Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: System Value Compared

System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: System Value Compared
By

System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: 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 $600 Gaming PC
Day 2: The $800 Enthusiast PC
Day 3: The $1,000 Performance PC
Day 4: Performance And Value, Dissected
Day 5: The $1,600 Alternative PC

Introduction

Our System Builder Marathon series typically includes three builds that target the best gaming value, the best overall value, and the best overall performance. That formula usually works well for us, and the mid-priced setup does take top honors in our final analysis (at least it has the previous three quarters). Of course, we also use a really wide spread of price points most of the time: $500, $1,000, and $2,000, or some variation of doubling price two times. With time, we've figured out that you usually get the best performance for your dollar somewhere in the $1,000 range.

Can we get even more precise, though? 

This quarter, we're zooming in on that sweet spot by narrowing our focus to price points all around it. I typically find that the most value-oriented components can be combined into a complete hardware solution (minus peripherals) that costs around $800. That price falls closest to our usual mid-range build. So, our results almost always support my theory.

Don, Paul, and Chris decided that it was time to put some money on that claim, which is how $800 became the mid-point for this quarter's System Builder Marathon. I was forced to give up half of my $2,000 budget to build a $1,000 system, while Don dropped from $1,000 to $800. Paul, on the other hand, jumped from $500 to $600 (lucky him). Knowing that an $800 system win would hand me the debate and a $1,000 system win would hand me the competition, I had only one thing left to say to those odds: Game on!

The one thing I didn't anticipate was that an extra $100 would give Paul the opportunity to use an Ivy Bridge-based processor with limited overclocking to the tune of 400 MHz over its stock setting. Surely that small speed-up wouldn't be enough to let the $600 machine keep up with fully-unlocked $800 and $1,000 boxes, right?

Q1 2013 System Builder Marathon Components
 $600 Gaming PC$800 Enthusiast PC$1000 Performance PC
ProcessorIntel Core i5-3350P: 3.1-3.3 GHz, Quad Core, 6 MB L3 CacheIntel Core i5-3570K: 3.4-3.8 GHz, Quad Core, 6 MB L3 CacheIntel Core i5-3570K: 3.4-3.8 GHz, Quad Core, 6 MB L3 Cache
GraphicsHIS Radeon HD 7850 1 GB H785F1G2MPowerColor PCS+ AX7870 Myst Edition 2GBD5-2DHPPV3E PowerColor PCS+ AX7870 Myst Edition 2GBD5-2DHPPV3E 
MotherboardASRock Z75 Pro3: LGA 1155, Z75 ExpressASRock Z77 Pro3: LGA 1155, Intel Z77 ExpressASRock Z77 Extreme4: LGA 1155, Intel Z77 Express
MemoryG.Skill Ripjaws F3-12800CL9D-4GBRL: DDR3-1600 C9, 2 GB x 2 (4 GB) Crucial Ballistix Tactical BLE2KIT4GD31608DE1TX0: DDR3-1600 C8, 4 GB x 2 (8 GB)Crucial Ballistix Tactical BLT2K4G3D1608ET3LX0: DDR3-1600 C8, 4 GB x 2 (8 GB)
System DriveSeagate Barracuda ST500DM002: 500 GB SATA 6Gb/s HDDSeagate Barracuda ST500DM002: 500 GB SATA 6Gb/s HDDMushkin MKNSSDCR240GB-DX: 240 GB, SATA 6Gb/s SSD
Storage DriveUses System DriveUses System DriveUses System Drive
OpticalSamsung SH-224BB/RSBS: 24x DVD±R, 8x DVD±R DLSamsung SH-224BB: 24x DVD±R, 12x DVD±R DLLite-On iHAS124: 24x DVD±R, 12x DVD±R DL
CaseXigmatek Asgard II B/B
Xigmatek Asgard II B/BRosewill Redbone U3
PowerAntec Neo Eco 400C: 400 W, ATX12V v2.3, 80 PLUSAntec Neo Eco 520C: 520 W, ATX12V v2.3, 80 PLUS
Antec Neo Eco 520C: 520 W, ATX12V v2.3, 80 PLUS
CPU CoolerIntel Boxed Heat Sink And Fan
Rosewill RCX-ZAIO-92Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus RR-B10-212P-G1
Total Cost$600 $795 $980
Display 119 Comments.
Top Comments
  • 20 Hide
    plasmaj12345 , March 1, 2013 3:21 AM
    thymanbearpigYou would think with an extra $200 you can get a noticeable difference in fps..


    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.
  • 19 Hide
    Crashman , March 1, 2013 4:32 AM
    atomicWARHonestly i would like to see an up-graders marathon. With price points of 600, 800, 1000, 1300, 1600, 2000 covered all using the same case, CD/dvd, and mech HDD (not included in cost). Those are the most common carry over parts besides my water-cooling that carries over build to build. I believe it would be a very useful and realistic use of funds many of your readers could relate to.
    That's an awesome idea too! We could get some old-fashioned Chieftech Dragon (or similarly-popular) cases, maybe some older 700W power supplies and hard drives, match everything and just change the platform. Anyone else think this is a good idea?
  • 17 Hide
    saxplayingcompnerd , March 1, 2013 3:22 AM
    @thymanbearpig They use the same GPU, most games are GPU bottle-necked. That's how they get nearly the same FPS.
Other Comments
  • 2 Hide
    thymanbearpig , March 1, 2013 3:16 AM
    You would think with an extra $200 you can get a noticeable difference in fps..
  • 20 Hide
    plasmaj12345 , March 1, 2013 3:21 AM
    thymanbearpigYou would think with an extra $200 you can get a noticeable difference in fps..


    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.
  • 17 Hide
    saxplayingcompnerd , March 1, 2013 3:22 AM
    @thymanbearpig They use the same GPU, most games are GPU bottle-necked. That's how they get nearly the same FPS.
  • -3 Hide
    mayankleoboy1 , March 1, 2013 3:26 AM
    Something i posted last quarter too :

    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)
    $1000 build. : 42.5%, 42.5%, 15% (equally good games and apps. fast storage should be plenty for OS+apps+games)
  • 8 Hide
    Crashman , March 1, 2013 3:49 AM
    ankit0x1still waiting for 2000$ build
    How about building up the $1000 machine into a dual-GPU added-storage $1600 PC?
  • 5 Hide
    mayankleoboy1 , March 1, 2013 3:49 AM
    can we have a chart of the combined totals of :
    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.
  • 8 Hide
    Anonymous , March 1, 2013 3:58 AM
    System Builder Marathons should use a $600, $1200, and $1800 dollar standard.
  • 0 Hide
    Crashman , March 1, 2013 3:59 AM
    mayankleoboy1can we have a chart of the combined totals of :1) FPS in games2)time taken in appsfor each build?so that we may draw our own conclusions from the data? I am not entirely satisfied with the conclusions you have drawn.
    Percentages are just as accurate, you'll find those on Page 13 along with power numbers.
  • 0 Hide
    bdizzle11 , March 1, 2013 4:02 AM
    For next SBM how about a $800, $1200, $1600. A little bit higher but more spread. I think that would better determine the sweet spot...
  • 12 Hide
    atomicWAR , March 1, 2013 4:08 AM
    Honestly i would like to see an up-graders marathon. With price points of 600, 800, 1000, 1300, 1600, 2000 covered all using the same case, CD/dvd, and mech HDD (not included in cost). Those are the most common carry over parts besides my water-cooling that carries over build to build. I believe it would be a very useful and realistic application of funds many of your readers could relate to.
  • 11 Hide
    tourist , March 1, 2013 4:10 AM
    "Paul Henningsen deserves full credit for a win that breaks the mid-priced PC’s winning streak."

    Congratulations Paul your sbm was right on target.
  • 2 Hide
    Crashman , March 1, 2013 4:30 AM
    bdizzle11For next SBM how about a $800, $1200, $1600. A little bit higher but more spread. I think that would better determine the sweet spot...
    I like that idea too! But the $800 PC...would that be the $600 PC with GPU upgrade and an added SSD? Because the $600 PC topped the charts this time.
  • 19 Hide
    Crashman , March 1, 2013 4:32 AM
    atomicWARHonestly i would like to see an up-graders marathon. With price points of 600, 800, 1000, 1300, 1600, 2000 covered all using the same case, CD/dvd, and mech HDD (not included in cost). Those are the most common carry over parts besides my water-cooling that carries over build to build. I believe it would be a very useful and realistic use of funds many of your readers could relate to.
    That's an awesome idea too! We could get some old-fashioned Chieftech Dragon (or similarly-popular) cases, maybe some older 700W power supplies and hard drives, match everything and just change the platform. Anyone else think this is a good idea?
  • 2 Hide
    mayankleoboy1 , March 1, 2013 4:40 AM
    edit.
  • 1 Hide
    lunyone , March 1, 2013 4:56 AM
    I would too like to see a system built with the Case/PSU/HD/DVD not included in the price, since most people building their own builds would most likely transfer those parts over (but I would probably upgrade the PSU, because it might be 4-5 yrs. old). So if we just didn't include the Case/HD/DVD into the cost than we could actually subtract about ($35 case/$50 HD/$20 DVD) $100-110 from the build costs on these SBM's. This would leave us with $500/$700/$900 build options, if we would like to consider those price points. I myself would like to see $400/$650/$900 builds with the above mentioned parts left out. This would get us a similar results, unless one would use a different GPU from the $650 to $900 build. One could possibly upgrade the GPU and get a 120/128gb SSD to fit within the $250 difference in price.
  • 1 Hide
    _Pez_ , March 1, 2013 6:37 AM
    maybe avoiding the same hardware between setups would be a better system comparison.

    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...
  • 3 Hide
    atomicWAR , March 1, 2013 6:48 AM
    lunyoneI would too like to see a system built with the Case/PSU/HD/DVD not included in the price, since most people building their own builds would most likely transfer those parts over (but I would probably upgrade the PSU, because it might be 4-5 yrs. old). So if we just didn't include the Case/HD/DVD into the cost than we could actually subtract about ($35 case/$50 HD/$20 DVD) $100-110 from the build costs on these SBM's. This would leave us with $500/$700/$900 build options, if we would like to consider those price points. I myself would like to see $400/$650/$900 builds with the above mentioned parts left out. This would get us a similar results, unless one would use a different GPU from the $650 to $900 build. One could possibly upgrade the GPU and get a 120/128gb SSD to fit within the $250 difference in price.


    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.
  • -1 Hide
    agnickolov , March 1, 2013 7:06 AM
    I'd suggest stepping the budget up by $200 for the next SBM - $800, $1000, $1200.
  • 4 Hide
    agnickolov , March 1, 2013 7:12 AM
    And a comment on the Visual Studio results - the $1000 machine's lead is almost exclusively due to the SSD, not the faster memory. C++ compilation has lots of disk I/O that dwarfs memory access. Speaking as a professional C++ developer myself.
  • 11 Hide
    Crashman , March 1, 2013 8:43 AM
    _Pez_maybe avoiding the same hardware between setups would be a better system comparison.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...
    BS :)  Seriously, if you think there's no point in comparing two similar systems, you're completely missing THE point. Two builders were given full license to build anything they wanted within their budgets, and you ended up with two of the same CPU and GPU because those parts were the parts that made the most sense from a value perspective.

    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.
Display more comments
React To This Article