The $800 build beats my $1,000 combination of parts under Skyrim’s High quality preset. But a shift to Ultra quality puts the two very similar systems back in check.
The $600 PC plays smoothly through its highest-quality settings at 1920x1080, where testing stopped. While 2560x1600 results might have been interesting, we doubt many gamers are going to spend one and a half times more on a monitor than their PC.


Previous
Next
Summary
- In Search Of The Best Possible Value
- Hardware, Software, And Overclock Settings
- Results: 3DMark And PCMark
- Results: SiSoftware Sandra
- Results: Battlefield 3
- Results: F1 2012
- Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
- Results: Far Cry 3
- Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Results: Adobe Creative Suite
- Results: Productivity
- Results: File Compression
- Power Consumption And Efficiency
- Where's The Value Sweet Spot?
Ask a Category Expert
The only real difference between the $800 and $1000 PC is that the $1000 has an SSD. They both have the same CPU, RAM, and GPU. Gaming should be about the same on both.
The only real difference between the $800 and $1000 PC is that the $1000 has an SSD. They both have the same CPU, RAM, and GPU. Gaming should be about the same on both.
Why would all the machines have same percent emphasis on games and productivity apps ? Why would a $600 gaming PC be evaluated similarly to a $800 enthusiast PC ? The percentwise distribution of each metric should be based on what usage the build was meant for.
Something like : games, apps, storage.
$600 build : 85%, 15% . (cheapest, best gaming. Very few apps. Doesnt need fast storage. )
$800 build : 55%, 35%, 10% (slightly better games over apps. Great apps. fast storage for OS + apps OR games)
$1000 build. : 42.5%, 42.5%, 15% (equally good games and apps. fast storage should be plenty for OS+apps+games)
1) FPS in games
2)time taken in apps
for each build?
so that we may draw our own conclusions from the data? I am not entirely satisfied with the conclusions you have drawn.
Congratulations Paul your sbm was right on target.
I think that there is no point of comparison between the last two setups.... I would have picked an amd setup just to change things...
yeah i think the PSU is one always worth updating as it is the heart of any system.
so maybe a psu/cpu/mobo/ram/cooling/graphic +what ever extras you can afford on said budget.
You're saying that these builds should have been coordinated, rather than competitive, and that a builder should have "took one for the team" by using inferior hardware? This was a competition, that's the point.