System Builder Marathon, Q1 2014: The Articles
Here are links to each of the four articles in this quarter’s System Builder Marathon (we’ll update them as each story is published). And remember, these systems are all being given away at the end of the marathon.
To enter the giveaway, please fill out this SurveyGizmo form, and be sure to read the complete rules before entering!
Day 1: The $2400 Reader's Choice PC
Day 2: Our New Enthusiast PC
Day 3: The $750 Gaming PC
Day 4: Performance And Value, Dissected
Introduction
Our System Builder Marathon typically caters to the value-oriented gaming, performance-enthusiast, and extreme performance markets. The benchmarks we use are similarly diverse; we try to include tests relevant to power users concerned with productivity, content creation, and gaming. Weighting the suite helps ensure that each type of test affects the end result the way we think is most fair. To that end, games only count towards 20% of our overall evaluation.
I typically get the privilege of building with the largest budget. That's both a blessing and a curse, though. Twenty-four-hundred dollars should be enough money to optimize for all of the benchmarks we run, which explains why my previous two efforts paired high-end CPUs with multiple graphics cards.
Was I wrong in that approach, though? More than once, readers pegged my "jack of all trades" approach as a master of none. Some folks criticized the use of gaming-class graphics cards in a workstation. Others thought it was a waste to use a professional-level processor in a gaming box. More than anything, though, it was stipulated that no machine should be expected to do everything well, and any effort to the contrary would fall short somehow.
Gamers were the most vocal advocates for change, making good points favoring a Haswell-based processor instead of Ivy Bridge-E. After all, only a handful of benchmarks scale well beyond four cores, and the newer architecture's better per-core performance helps improve the benchmark results in less aggressively-threaded metrics. Haswell-based processors also use less power, allowing us to choose a PSU that's either cheaper, more efficient, or a combination of both. Lower CPU prices, a dual-channel memory kit (instead of quad), and a Z87 Express-based motherboard (rather than X79) leaves more room in the budget for graphics, too.

Incidentally, graphics turned out to be the most contentious part of my previous build. Purchased for a mere $400 per card at the start of the cryptocurrency gold-rush, my two Radeon R9 290s quickly rose to $1200 before I could even write about why I picked them. Worse, those newly-expensive cards also compelled me to buy a super-quiet case that a lot of readers didn’t like. In comparison, at $520 per board, the GeForce GTX 780s our readers were recommending would run quiet enough to pick almost any case out there.
| Q1 2014 $2400 Performance PC Components | ||
|---|---|---|
| Processor | Intel Core i7-4770K (Haswell): 3.5-3.9 GHz, Quad-Core, 8 MB Shared L3 Cache | $340 |
| Graphics | 2 x EVGA 03G-P4-2781-KR GeForce GTX 780 3 GB (SLI) | $1040 |
| Motherboard | ASRock Z87 Extreme4: LGA 1150, Intel Z87 Express | $145 |
| Memory | G.Skill Ripjaws X F3-1866C9D-16GXM: DDR3-1866 C9, 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) | $163 |
| System Drive | SanDisk Ultra Plus SDSSDHP-256G-G25: 256 GB, SATA 6Gb/s SSD | $170 |
| Storage Drive | Seagate Barracuda ST2000DM001: 2 TB, SATA 6Gb/s Hard Drive | $90 |
| Optical | Lite-On iHAS124-04: 24x DVD±R, 48x CD-R | $20 |
| Case | NZXT Phantom 410 Series CA-PH410-G1 | $90 |
| Power | Corsair HX750: 750 W Semi-Modular, ATX12V v2.3, 80 PLUS Gold | $140 |
| CPU Cooler | Thermaltake CLW0217 Water 2.0 Extreme | $95 |
| PWM Fan | Antec SpotCool Blue LED Fan | $17 |
| Total Cost | $2310 | |
Has our audience's guidance turned this month’s do-everything PC into a high-end gaming build? We’ll run a few benchmarks to answer that question. But first, let's examine the components and how they all come together.
The most cogent criticism of our previous machine was that its Radeon R9 290 graphics cards were overpriced, ill-tempered, and noisy. When I ordered them, though, 290s were still $400 each. It's only unfortunate that we can't go back in time to lock down pricing on AMD's second-fastest single-GPU board. This time around, however, we know better.
Graphics Cards: Two EVGA GeForce GTX 780s in SLI
Tom's Hardware readers recommended Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 780 to replace the previous build’s Radeons, and picking EVGA as the supplier was as easy as selecting “Sort By: Lowest Price” from Newegg’s list of models.

Read Customer Reviews of EVGA's GeForce GTX 780
I love blower-style coolers for their ability to remove GPU heat from the case, but concede that many of those coolers are too noisy to satisfy a majority of our readers. Nvidia put a great amount of effort into developing a radial fan cooler that could deliver the best of both cooling and noise, and EVGA’s part number 03G-P4-2781-KR employs it.
CPU: Intel Core i7-4770K
CPU selection is always contentious, especially when some of our benchmarks effectively utilize more than four cores and others don't. Fans of the Core i5-4670K's value rightly point out that part's excellent overall performance and overclocking headroom, while proponents of the Core i7-4930K have more cores, cache, and Intel's Hyper-Threading technology on their side.

Read Customer Reviews of Intel's Core i7-4770K
Between those extremes, the Core i7-4770K has four cores, a little more shared L3 cache, and Hyper-Threading to schedule up to eight threads concurrently. Those features do improve core utilization however, and the performance boost in a few applications is enough to garner support in the high-end space.
System RAM: G.Skill 8 GB Dual-Channel DDR3-1866 C9
Based on a ton of testing, it appears that G.Skill uses only a few DRAM ICs across a wide variety of products. Of them, the company's most value-oriented overclocking modules are usually labeled DDR3-1866 C9 or DDR3-1600 C8 at 1.50 V. Available in a variety of colors and heat spreader styles, and I usually opt for the lower-profile Ares version.

Read Customer Reviews of G.Skill's Ripjaws X F3-1866C9D-16GXM
But Ripjaws X was a little cheaper than Ares on the day my parts were ordered, so I went that route instead. Likewise, DDR3-1866 C9 was a little cheaper than DDR3-1600 C8. And the cheapest color was blue.
The specific part number I went with is F3-1866C9D-16GXM. If you know what to look for, though, you might find a better deal on the same RAM under a different part number on a different day.
The LGA 1150 market is flooded with Z87 Express-based motherboards battling for value supremacy. We only needed to look back to Fast And Cheap? Five Sub-$160 Z87 Motherboards For Enthusiasts to narrow the field.
Motherboard: ASRock Z87 Extreme4
We've given ASRock a hard time for using temporary discounts to win favor. But today's regular price for the Z87 Extreme4 is pretty much the formerly-discounted price. Other vendors haven't kept pace with the company's aggressive pricing, so the board's Smart Buy award remains very much relevant.

Read Customer Reviews of ASRock's Z87 Extreme4
The Z87 Extreme4 won its award by offering more features than the similarly-priced Biostar Hi-Fi Z87X 3D. Both products provide the exceptional overclocking capability we seek, but Biostar was unable to drop its price to compensate for a lighter feature set.
Case: NZXT Phantom 410
NZXT’s Phantom 410 won an award for its cooling-to-noise ratio in spite of its ventilated side panel. That’s impressive. I’d like to imagine what the case might accomplish with an extra intake fan on the front and no vent in the side panel.

Read Customer Reviews of NZXT's Phantom 410
On the other hand, it’s easier for me to imagine what this case might look like with liquid cooling installed. The top panel design begs for a radiator, and today it’s getting one.
Power Supply: Corsair HX750
My previous build lived well under an 850 W Seasonic power supply, even after overclocking its early-technology six-core processor. The new CPU would save at least 100 W, and that opened up higher-efficiency options like Corsair’s HX750.

Read Customer Reviews of Corsair's HX750 PSU
Rock-solid stability through several of my previous builds keeps Corsair’s HX750 on my short list, while an 80 PLUS Gold rating also reduces operational expense compared to the previous build’s 850 W 80 PLUS Bronze-rated unit. Some readers will likely criticize the part for being semi-modular, but the non-modular cables are needed anyway.
Processors based on Intel's Haswell architecture can be much more difficult to cool than Ivy Bridge-E. Meanwhile, the Haswell design need less absolute cooling capacity than Ivy Bridge-E. Those two apparently-conflicting statements can be justified by the observation that the lower-power Haswell-based chips respond poorly to increased cooling capacity.
CPU Cooling: Thermaltake Water 2.0 Extreme
Given the above observations, it appears that anything larger than a 120 mm single-fan cooling tower wastes money. On the other hand, choosing anything smaller than the cooler from my previous build would open me up to criticism if today's setup didn't overclock well. I wanted to play this one safe.

Read Customer Reviews of Thermaltake's Water 2.0 Extreme
Overclocked Haswell cores are so temperamental that a mere 3 °C drop in temperature can add 100 MHz to a stable configuration. Because of the CPU’s heat transfer problems, that’s about all I expect from Thermaltake’s huge, award-winning Water 2.0 Extreme.
Motherboard Cooling: Antec SpotCool 80
Anyone who thinks that $95 is too much to spend to cool a heat-soaked CPU will be incensed to hear that the expense doesn’t end there. Most motherboards are designed to cool the CPU voltage regulator using exhaust from the CPU cooler, and the fans on a liquid cooler's radiator don’t point in that direction.

Read Customer Reviews of Antec's SpotCool 80
Designed to cool nearly any component, Antec’s SpotCool is the perfect add-on voltage regulator fan for motherboards that weren’t designed to accept a fan. I always keep one of these on-hand for liquid-cooling predicaments, but decided to actually include it in my order this time.
The need for a voltage regulator fan emerges at moderately increased CPU voltage. If the CPU isn’t able to support moderate voltage increases before crossing its own thermal threshold, then I’ve wasted money.
Readers recommended a change in CPU and graphics, so I tried to keep the other performance-oriented aspects of this build as close to the previous effort as possible. Since system drive performance is among our measurements, the previous machine’s SSD remains.
System Drive: SanDisk Ultra Plus SDSSDHP-256G-G25
It’s no longer mentioned in our Best SSDs For The Money column, but that’s probably because a competing model dropped to $200.

Read Customer Reviews of SanDisk's Ultra Plus 256 GB SSD
The SanDisk Ultra Plus is still an attractive deal at $170 though, placed between Tiers 1 and 3 in both performance and price. No Tier 2 products made the recommended list, though the guide’s editor seemed to have other priorities.
Storage Drive: Seagate Barracuda 2 TB
SSD-equipped systems usually run out of capacity long before you start piling on your collection of movies, music, and pictures. A hard drive assumes the role of mass storage for stuff that doesn’t get used as often and isn't performance-sensitive.

Read Customer Reviews of Seagate's Barracuda 2 TB
Even though it sports a 7200 RPM spindle speed and 64 MB of cache, we’re not expecting any speed records from the ST2000DM001. But it does give us a lot of storage space for $90. Better still (for me), this optional component isn’t tested by our benchmark suite.
Optical Drive: Lite-On iHAS124
I’ve always believed that a high-end build should have the flexibility to support multiple media formats, which is why I usually equip these machines with a Blu-ray writer. Unfortunately, the original order price of our other components didn’t leave room in the budget for that this time.

Read Customer Reviews of Lite-On's iHAS124
Able to burn DVD media at 24x and read my driver discs before I could get online to look for update, Lite-On’s iHAS124 is a low-cost solution to a problem that some of our readers don't have. Still, I consider the $20 spend to be worthwhile.
My 2012 story Building With The NZXT Phantom 410 provides a general guideline for assembling today’s system, and 2013’s Installing Thermaltake’s Water 2.0 Extreme covers the cooler’s details. But this is my first system to combine those parts.
I installed the ASRock Z87 Extreme4 motherboard right away to check cooler clearance, but don’t recommend you following suit, since the motherboard's heat sinks block access to some fan screws.

The NZXT’s fan openings have bell-shaped extensions specifically designed to clear the coolant fittings of top-mounted radiators. Though the chassis appears to support a slim 280 mm (2 x 140 mm) radiator at its limit, Thermaltake’s thicker 240 mm (2 x 120 mm) system performed better in our ten-way comparison.

The 240 mm Water 2.0 Extreme radiator appears to be a particularly good choice, since it clears our optical drive in the top bay. A radiator this size can also be turned to place its fittings on the opposite side, while a 280 mm radiator would only fit in the shown orientation.

Remember the terms “slim” and “thicker” two paragraphs above? The Phantom 410’s top panel is tall enough in the middle to fit this 1.5” radiator, but would have limited wider 280 mm (2 x 140 mm) radiators to around 1.2” thickness.

Rather than use a separate power cable for the optical drive, I decided to move it to the bottom 5.25” bay and share a cable with the SSD and hard drive. Other cables are stuffed neatly behind the motherboard tray.
At 1.32 V CPU core, ASRock’s Turbo 4.60 GHz overclocking profile provided more than enough voltage to prevent crashing on this Core i7-4770K.
Unfortunately, that high voltage also caused it to throttle within seconds of starting an eight-thread run of AVX-optimized Prime95. Experimentation showed that a minimum of 1.275 V was needed to make this core run at 46 x 100 MHz, but that this voltage still caused thermal bottlenecking within minutes of my stability tests.

Some overclockers will point out that my stress test is unrealistically tough, that thermal throttling prevents damage, and that this protection mechanism takes minutes to start under Prime95. So, it'd be unlikely to affect our benchmarks. But when I look for a stable overclock, I avoid throttle conditions altogether. I instead dropped the CPU multiplier to 45x and began looking for the lowest voltage that would keep the CPU stable at 4.5 GHz.

A 1.24 V VCore worked great, so I also dropped the ASRock 4.60 GHz profile’s 1.30 V “CPU Cache” voltage to 1.24 V.

I increased the memory subsystem from its DDR3-1866 profile to DDR3-2133, and also configured it to 1.60 V.

To achieve stability at DDR3-2133, the three primary latencies all needed to be increased by one cycle beyond XMP settings. I usually find that tRAS can also be tightened, but that wasn’t true for this combination of memory and CPU.

As with the CPU, I don’t like the idea of graphics cards that throttle down when you need full power the most. I first increased the GPU power limit to its maximum slider setting, then began bumping up GPU clock in 25 MHz increments. After finding +175 MHz unstable and +150 MHz stable, I picked a frequency that would result in a nice round number for the GPU clock. Adding 157 MHz yielded a 1020 MHz GPU base clock and a 1059 MHz typical GPU Boost frequency.
Packing key reader-recommended hardware changes, my current $2400 build goes up against last quarter's effort, which wasn't very well-received. That system couldn’t hold this machine’s 4.5 GHz under the duress of Prime95 running all-out using AVX optimizations, so it was instead configured with a variable 4.4 (six-core) to 4.6 GHz (two-core) frequency range.
| Test Hardware Configurations | ||
|---|---|---|
| Current $2400 PC | Previous $2400 PC | |
| Processor (Overclock) | Intel Core i7-4770K: 3.5 - 3.9 GHz, Four Physical Cores, O/C to 4.5 GHz, 1.25 V | Intel Core i7-4930K: 3.4 - 3.9 GHz, Six Physical Cores, O/C to 4.4 -4.6 GHz, +140 mV |
| Graphics (Overclock) | 2 x EVGA GeForce GTX 780: 902 MHz GPU, GDDR5-6008, O/C to 1059 MHz, GDDR5-6720 | 2 x Asus Radeon R9 290: 947 MHz GPU, GDDR5-5000, O/C to 1100 MHz, GDDR5-5600 |
| Memory (Overclock) | 16 GB G.Skill DDR3-1866 CAS 9-10-9-28, O/C to DDR3-2133 CL 9-10-11-10, 1.585 V | 16 GB G.Skill DDR3-1866 CAS 9-10-9-28, O/C to DDR3-2133 CL 9-10-11-10, 1.585 V |
| Motherboard (Overclock) | ASRock Z87 Extreme4: LGA 1150, Intel Z87 Express, Stock 100 MHz BCLK | ASRock X79 Extreme4: LGA 2011, Intel X79 Express, Stock 100 MHz BCLK |
| Optical | Lite-On iHAS124: 24x DVD±R | Pioneer BDR-208DBK: 15x BD-R |
| Case | NZXT Phantom 410 | Fractal Design Define R4 Black Pearl |
| CPU Cooler | Thermaltake CLW0217 Water 2.0 Extreme | Thermaltake CLW0217 Water 2.0 Extreme |
| Hard Drive | SanDisk SDSSDHP-256G-G2 256 GB SATA 6Gb/s SSD | SanDisk SDSSDHP-256G-G2 256 GB SATA 6Gb/s SSD |
| Power | Corsair HX750: 750 W Semi-Modular, 80 PLUS Gold | Seasonic SS-850AM: 850 W Semi-Modular, 80 PLUS Bronze |
| Software | ||
| OS | Microsoft Windows 8 Pro x64 | |
| Graphics | Nvidia GeForce 335.23 | AMD Catalyst 13.12 |
| Chipset | Intel INF 9.4.0.1026 | Intel INF 9.3.0.1026 |
The biggest problem with last quarter's configuration wasn't my hardware choices, though. Rather, both of its graphics cards were slammed by a 50% price spike between the time they were ordered and when our System Builder Marathon went live.
Today's machine has a small issue of its own. Enabling XMP at otherwise-stock settings caused it to crash during Sandra's bandwidth-intensive Cryptography tests. Adding 20 mV core offset in firmware fixed that issue.
| Benchmark Configuration | |
|---|---|
| 3D Games | |
| Battlefield 4 | Version 1.0.0.1, DirectX 11, 100-sec. Fraps "Tashgar" Test Set 1: Medium Quality Preset, No AA, 4X AF, SSAO Test Set 2: Ultra Quality Preset, 4X MSAA, 16X AF, HBAO |
| Grid 2 | Version 1.0.85.8679, Direct X 11, Built-in Benchmark Test Set 1: High Quality, No AA Test Set 2: Ultra Quality, 8x MSAA |
| Arma 3 | Version 1.08.113494, 30-Sec. Fraps "Infantry Showcase" Test Set 1: Standard Preset, No AA, Standard AF Test Set 2: Ultra Preset, 8x FSAA, Ultra AF |
| Far Cry 3 | V. 1.04, DirectX 11, 50-sec. Fraps "Amanaki Outpost" Test Set 1: High Quality, No AA, Standard ATC, SSAO Test Set 2: Ultra Quality, 4x MSAA, Enhanced ATC, HDAO |
| Adobe Creative Suite | |
| Adobe After Effects CC | Version 12.0.0.404: Create Video which includes 3 Streams, 210 Frames, Render Multiple Frames Simultaneously |
| Adobe Photoshop CC | Version 14.0 x64: Filter 15.7 MB TIF Image: Radial Blur, Shape Blur, Median, Polar Coordinates |
| Adobe Premeire Pro CC | Version 7.0.0 (342), 6.61 GB MXF Project to H.264 to H.264 Blu-ray, Output 1920x1080, Maximum Quality |
| Audio/Video Encoding | |
| iTunes | Version 11.0.4.4 x64: Audio CD (Terminator II SE), 53 minutes, default AAC format |
| LAME MP3 | Version 3.98.3: Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 min, convert WAV to MP3 audio format, Command: -b 160 --nores (160 Kb/s) |
| HandBrake CLI | Version: 0.99: Video from Canon Eos 7D (1920x1080, 25 FPS) 1 Minutes 22 Seconds Audio: PCM-S16, 48,000 Hz, Two-channel, to Video: AVC1 Audio: AAC (High Profile) |
| TotalCode Studio 2.5 | Version: 2.5.0.10677: MPEG-2 to H.264, MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec, 28 sec HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG-2), Audio: MPEG-2 (44.1 kHz, 2 Channel, 16-Bit, 224 Kb/s), Codec: H.264 Pro, Mode: PAL 50i (25 FPS), Profile: H.264 BD HDMV |
| Productivity | |
| ABBYY FineReader | Version 10.0.102.95: Read PDF save to Doc, Source: Political Economy (J. Broadhurst 1842) 111 Pages |
| Adobe Acrobat 11 | Version 11.0.0.379: Print PDF from 115 Page PowerPoint, 128-bit RC4 Encryption |
| Autodesk 3ds Max 2013 | Version 15.0 x64: Space Flyby Mentalray, 248 Frames, 1440x1080 |
| Blender | Version: 2.68A, Cycles Engine, Syntax blender -b thg.blend -f 1, 1920x1080, 8x Anti-Aliasing, Render THG.blend frame 1 |
| Visual Studio 2010 | Version 10.0, Compile Google Chrome, Scripted |
| File Compression | |
| WinZip | Version 18.0 Pro: THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to ZIP, command line switches "-a -ez -p -r" |
| WinRAR | Version 5.0: THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to RAR, command line switches "winrar a -r -m3" |
| 7-Zip | Version 9.30 alpha (64-bit): THG-Workload (1.3 GB) to .7z, command line switches "a -t7z -r -m0=LZMA2 -mx=5" |
| Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings | |
| 3DMark 11 | Version: 1.0.5.0, Benchmark Only |
| 3DMark Professional | Version: 1.2.250.0 (64-bit), Fire Strike Benchmark |
| PCMark 8 | Version: 1.0.0 x64, Full Test |
| SiSoftware Sandra | Version 2014.02.20.10, CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / Multimedia / Cryptography, Memory Bandwidth Benchmarks |
3DMark suggests that the previous machine’s $600 AMD Radeon R9 290s are faster than the current build’s $520 GeForce GTX 780s, and that makes sense on a price/performance basis.
When I chose them, however, the Radeons were only $400. Now you understand why so many folks considered AMD's Hawaii-based parts to be such a good deal. On the bright side, they've dropped from a high of over $600 to right around $500 more recently.

Most gamers blamed cryptocurrency miners for the shortage of Radeon R9 290 and 290X cards. Availability is improving now, though not before enthusiasts started noticing Nvidia's high-end cards could keep up in disciplines other than scrypt-based mining.

PCMark isn't my favorite benchmark because it doesn't properly reflect the optimizations for six-core CPUs that some of our real-world workloads more prominently show off. On the other hand, it’s a better indicator of performance for ordinary desktop applications, as well as the storage performance of those applications.
Despite its older CPU architecture, the extra cores enabled on last quarter's System Builder Marathon machine push it beyond today's Haswell-based system in SiSoftware Sandra's Arithmetic module. Those extra processing resources were the reason I chose to go with Ivy Bridge-E.
Granted, the results from Sandra aren't used in our final price/performance calculations. But our benchmark suite does have a few tests in it that benefit from the same six-core configuration.

The old machine also looks great in Sandra's Cryptography test, which taxes memory bandwidth and favors a quad-channel controller for AES encryption/decryption. Notice that today's build achieves higher hashing scores though, thanks to optimizations for Haswell's more modern instruction support.


The previous machine’s quad-channel memory controller also offers twice the theoretical bandwidth of its dual-channel replacement. We're curious to see how this effects real-world applications.
Since the current machine features the more advanced CPU architecture, I can only credit the last quarter's Radeon R9 290 graphics card for superior performance in the AMD-sponsored Battlefield 4. The new machine’s GeForce GTX 780s achieve a win at our highest two settings, but two wins in eight tests isn’t going to push this configuration into the winner’s circle.


Far Cry 3 shows a far stronger preference for the current build’s Nvidia graphics cards. The GeForce cards don't lead as much at our highest setting, but the fact that they're in front for the entirely of this game does exonerate the enthusiasts who suggested that I use them in my Q1 2014 build.


Performance in Grid 2 scales opposite of Battlefield 4, favoring the GeForce GTX 780-based machine in six out of eight tests, and switching over to last quarter's configuration at the highest two settings. That box with the Radeon R9 290s in it appeared more processor-bound though, and we've noticed similar CPU-dependencies from AMD graphics cards in the past.


The current build’s GeForce GTX 780 cards in SLI make a clean sweep of Arma 3, contributing to an overall gaming lead of approximately 12%. Can the older machine and its hexa-core processor catch back up in the rest of our benchmark set, though?


Apple iTune and LAME MP3 are both single-threaded workloads. I might have expected an Ivy Bridge-E-based CPU running at 4.6 GHz (through Turbo Boost) to lead a 4.5 GHz processor employing Intel's Haswell architecture, but frequency isn't the only variable affecting performance. Haswell gives Intel's Core i7-4770K a big enough IPC advantage to carve out a small lead.
Don't expect the same outcome from applications optimized for threading, though. In those titles, extra processing resources will come into play and further improve the Ivy Bridge-E design's relative performance.


Lower is better when it comes to encoding times, and the previous build’s two additional cores give it a significant advantage in our threaded HandBrake and TotalCode Studio benchmarks.


Adobe After Effects appears to have a slight preference for the current build’s newer CPU architecture, but the overall difference is marginal at best. We need to jump to Photoshop to see the real benefits of the previous machine’s additional processing cores.


That’s not to say the previous machine performed perfectly in Photoshop. Its OpenCL-based filters work far better using the newer platform's GeForce GTX 780 graphics system.

Adobe Premiere benefits from the previous build’s greater core count, while single-threaded Acrobat X prefers the current machine’s newer architecture.

Does your next system need to serve a business purpose? Last quarter's configuration with six Ivy Bridge-based cores was ideal for that. Strong finishes in 3ds Max, Blender, FineReader, and Visual Studio show why Intel's LGA 2011-based processors remain compelling options for power users who need to get work done. In comparison, the four-core CPU built on Intel's Haswell architecture is a better option for the gaming crowd, it appears.




Compression app 7-Zip, which we know to be well-optimized for multi-core processors, responds well to the six-core CPU from last quarter. WinRAR offsets that slightly by demonstrating a preference for Intel's Haswell architecture. I'm testing with an older version of WinZip, which doesn't reflect Corel's latest efforts to improve performance on highly parallelized designs. Consequently, WinZip appears split, favoring Core i7-4770K in the basic CPU benchmark. GeForce GTX 780 locks down the win when we use OpenCL acceleration, too.



We already knew that the previous build’s six-core processor and Hawaii-based graphics cards were energy hogs. But at least that machine idled down to reasonably low power consumption. My latest effort is even more miserly, though not to the degree I was expecting.
The chart below shows global power consumption, which includes losses inside the power supply. At 85% efficiency, the new system’s 802 W peak input power turns into 682 W of output for its Corsair HX750 power supply.

Noticing that the new machine draws 116 W less under full CPU load, our temperature chart might make a few readers do a double-take.

Both setups use the same CPU cooler, yet the current system's four-core CPU runs far hotter than the previous build’s six-core processor. The Haswell architecture's issues with heat are a glaring flaw in an otherwise excellent product.

Tom's Hardware readers who want a multi-purpose machine with an emphasis on gaming will be happy with the change to GeForce GTX 780 cards and a Core i7-4770K. Is the new build's advantage in games strong enough to counter the previous machine’s productivity lead, at least giving us a tie at stock clock rates?

Truth be told, one reason last quarter's box sunk to the new machine's performance levels at stock settings was that its workstation-oriented SATA driver sacrificed performance in the name of data integrity. After reverting back to Windows 8’s stock AHCI driver for its overclocked configuration, storage scores jumped by 15%. Thus, the new machine is not as strong as my combined scores would have us believe.
A broad focus across our entire benchmark suite has caused many of my previous machines to look like workstations with gaming graphics cards. At least, that's what the feedback indicates. Occasionally, they end up behaving like gaming boxes with professional-class CPUs. A number of you asked for a change, and so today's effort was designed to facilitate a fresh perspective.

Slowed by Intel's enterprise-oriented storage driver, the previous build still managed to provide similar overall value to the game-centric replacement I pieced together today. Removing that stumbling block as I overclocked, the previous build’s less aggressive overclock manages to convey super value anyway.
But I still wouldn’t recommend the Q4 2013 setup today after what happened in the graphics market. Prices on Radeon R9 290s have shot up, and then dipped down a bit. But I'd only stand behind my choices if you could still find the Hawaii-based card for its original $400.

Comparing the prices of components today puts last quarter's top-end build at a huge disadvantage. If I were to choose my own multi-purpose performance-focused PC today, I’d need to figure out a combination of Ivy Bridge-E processor and Nvidia graphics cards that fit within a $2400 budget.

Gamers like gaming, and there are professionals who mix work and play. Although the previous build didn't please everyone, I can at least say that the new one caters to a crowd not dependent on business-class applications for making money. I don't even need consider price spikes on AMD's cards to see the current Intel/Nvidia-based build's gaming leadership.

Volatile pricing sounds the swan’s song for the previous PC’s Radeon R9 290 CrossFire configuration. I’m unlikely to revisit any AMD-based configuration until those cards can be purchased at October 2013 levels. Regardless of the reasons, your feedback driving my choices results in a better value this quarter.