRW-24B1ST/BLK/B/AS DVD/CD Writer ($19.98 @ OutletPC) Total: $797.14(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 13:58 EDT-0400)So for those interested in getting good performance in an all-purpose setup without breaking the bank, this seems like a good option.
Score
0
cknobman
March 26, 2014 11:49:46 AM
pauldh
March 26, 2014 12:11:24 PM
Evolution2001
March 26, 2014 12:13:44 PM
(My first comment is slightly tangential to this discussion, but I'll come back around quickly.)
What is the prevailing wisdom (via subjective testing and not anecdotal evidence) in terms of how many fps are needed to have a 'smooth' gaming experience? Is it 30, 60, 90+ ? The reason I pose that question first is because of the benchmarks that are still being included in these reviews.
If 30fps is the baseline, then it would seem that from here on out, spending time benchmarking any game at 1920x1080 and lower is a waste of time. From what I'm seeing, these 'budget rigs' are capable of playing any game at max detail at 1080 and below well in excess of 30fps. Therefore, I put forth for consideration that the resolution be dropped as a benchmark. For single display setups with either monitor, TV, or projection that max out at 1080p, pretty much any current video card and CPU is going to get you there. (This is also why I preferred the GPU reviews when they listed fps @ given resolutions, versus the current 'value' scores.)
When I built my gaming rig for my home theater, I only needed to be able to max games out at 1080p because that's the native/max resolution of mine and most consumer projectors and TV's (within a gamer's budget). Getting any hardware that can benchmark an enjoyable experience at higher resolutions is wasted money in 'single monitor' situations at 1080p or lower. Technically, my non-OC'd HD7870 is the most I need because when it was still in the benchmarks, it was able to hit at minimum 30fps on all the then-current titles at 1080p. And since the current hardware blows by 30fps with the greatest of ease, I imagine that the older, higher-end cards will still manage a minimum of 30 fps if not better.
That being said, if 'conventional wisdom' states that 60fps is what's required- taking into account 60Hz refresh rates- then by all means maybe 60fps is the baseline and knowing that a particular game won't reach 60fps at 1080p is still relevant.
Thoughts?
What is the prevailing wisdom (via subjective testing and not anecdotal evidence) in terms of how many fps are needed to have a 'smooth' gaming experience? Is it 30, 60, 90+ ? The reason I pose that question first is because of the benchmarks that are still being included in these reviews.
If 30fps is the baseline, then it would seem that from here on out, spending time benchmarking any game at 1920x1080 and lower is a waste of time. From what I'm seeing, these 'budget rigs' are capable of playing any game at max detail at 1080 and below well in excess of 30fps. Therefore, I put forth for consideration that the resolution be dropped as a benchmark. For single display setups with either monitor, TV, or projection that max out at 1080p, pretty much any current video card and CPU is going to get you there. (This is also why I preferred the GPU reviews when they listed fps @ given resolutions, versus the current 'value' scores.)
When I built my gaming rig for my home theater, I only needed to be able to max games out at 1080p because that's the native/max resolution of mine and most consumer projectors and TV's (within a gamer's budget). Getting any hardware that can benchmark an enjoyable experience at higher resolutions is wasted money in 'single monitor' situations at 1080p or lower. Technically, my non-OC'd HD7870 is the most I need because when it was still in the benchmarks, it was able to hit at minimum 30fps on all the then-current titles at 1080p. And since the current hardware blows by 30fps with the greatest of ease, I imagine that the older, higher-end cards will still manage a minimum of 30 fps if not better.
That being said, if 'conventional wisdom' states that 60fps is what's required- taking into account 60Hz refresh rates- then by all means maybe 60fps is the baseline and knowing that a particular game won't reach 60fps at 1080p is still relevant.
Thoughts?
Score
1
Onus said:
Mini-ITX cases tend to be disproportionately expensive, especially ones large enough to allow for the cooling that a gaming PC may need. Micro-ATX seems like a comfortable size for most builds, the more I think about it.This case has room in it for an optical drive, a pair of mechanical drives (e.g. for RAID1), and a SSD boot drive, plus a hefty graphics card and a 120mm tower cooler.
Here's an equivalent Mini-ITX build that runs in the SG05 for $725. Yes, the GTX770 will fit without modifications (even though it's 6mm over spec), and yes, the SG05 can easily handle the cooling requirements of the 770. This is one compact power-house, and if you're not restricted to Newegg prices, it can be had for a bit cheaper.
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks
CPU: Intel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz Dual-Core Processor ($124.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: ASRock H81M-ITX Mini ITX LGA1150 Motherboard ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory
Storage: Toshiba 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($64.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card ($319.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Silverstone SG05BB-LITE Mini ITX Tower Case ($47.98 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Silverstone 450W 80+ Bronze Certified SFX Power Supply ($85.98 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Samsung SN-208FB/BEBE DVD/CD Writer ($31.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $725.90
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 16:01 EDT-0400)
I also have the Rosewill Line M case as my second office PC and can attest to its value and cooling effectiveness. I'm running an overclocked Phenom II X4 965 cooled by a 120mm Radiator and the Gigabyte Windforce R9-280X. It packs 2 HDDs, an SSD, Blu Ray Writer, and 3.5" card reader. Yes, I changed out the fans to reduce that front fan noise. The best thing about this is the low height. At just over 14", it's sitting on the shelf under my desk up off the floor. The only other uATX case with this capability at this size is the Silverstone TJ08 at twice the price (admittedly the TJ08 is much nicer).
The Line M has been an outstanding all-purpose budget case. I'm trying to upgrade it now, but form and function-wise, I'm having a real tough time finding a suitable replacement.
Score
2
2Be_or_Not2Be
March 26, 2014 1:26:21 PM
vertexx said:
Onus said:
Mini-ITX cases tend to be disproportionately expensive, especially ones large enough to allow for the cooling that a gaming PC may need. Micro-ATX seems like a comfortable size for most builds, the more I think about it.This case has room in it for an optical drive, a pair of mechanical drives (e.g. for RAID1), and a SSD boot drive, plus a hefty graphics card and a 120mm tower cooler.
Here's an equivalent Mini-ITX build that runs in the SG05 for $725. Yes, the GTX770 will fit without modifications (even though it's 6mm over spec), and yes, the SG05 can easily handle the cooling requirements of the 770. This is one compact power-house, and if you're not restricted to Newegg prices, it can be had for a bit cheaper.
PCPartPicker part list / Price breakdown by merchant / Benchmarks
CPU: Intel Core i3-4130 3.4GHz Dual-Core Processor ($124.99 @ Newegg)
Motherboard: ASRock H81M-ITX Mini ITX LGA1150 Motherboard ($59.99 @ Newegg)
Memory: G.Skill Ares Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 Memory
Storage: Toshiba 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive ($64.99 @ Newegg)
Video Card: MSI GeForce GTX 770 2GB Video Card ($319.99 @ Newegg)
Case: Silverstone SG05BB-LITE Mini ITX Tower Case ($47.98 @ Newegg)
Power Supply: Silverstone 450W 80+ Bronze Certified SFX Power Supply ($85.98 @ Newegg)
Optical Drive: Samsung SN-208FB/BEBE DVD/CD Writer ($31.98 @ Newegg)
Total: $725.90
(Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available.)
(Generated by PCPartPicker 2014-03-26 16:01 EDT-0400)
I will also attest to the Silverstone SG05 as being a great case for those who want something that can easily hold & run a decent graphics card (I'm running a 7850) along with a SSD and a 2nd hard drive, if desired. It has excellent airflow, and if you get Silverstone's 450W SFX power supply, it's has enough power for everything the case can hold. A small mini-ITX case like it has more appeal to most at initial site than a larger ATX case.
Score
0
Don't you also need a power/data adapter for the slim optical drive? It's not expensive ($12 maybe?) but I thought it was needed...
I considered that case, but ultimately went with what is shown in my .sig as "Gypsy" (for its small size, good for traveling). It is nowhere near as graphically capable, but I've not been playing demanding games. It blazes through anything else though, with its i5 and a pair of SSDs.
I considered that case, but ultimately went with what is shown in my .sig as "Gypsy" (for its small size, good for traveling). It is nowhere near as graphically capable, but I've not been playing demanding games. It blazes through anything else though, with its i5 and a pair of SSDs.
Score
0
Onus said:
Don't you also need a power/data adapter for the slim optical drive? It's not expensive ($12 maybe?) but I thought it was needed...I considered that case, but ultimately went with what is shown in my .sig as "Gypsy" (for its small size, good for traveling). It is nowhere near as graphically capable, but I've not been playing demanding games. It blazes through anything else though, with its i5 and a pair of SSDs.
Yes - I usually use this one:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
You also need to look at the PCIE connectors as the PSU has one 8-pin and 2-6pin. That MSI card has 2 8-pin connectors, but comes with 6 to 8 pin PCIe adapters. The power delivery is definitely sufficient.
Finally, I didn't mention a minor case mod that is required for these MSI gaming series GPUs - there are holes in the ODD tray that are meant to pass thru the PCIE power connector down to the top of the video card, and you just need to widen them up. I use a pair of tin snips - takes just a couple minutes. At 10.24", the GPU just fits. You need to uninstall the front fan and install the GPU before the PSU and other components. But it works.
Score
0
hmp_goose
March 26, 2014 3:04:19 PM
Quote:
Hey we are always open to suggestions though, but for SBMs have to scale back to four easily comparable & repeatable games. Unfortunately this typically rules out MP testing.I wish I had one for you: MW: O's ca_thread0Affinity, the obnoxious one on the last core, doesn't really show itself until things other then yourself are moving on-screen (read: multi-player.)
Assuming it's not been locked down in MW: O, does anyone know how to recored a demo on Cryengine 3?
Score
0
f-14
March 26, 2014 3:12:03 PM
"This quarter's machine even scores a victory, as its GeForce GTX 770 best handles the OpenCL-accelerated WinZip sub-test."geee an out dated winzip that just happens to coincide with date around a rebranded GTX 680... i sort of feel lead to suspect something."If you insist on higher sustained performance, you might prefer the 47 to 52 FPS floors established by the two costlier configurations.""However, when I adjust both systems to reflect today's pricing and isolate the performance-oriented parts, my $750 box scores a victory in its stock form."you didn't get to throw out the case and media player prices when choosing parts in the previous system in order to have the option to pick better parts either."peak draw from the wall remains under 300 W. You most certainly don't need the 600 W power supply recommended by Zotac. Our 450 W PSU has oodles of output in reserve."of course it's going to have reserve! it's bottlenecked and throttled down by the i3 vs a much better performance more core cpu
Score
-2
I know you've probably heard it before, but I really like these better when they are 500-1000-1500 or some much more reasonable range. It seems like the 2400 dollar build is just getting hardware thrown in there just for the sake of having more hardware and anyone spending that much on a machine is generally just going to get an i7 with a couple of SLI/crossfire video cards that fit in the budget and have a beast of a machine no matter what the choices were. The real challenge is at the low end where part choice has serious impacts on performance in other areas in most cases.
1500 is more than ample for a rather insane gaming rig these days and 500 bucks puts a HTPC/Gaming box in the realm of consoles but is a far more flexible and well rounded than a gaming console.
1500 is more than ample for a rather insane gaming rig these days and 500 bucks puts a HTPC/Gaming box in the realm of consoles but is a far more flexible and well rounded than a gaming console.
Score
3
Traciatim said:
I know you've probably heard it before, but I really like these better when they are 500-1000-1500 or some much more reasonable range. It seems like the 2400 dollar build is just getting hardware thrown in there just for the sake of having more hardware and anyone spending that much on a machine is generally just going to get an i7 with a couple of SLI/crossfire video cards that fit in the budget and have a beast of a machine no matter what the choices were. The real challenge is at the low end where part choice has serious impacts on performance in other areas in most cases. 1500 is more than ample for a rather insane gaming rig these days and 500 bucks puts a HTPC/Gaming box in the realm of consoles but is a far more flexible and well rounded than a gaming console.
Score
3
TheRohBoat
March 26, 2014 9:06:15 PM
bustapr
March 27, 2014 6:49:31 AM
Quote:
Quote:
The i3 was a bad choice, why not get an i5-3330 which is about the same in price and it offers 2 more fully enabled cores, which really would help in applications and the 'newer' games.The MOBO would also be cheaper as it is last gen. Quote:
nalmost nothing truely makes use of 8 cores yet. I say yet, because the next gen game consoles will force games to become truly multithreaded in the future. Score
0
ampy60
March 27, 2014 7:40:55 AM
ckholt83
March 27, 2014 8:55:35 AM
Quote:
hmp_goose said:
"The games we just added are unquestionably less processor-bound." This sounds like a major oversight, I fear …Score
0
- 1 / 2
- 2
- Newest
Related resources
- New $1000 gaming system or System Builder Marathon, Q4 2012: $1,000 Forum
- SolvedFirst time builder-Up-gradable Gaming pc for Cheap 2013/2014 Forum
- With Tom's System Builder Marathon in mind: Build a Infinite Budget PC Forum
- System Builder Marathon, May '09: $1,300 Enthusiast PC Forum
- System Builder Marathon: Sub-$4000 PC Forum
- $500 Gaming PC (From recent builder marathon) Forum
- recommended Gaming PC build for £750-£910 as of jan 1st 2014 Forum
- Gaming PC, First Time Builder ~$750 Forum
- $750-900 Gaming PC (first time builder) Forum
- Toms hadware system builder 2010 December 500 gaming pc Forum
- More resources
!