Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Memory, Hard Drive, And Optical Drive

System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2011: $1200 Enthusiast PC
By

Memory: Mushkin Enhanced Redline 4 GB (2 x 2 GB) DDR3-1600 Memory Kit 

Mushkin's Enhanced Redline dual-channel kit boasts 7-8-7-24 1T timings at a 1600 MT/s data rate, and it’s an excellent value at the $40 price point. This product was recently deactivated from Newegg, but you can get the Mushkin Blackline kit 996782 with the same specifications and price.

Read Customer Reviews of Mushkin's Enhanced Redline 4 GB DDR3-1600 Kit


SSD: OCZ Vertex Plus OCZSSD2-1VTXPL60G 2.5" 60 GB

Read Customer Reviews of OCZ's Vertex Plus 60 GB


Flash-based storage weren't affected by the same flooding catastrophe in Thailand that is impacting conventional hard drives, and OCZ’s Vertex Plus 60 GB SSD is an affordable product (even if its user reviews scare us a little) with enough space to serve as a boot drive.

Hard Drive: Western Digital Caviar Black 750 GB

Read Customer Reviews of Western Digital's Caviar Black 750 GB


At $180, the price of this hard disk has tripled since we last used it in our System Builder Marathon, and this component is solely responsible for the cost overage on our $1200 budget. Nevertheless, it’s one of the best-performing hard drives available, so we're sticking with it.

Optical Drive: Lite-On iHAS124-04 DVD Burner

Read Customer Reviews of Lite-On's iHAS124-04 DVD Burner


For $22, Lite-On’s iHAS124-04 has a 2 MB buffer and a 24x DVD write speed. You might not get any frills with this OEM product, but you aren't asked to pay for any, either.

Display all 128 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 21 Hide
    slicedtoad , December 20, 2011 4:01 AM
    I was shocked an disappointed when I saw 'fx' on that first page, but now I've changed my mind.
    It's quantified the exceeding suck of bulldozer far better than the official bulldozer review.

    Maybe win8 will change everything, but I think it dubious.
  • 21 Hide
    Zero_ , December 20, 2011 3:36 AM
    Something is not right here :pfff:  . But awesome review of a bulldozer rig. It fails, big time.

    Bring on $600! FX-4100? :kaola: 
  • 18 Hide
    one-shot , December 20, 2011 7:02 AM
    Bulldozer wins in the power consumption benchmark with the highest score!
Other Comments
  • 21 Hide
    Zero_ , December 20, 2011 3:36 AM
    Something is not right here :pfff:  . But awesome review of a bulldozer rig. It fails, big time.

    Bring on $600! FX-4100? :kaola: 
  • 2 Hide
    compton , December 20, 2011 3:36 AM
    I understand that the SBM doesn't have the flexibility to utilize sales or rebates, but seriously, the Vertex Plus is neither a Vertex or a Plus. There are better options for less money even. I just bought several new Vertex and Vertex Turbos for less than a dollar per GB. If you're not dead-set on one particular drive, have flexibility and when and where the drive is purchased, you can do much better for $87. I'd rather take my chances with buying a used drive than purchase a new drive I know is a turkey. There is probably also a reason that Arrowana FW has yet to be released for older Indilinx controlled drives with 3xnm NAND.

  • 8 Hide
    Dacatak , December 20, 2011 3:36 AM
    Bulldozer is dozing all right.
  • 17 Hide
    manu 11 , December 20, 2011 3:39 AM
    your hd, seagate 1tb is only 130$
    fx 6100, i was surprised that it was such a deep bottlencek.
    biostar ta 990fx?, you can get asrock extreme 4 with sli and xfire support for 110$

    overall, indeed you have taken a chance.

    i was in a mood to buy fx but wow, this changed my ming, i will now surely go with i5.
  • 21 Hide
    slicedtoad , December 20, 2011 4:01 AM
    I was shocked an disappointed when I saw 'fx' on that first page, but now I've changed my mind.
    It's quantified the exceeding suck of bulldozer far better than the official bulldozer review.

    Maybe win8 will change everything, but I think it dubious.
  • 15 Hide
    gtx_560tiuser , December 20, 2011 4:18 AM
    lol 2 fps in metro 2033...
  • 7 Hide
    king_maliken , December 20, 2011 4:20 AM
    Just to point something out, should it not say in the graphs current $1200 PC and not current $1000?

    Also on the article, why try something out on a system builder marathon, the FX should of been tested in an other article, such as a review. It does not really matter that yes in fact the GPUs are much better but the CPU is holding them way back... Why cheap out on a motherboard? that Biostar TA990FXE from what I've read is not great, not good even.

    *Thought this was for people who didn't really know what to build, or how to build a computer? I wouldn't recommend this build.
  • 1 Hide
    pharoahhalfdead , December 20, 2011 4:28 AM
    Awesome article. Despite people bashing AMD's new BD, this is actually a build that needed to be done. Alot of people are building systems around the new BD, and these benchmarks can be helpful, since just about all of the reviews are centered around the 8100 series. I decided to go with a Phenom 980 instead of the 8150 after reviews, but I never saw anythang about the 6100 series.

    I still want to see how it handles multi-tasking compared to Intel.
  • 10 Hide
    cleeve , December 20, 2011 4:30 AM
    king_malikenWhy cheap out on a motherboard? that Biostar TA990FXE from what I've read is not great, not good even.


    Based on what? It was a fantastic overclocker and stable as hell.

    What is your beef with the board?
  • 4 Hide
    king_maliken , December 20, 2011 4:43 AM
    CleeveBased on what? It was a fantastic overclocker and stable as hell. What is your beef with the board?

    Let me edit part out, for some reason I thought it was another board that I have had many issues with, my bad. Just did a quick read up on that board and yeah you're correct, it seems to be alright.
  • 4 Hide
    a4mula , December 20, 2011 4:51 AM
    I tend to agree with king_maliken. Perhaps the SBM's aren't meant to be direct guides to building a new system but that doesn't stop people for using them in that exact manner. From a personal standpoint I enjoyed the article. It really hit home the reasons why AMD has openly admitted no longer competing with Intel in this segment. I just think most people associate the SBM with the best value/performance pc at a given price point.
  • 11 Hide
    Crashman , December 20, 2011 5:00 AM
    a4mulaI tend to agree with king_maliken. Perhaps the SBM's aren't meant to be direct guides to building a new system but that doesn't stop people for using them in that exact manner. From a personal standpoint I enjoyed the article. It really hit home the reasons why AMD has openly admitted no longer competing with Intel in this segment. I just think most people associate the SBM with the best value/performance pc at a given price point.
    Actually I think Don was trying to pull a magic rabbit out of his A...

    AMD-logo'd baseball cap!

    C'mon guys, can't you see the man bleeds green? And on top of that, he's Canadian! You know, land of the ATI and home of the AMD takeover? If you can't see how broken up he is about all of this please, just try to imagine it and be gentle!
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , December 20, 2011 5:01 AM
    Memory bandwidth seems too low
  • -1 Hide
    joytech22 , December 20, 2011 5:12 AM
    pharoahhalfdeadThe vast majority of people who criticize BD does not have a system that is anywhere near as fast a this or as fast as an i5-2500k. They are mainly running slower and ancient dual cores from years ago


    Are you sure about that? That's a big thing to say.
    Sure BD was a flop but the patch looks promising, 10-15% improvement isn't a small increase.

    Although BD isn't exactly a competitor when it comes to single threaded applications, multi-core performance is on-par or slightly ahead/behind when comparing to a 2500k.

    AMD has something, that's better then nothing.
    Although.. Nobody's buying it really. lol.
  • 13 Hide
    Crashman , December 20, 2011 5:16 AM
    joytech22Are you sure about that? That's a big thing to say.Sure BD was a flop but the patch looks promising, 10-15% improvement isn't a small increase..l.
    Nor realistic. I spent a day testing it with Tom's Hardware's motherboard test suite and saw 0% increase. Straight up, I pulled one of the boards from the review (Asus Sabertooth 990FX), plopped it on the bench, remounted the original test drive, added the patch and got zip.

    Nothing.

    Nadda.

    A day wasted during the holiday season, a day behind on my other articles.
  • 8 Hide
    cleeve , December 20, 2011 5:29 AM
    CrashmanActually I think Don was trying to pull a magic rabbit out of his A...AMD-logo'd baseball cap!C'mon guys, can't you see the man bleeds green? And on top of that, he's Canadian! You know, land of the ATI and home of the AMD takeover? If you can't see how broken up he is about all of this please, just try to imagine it and be gentle!


    Haha funny Crash, funny.

    Its all explained in the intro. I can't imagine doing something new with the 2500K, we've seen it all before and I've used the CPU in most of my SBM builds for a year. Sometimes it's nice to mix it up.

    I was never under any illusions that it'd challenge the Core i5, but I did want to see if it could compete in the graphics arena with a pair of 6950's.

    And boy oh boy, it couldn't. Not too much of a surprise except I expected it to do a little better.
  • 9 Hide
    stm1185 , December 20, 2011 5:40 AM
    Any chance you could drop in a 1055T and run the tests again. I'd be curious if the old Thuban would outperform the FX chip!
  • 0 Hide
    Todd Sauve , December 20, 2011 5:43 AM
    Hi Guys,

    Sad to see that the new FXs are such poor performers with current software. I wonder how long it will be before the multi-threaded software AMD claims its new line is built for actually becomes somewhat mainstream and of everyday use to the average PC user?

    What I am really interested in finding out is whether or not any of these new AMD FX CPUs can be successfully run in the original AMD 890 series motherboards, because Asus, Gigabyte, MSI and most of the others claimed that they would, and also posted updated BIOSes to prove it. Yet Tom's has never tested this out for us and neither has any other website that I'm aware of.

    Come on Tom's! Check this out for us! You guys are one of the top authorities in the PC world, so show your fans some love and get down to it! ;) 
  • 7 Hide
    cleeve , December 20, 2011 5:53 AM
    stm1185Any chance you could drop in a 1055T and run the tests again. I'd be curious if the old Thuban would outperform the FX chip!


    Actually, I'll be using the same board for a sub-$200 CPU gaming comparo coming up
Display more comments