With nearly one-third the performance of its fastest rival, we expect a great value score for the $500 machine. But how will the $1000 PC stand up, given the handicap applied to its hard drive score?
As usual, the $500 overclocked machine takes a significant win in overall value.
Meanwhile, the overclocked $1000 build finishes only slightly behind the $500 machine’s stock configuration. The $2000 build is an awesome performer, but its performance-per-dollar is atrocious. Or is it?
A minimum amount of performance is required to accomplish some tasks or satisfy certain customers, and the easiest place to see that is in 2560x1600 gaming. The $500 machine wasn’t even tested here, though the second-place $1000 build was. Gone are the $1000 machine’s gimped hard drive scores. And yet, we still find one place where the $2000 PC can justify its expense.
If there is just one word to focus on throughout this comparison, it might be "adequacy."
While the $2000 machine reigns supreme in performance, its cost is beyond the means of most builders. And while the $500 machine easily takes a value lead, most enthusiasts would find its performance to be completely lacking. The one machine that is adequate in most games and settings, nearly a match for the $2000 build in application performance, and affordable to most enthusiasts is Don Woligroski's $1000 PC. Perhaps that's why Don gets the right to use the word "Enthusiast" in its title. After all, nobody buys something labeled "The $1000 Adequate PC."
- Who Built The Best PC This Quarter?
- Test Setups And Benchmarks
- Benchmark Results: 3DMark And PCMark
- Benchmark Results: SiSoftware Sandra
- Benchmark Results: Crysis
- Benchmark Results: F1 2010
- Benchmark Results: Just Cause 2
- Benchmark Results: Metro 2033
- Benchmark Results: Audio And Video Encoding
- Benchmark Results: Productivity
- Power And Heat
- Average Performance And Efficiency
- Crowning A Value PC Winner