
We begin our benchmark analysis with a handful of synthetic tests designed to emphasize differences between the various subsystems that changed between last quarter's configuration and this PC. The biggest differences this time around will likely be reflected in graphics-oriented tests thanks to the disparity between the GeForce GTX 770 and Radeon R9 290. In addition, we're hoping to see the Core i5-4690K's higher overclock give it a notable advantage.
When we break down the test's individual components, we can see the Physics suite, in blue, favors the new build's higher-clocked Core i5-4690K, while the Graphics component, in black, demonstrates a sizable lead for the Radeon R9 290. The red result represents the overall 3DMark result, which reflects an advantage for last quarter's PC.
The graphics card isn't much of a factor when it comes to PCMark, and the new build gets extra points for its high clocks and memory bandwidth.
Now that we've added an SSD back into the mix, you can see a huge difference in storage performance. This is a good approximation of the experience you'll have when booting off of these drives, too.
Intel's Core i5 processors perform neck and neck in Sandra's Arithmetic module, with the newer 4690K enjoying a slight lead thanks to its higher stock and overclocked clock rates.
The cryptography Encoding/Decoding benchmark is accelerated by AES-NI, so performance is dictated by the rate at which system memory can feed data into the CPU. The new build's faster memory allows for a substantial lead.
As the cryptography test suggested, there is a sizable gap in memory subsystem performance between these two systems. My newer build's memory defaults to 1800 MT/s, while the XMP profile increases it to 2400 MT/s. Contrast this with the 1333 MT/s default/1600 MT/s overclocked memory in the last quarter's build.
- Changing Focus For A Look At Processor Performance
- CPU, Motherboard And Cooler
- Graphics Card, Power Supply And Case
- Memory, Hard Drives And Optical Storage
- Building And Overclocking
- How We Tested
- Results: Synthetics
- Results: Media Transcoding
- Results: Rendering And Productivity
- Results: Adobe Creative Cloud
- Results: Compression Tools
- Results: Battlefield 4 And Arma 3
- Results: Grid 2 And Far Cry 3
- Power And Temperature
- Q3 2014 Mainstream Enthusiast PC Under $1300 Verdict






[EDIT by cleeve]
They are not reversed. Check out the accompanying writeup to help make sense of it.
[/EDIT]
While I'd agree on the cheaper case, the 970 wasn't an option since they hadn't been released when they were buying parts for this quarter's SBM.
From Page 3 of the article: "The GeForce GTX 970 launched last week wasn't available (or even public information) back when we ordered the pieces for this build. So, I needed something cheaper than the Radeon R9 290 that wouldn't sacrifice gaming performance. Under $300, the best option was Nvidia's GeForce GTX 770."
Obviously, today the 970 would be a much better choice, but that option didn't exist when this build was purchased.
Good job. There is always that guy who does not read the article when it explains why the brand new card was not used, because it was not an option at the time of the review.
So congrats on being that guy this time. It only took 3 posts to get there.
on the last page:
may be you meant the Q2 enthusiast system. imo, yea, the q3 build doesn't seem as attractive as the q2 one. i think that one could add the ssd from this build and still be the better pc.
i wonder if you guys would build an fx8350/8320 pc as an alternative build at this price range for the ongoing overclocking theme.
I'd like to know more about the thickness / flexibility of the ASRock mobo. Otherwise, I don't think I have any niggles over performance-related parts.
I've never had any problems with Asrock and I'm on my second Asrock board.
Can I haz your 3GB 770 plz ?
Don't think the Q2 rig was properly setup if you are losing to the 770 in every test...
in page 5, GTX 770 overclocking used AMD OverDrive utility?
is there some kind of mistake or what?