CPU: Intel Core i5-2400
With our sights set on a $550 Radeon HD 7970 for our $1250 build, we have to cut some corners. And it's not like the $190 Core i5-2400 is a bad CPU. After all, we’ve been recommending it in the sub-$200 space for some time now. Moreover, in our recent sub-$200 CPU gaming comparison, this processor performed very closely to the Core i5-2500K overclocked to 4 GHz.

Read Customer Reviews of Intel's Core i5-2400
Although the Core i5-2400’s multiplier ratio is locked, we’re interested in seeing how much speed this 3.1 GHz model gains when we peg it at its highest available 38x Turbo Boost ratio.
Motherboard: ASRock P67 Pro3 SE

Read Customer Reviews of ASRock's P67 Pro3 SE
We heard good things about ASRock’s P67 Pro3, so we thought we’d give the SE version a try. At $95, it certainly didn’t hurt that this was also the lowest-priced motherboard we could find with Intel's P67 chipset.
On paper, it has everything else we need: DDR3 memory support up to 2133 MT/s and a PCIe x16 slot. Reality turned out to be a little different though, as we suffered from from a BIOS limitation that we’ll discuss in the overclocking section. Know this: if you plan on overclocking, spend a few more dollars on a platform with more complete firmware settings. If you’re not overclocking, you might appreciate the Pro3 SE’s thin footprint, which fit into our mid-tower enclosure with ease.
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper TX3
Read Customer Reviews of Cooler Master's Hyper TX3
We know that there are better coolers out there, but you’ll have a hard time finding one for $20. Given tight budget constraints, we opted for Cooler Master’s low-budget option. It just so happens to be a decent model for the price, and it's significantly better than the solution you get bundled with Intel's Core i5-2400.
- Giving It Up For More Gaming Performance
- CPU, Motherboard, And Cooler
- Video Cards, Power Supply, And Case
- Memory, Hard Drive, And Optical Drive
- Building And Tweaking Around A Radeon HD 7970
- Test System And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: Synthetics
- Benchmark Results: Media Encoding
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Benchmark Results: Battlefield 3 And Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
- Benchmark Results: DiRT 3 And StarCraft II
- Power And Temperature Benchmarks
- A Surprisingly Robust Gaming System
I like how the 2400 is used but would it be okay dropping the cooler?
Read only optical drive? This makes no sense and is probably the worst skimp Ive ever seen. Spend the 5 bucks for a burner. Iso image anyone? This is an enthusiast level build... no mud flaps, no sale.
I desperately want a monitor at that resolution.
For the price, the lack of a larger SSD seems like an oversight. I would think anyone really considering this build would have done better to get a larger SSD and a 7950 or 7870. Or perhaps a single large hybrid HD would be a better option.
When you compare their overclocking potentials, they have about the same performance. And then there is the availability of the GTX 680, which is not. So it makes since why the 7970 was chosen.
The 7970 has better compute potential too. But I don't think that is relevant for a gaming box.
My thoughts exactly. This story was probably done before Kepler, but now with the 680 launched, the editor sure must be feeling a bit shortchanged.
Of course, the fact that the 680 has disappeared off the shelves is a different story entirely. In any case, within the next few weeks, we should see significant price cuts on the 7970, potentially making this build relevant once again.
I desperately want a monitor at that resolution.
Seriously folks, the NZXT GAMMA Classic Case is the best ATX case for under $50.
Also I agree, 64GB SSD is tiny for gamers. Its fine in an office enviroment, where you only have just the production programs that you use on a daily basis installed, with the actual data stored on a server/database. But for gamers whose Steam folder alone is in the 100s of GBs, its pointless.
Also, why bother with an aftermarket heatsink if you don't plan to overclock? I can understand if your after a low/noiseless pc (like me), but considering your running a 7970 and noisy stock case fan, it's a waste of money.
On a positive note, the $650 build was OK.
Not all of us need to run our games off an SSD. I use a 64GB SSD to boot from, and use my 7200rpm HDD to run my games, and it works just fine. I think people are being a little too picky. Especially about a build that will eventually be given away for free.
i think you meant 2560x1600!
Also interesting to note that the FX-6100 seemed to perform better in this comparison, then against the i5-2400 configuration used in the $600 December SBM which wiped the floor with it.
I understand that SSD is a no-brainer for a well rounded system. Heck, I myself would never spend north of a grand on a pc and not throw in an SSD. But the FPS per dollar is hurt by adding such an expensive storage subsystem.
Im pretty sure they stated in the $650 build that they had this stuff picked out a couple months ago, so pretty much just as the AMD 7xxx series came out, long before the Nvidia 6xx series was released. They also stated they are sick and tired of using the 2500k in their builds. I like it when they experiment. Otherwise we wouldnt have seen how horribly bad the bulldozer build was last time.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/overclock-core-i7-sli-liquid-cooling,3096-2.html
That was in the previous SBM so you really haven't been looking very long. I gave you a thumbs down just to cancel out some of those thumbs up you received
I like how the 2400 is used but would it be okay dropping the cooler?
Read only optical drive? This makes no sense and is probably the worst skimp Ive ever seen. Spend the 5 bucks for a burner. Iso image anyone? This is an enthusiast level build... no mud flaps, no sale.