
| Test Hardware Configurations | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| $2000 Performance PC | $1000 Enthusiast PC | $500 Gaming PC | |
| Motherboard (Overclock) | Gigbyte Z68XP-UD3 LGA 1155, Intel X58 Express 102 MHz Base Clock | EVGA P67 Micro SLI LGA 1155, Intel P67 chipset No Base Clock O/C | ASRock M3A770DE Socket AM3, AMD 770 No Reference Clock O/C |
| Processor (Overclock) | Intel Core i7-2600K 3.40 GHz, Four Physical Cores O/C to 4.48 GHz at 1.36 V | Intel Core i5-2500K 3.30 GHz, Four Physical Cores O/C to 4.49 GHz at 1.40 V | AMD Phenom II X4 955 BE 3.2 GHz, Four Cores O/C to 3.80 GHz at 1.38 V |
| Memory (Overclock) | 8 GB G.Skill DDR3-1866 CAS 9-10-9-28, O/C at 1.60 V to DDR3-1901 CL 9-10-9-16 | 8 GB Mushkin DDR3-1600 CAS 7-8-7-24 No O/C | 4 GB Crucial DDR3-1333 CAS 9-9-9-24, O/C at 1.65 V to DDR3-1333 CL 8-8-8-22 |
| Graphics (Overclock) | 2 x EVGA GeForce GTX 580: 772 MHz GPU, GDDR5-4008 No O/C | 2 x EVGA GeForce GTX 460 1 GB: 820 MHz GPU, GDDR5-4200 O/C to 875 MHz, GDDR5-4400 | Sapphire HD 6870 1 GB: 900 MHz GPU, GDDR5-1050 O/C to 960 MHz, GDDR5-4720 |
| Optical | Lite-On iHAS224-06 24x/8x DVD±R/RW | Sony AD-7260S-0B 24x/8x DVD±R/RW | Samsung SH-222AB 22x/8x DVD±R/RW |
| Case | Antec Three Hundred Illusion | Raidmax Atlas-295WB | NZXT Gamma GAMA-001BK |
| CPU Cooler | Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus | Cooler Master Hyper TX3 | AMD boxed heatsink/fan |
| Hard Drive | Adata S511 120 GB, SATA 6Gb/s SSD Western Digital Caviar Green WD20EARS HDD | OCZ Vertex 30 GB, SATA 3Gb/s SSD Western Digital Caviar Black WD7502AAEX HDD | Seagate Barracuda 500 GB HDD |
| Power | Seasonic SS-850HT: 850 W, ATX12V v2.31, 80 PLUS Silver | Corsair CX600 V2: 600 W ATX12V v2.3, 80 PLUS | Antec EarthWatts EA430D: 430 W, ATX12V 2.3, 80 PLUS Bronze |
| Software | |||
| OS | Microsoft Windows 7 Ultimate x64 | ||
| Graphics | Nvidia GeForce 280.26 | AMD Catalyst 11.8 | |
| Chipset | Intel INF 9.2.0.1030 | AMD All-in-1 Ver. 8.631_W7_logo | |
| Benchmark Configuration | |
|---|---|
| 3D Games | |
| Crysis | Patch 1.2.1, DirectX 10, 64-bit executable, benchmark tool Test Set 1: High Quality, No AA Test Set 2: Very High Quality, 8x AA |
| F1 2010 | V1.01, Run with -benchmark example_benchmark.xml Test Set 1: High Quality Preset, No AA Test Set 2: Ultra Quality Preset, 8x AA |
| Just Cause 2 | Version 1.0.0.2, Built-In Benchmark "Concrete Jungle" Test Set 1: Medium Details, No AA, 8x AF Test Set 2: Highest Details, 8x AA, 16x AF |
| Metro 2033 | Full Game, Built-In Benchmark, "Frontline" Scene Test Set 1: DX11, High, AAA, 4x AF, No PhysX, No DoF Test Set 2: DX11, Very High, 4x AA, 16x AF, No PhysX, DoF On |
| Audio/Video Encoding | |
| iTunes | Version 9.0.3.15 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 0.94: "Big Buck Bunny" (720x480, 23.972 FPS) 5 Minutes, Audio: Dolby Digital, 48 000 Hz, Six-Channel, English, to Video: AVC Audio: AC3 Audio2: AAC (High Profile) |
| MainConcept Reference | Version: 2.0.0.1555: 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 | |
| Adobe Photoshop CS5 | Version 12.0 x64: Filter 15.7 MB TIF Image: Radial Blur, Shape Blur, Median, Polar Coordinates |
| Autodesk 3ds Max 2010 | Version 12.0 x64: Space Flyby Mentalray, 248 Frames, 1440x1080 |
| WinZip | Version 14.0 Pro: THG-Workload (464 MB) to ZIP, command line switches "-a -ez -p -r" |
| WinRAR | Version 4.0 Beta 4: THG-Workload (464 MB) to RAR, command line switches "winrar a -r -m3" |
| 7-Zip | Version 9.2: THG-Workload (464 MB) to .7z, command line switches "a -t7z -r -m0=LZMA2 -mx=5" |
| ABBYY FineReader | Version 10.0.102.82: Read PDF save to Doc, Source: Political Economy (J. Broadhurst 1842) 111 Pages |
| Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings | |
| 3DMark 11 | Version: 1.0.1.0, Benchmark Only |
| PCMark 7 | Version: 1.0.4 x64, System, Productivity, Hard Disk Drive benchmarks |
| SiSoftware Sandra 2011 | Version 2011.1.17.15, CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / MultiMedia, Memory Test = Bandwidth Benchmark |
Value, shamlue: Will it run Crysis?
Oh: Wait …
Actually what we need now are more affordable 2560x1600 monitors for these enthusiast PCs.
I think the next quarter SBM should utilize an SSD at all segments. Its just about time when no one should seriously think of not including a SSD a build. There are great values out there and even the budget system deserves some love. If a small increase in price segments is necessary, so be it. Going from a HDD to a SSD is like going from IGP to discrete class graphics.
Also, as a result, more emphasis should be placed on the storage sub system. I know these are gaming configurations, but I'd give up my GPU in a nanosecond if it meant I could keep my SSDs. Fortunately, I don't have to choose, but I would if I had too, and I'm not alone out there. Budget systems don't feel so budget-y with even a modest SSD.
Maybe the value of the $1000 PC would go up if you weren't wasting money on unnecessary or poorly chosen parts. You could add another 4 GB of ram, and swap out the twin stuttering 460's for 6870's (and still have enough money to add a better, modular PSU).
Here:
http://i.imgur.com/g22Bq.jpg
I think the next quarter SBM should utilize an SSD at all segments. Its just about time when no one should seriously think of not including a SSD a build.
Yeah, good luck fitting an SSD into a $500 gaming build.
Yeah, good luck fitting an SSD into a $500 gaming build.
there have been 64GB Vertex Crucial drives on sale for < 79$. Which isn't bad.
And I meant OCZ Vertex / Crucial M4
Yeah, good luck fitting an SSD into a $500 gaming build.
That's why I think the $500 system should be closer to $600, maybe like $550. 30GB Agility drives were going for $40 yesterday at the Egg, so its not like you have to spend $300 to get a tangible benefit. That one addition would have contributed a significant performance benefit and the budget category used to be $650 anyway.
I would have stick to 1 gpu in the 1000 S build. Instead of 2 gf 460/radeon 6850 I would have used 1 radeon 6970/ geforce gtx570 - from persoanl experience 1 gpu = less problems!
i think quicksync should be included in the final score as video conversion is something that everyone of us do. and if we buy a SB cpu, then we would surely use quicksync.
maybe also include windows boot time.
can you explain more please?
I would have stick to 1 gpu in the 1000 S build. Instead of 2 gf 460/radeon 6850 I would have used 1 radeon 6970/ geforce gtx570 - from persoanl experience 1 gpu = less problems!
Every single system builder article explicitly states that discounts, rebates and specials don't apply for the purpose of determining price.
I would have stick to 1 gpu in the 1000 S build. Instead of 2 gf 460/radeon 6850 I would have used 1 radeon 6970/ geforce gtx570 - from persoanl experience 1 gpu = less problems!
A 34% increase in FPS is hard to ignore. Not to mention that if you use dual 6870's you open up the possibility of smooth eyefinity gaming @ 5760x2160 (I think it's pulling ~50 FPS in Farcry 2 with those cards @ high settings). And the 2 cards are only ~$20 more right now.
Yes, a single card option is great, but I'm not paying $700+ for a 6990.
You can also get a pair of 560's (minus the ti) for $310 after rebate. Seeing as Dual screen gaming is not supported by any Nvidia cards, I find that it's overkill.
Always limited to US. Sad for dedicated fans like me
.
The $500 build is the only one I'd consider "great". Regardless, you guys did a great job making these informative articles.
I wonder what other combination could be made up for the Q4 $500 SBM. I'm thinking perhaps a Core i3 2100 with a GeForce GTX 560? The 560 would have to come a bit down in price for that to happen, though.
I'm still not sure of the point of running iSSE4.1 tests on a Phenom II considering they don't support SSE4.1, however it's not something that a) would've made a difference to anything, or b) we'll see much of in future.
I think the $500 build was the best thought out PC. The other were too much money spend for the performance gains. Most of the $1000 and $2000 builds could have had part replaced by cheaper and just as good parts.
I would like to offer up an annual analysis on these results. Assumptions: your computer usage over an entire year averages out to 2 hours a day. If that $2,000 PC can perform work just 2 seconds faster each minute than the $500 pc, it saves you A DAY of your life each year. 24 hours and change in fact. Which is really more like 3 WORK days if you consider an 8 hour work day. There is no recourse on the lower value PC's for this, unless you buy 2 (or 4) and find some way to cluster them together or farm out your workloads. Of course, you still have to pay for the power twice (or four times) and the cost of time/administration for the cluster, farming, etc... which defeats the time savings.
Based on this I say the $2000 is totally worth the price. I'd happily pay a one time premium to get a day (or 3 depending in your definition) of my life back each and every year. ...and that was just 2 seconds faster.. imagine if its 10.. or 20 seconds faster? How often do you get the chance to write a check for more free time?
I would like to offer up an annual analysis on these results. Assumptions: your computer usage over an entire year averages out to 2 hours a day. If that $2,000 PC can perform work just 2 seconds faster each minute than the $500 pc, it saves you A DAY of your life each year. 24 hours and change in fact. Which is really more like 3 WORK days if you consider an 8 hour work day. There is no recourse on the lower value PC's for this, unless you buy 2 (or 4) and find some way to cluster them together or farm out your workloads. Of course, you still have to pay for the power twice (or four times) and the cost of time/administration for the cluster, farming, etc... which defeats the time savings. Based on this I say the $2000 is totally worth the price. I'd happily pay a one time premium to get a day (or 3 depending in your definition) of my life back each and every year. ...and that was just 2 seconds faster.. imagine if its 10.. or 20 seconds faster? How often do you get the chance to write a check for more free time?
You can always go walk around or do something else while the computer "works" on something you don't want to wait sitting, you know...
Anyway, kudos to the 1k build. But I liked the 500 better, cause you could add a few bucks and get similar/same perf to the 1k (and 2k) build in some areas.
Cheers!