12:40 AM - 10/31/2008 by
Thomas Soderstrom
- Email |
- Print |
- Comments (68) |
- Share

| Crysis | Version: 1.2.1, Video Quality: Very High Details, Demo: CPU-Benchmark + Tom’s Hardware Tool |
| Supreme Commander Forged Alliance | Version: 1.5.3599, Video Quality: Highest Settings, Demo: WallaceTX_006_006, Benchmark: Fraps 2.9.4 - Build 7037 |
| Unreal Tournament 3 | Version: 1.2, Sound and DirectX10, Texture Details: 5, Level Details: 5, Demo: vCTF-Reflection_bot, Time: 12/60 |
| World in Conflict | Version: 1.0.0.9, Video Quality: Very High details, Demo: Game-Benchmark |
| iTunes | Version: 7.7.0.43, Audio CD (Terminator II SE), 53 min, Default format AAC |
| Lame MP3 | Version: 3.98 Beta 3 (05-22-2007), Audio CD Terminator II SE, 53 min, wave to MP3, 160 Kb/s |
| TMPEG 4.5 | Version: 4.5.1.254 Import File: Terminator 2 SE DVD (5 Minutes) Resolution: 720x576 (PAL) 16:9 |
| DivX 6.8.3 | Encoding mode: Insane Quality Enhanced multi-threading Enabled using SSE4 Quarter-pixel search |
| XviD 1.1.3 | Display encoding status = off |
| Mainconcept Reference 1.5.1 Reference H.264 Plugin Pro 1.5.1 | MPEG2 to MPEG2 (H.264) MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec 28 sec HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG2) Audio: MPEG2 (44.1 kHz, Two Channel, 16 Bit, 224 Kbps) Mode: PAL (25 FPS) Profile: Tom’s Hardware Settings for Qct-Core |
| Autodesk 3D Studio Max 9 | Version: 9.0, Rendering Dragon Image at 1920x1080 (HDTV) |
| Adobe Photoshop CS 3 | Version: 10.0x20070321 Filtering from a 69 MB TIF-Photo Benchmark: Tomshardware-Benchmark V1.0.0.4 Filters: Crosshatch, Glass, Sumi-e, Accented Edges, Angled Strokes, Sprayed Strokes |
| Grisoft AVG Anti-Virus 8 | Version: 8.0.134 Virus base: 270.4.5/1533 Benchmark: Scan 334 MB Folder of ZIP/RAR compressed files |
| Winrar 3.80 | Version 3.70 BETA 8 WinZIP Commandline Version 2.3 Compression = Best Dictionary = 4096 KB Benchmark: THG-Workload (334 MB) |
| Winzip 11 | Version 11.2 Compression = Best Benchmark: THG-Workload (139 MB) |
| 3DMark Vantage | Version: 1.02 GPU and CPU scores |
| PCMark Vantage | Version: 1.00 System, Memory, Hard Disk Drive benchmarks Windows Media Player 10.00.00.3646 |
| SiSoftware Sandra XII SP2 | Version 2008.5.14.24, CPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / MultiMedia, Memory Test = Bandwidth Benchmark |
Topics being discussed on the forums
- Card Alternative from the System Builder Marathon Article [Graphic & Displays]
- Have the winners of the system builders marathon been announced [Tom's Guide]
- System Builder Marathon [Homebuilt Systems]
- System Builder Marathon, May '09: $1,300 Enthusiast PC [Homebuilt Systems]
- WEIGH IN: $1200 AMD system for Sept. System Builder Marathon [Homebuilt Systems]
Questions? Ask Tom's community!
- 1 / 4
- Next
-
Sponsored links
Related forums topics
- New member, Need advice on upgrading pc.
- Why is Q6700 $290 more than Q6600?
- AMD 3700 & 8800 good match?
- suggestions on a CPU...never build a computer before...
- Can this PSU handle it?
- Swiftech H20-220 Compact ??
- System Builder Marathon: Overclocking Day 3
- System Builder Marathon (Overclocking) Day 1
- Will the GIGABYTE GA-MA790X-DS4 work for me?
- Posting and reposting with K9N4 Ultra
- RAM and Motherboard question
- SLi v Non
- WEIGH IN: Dec.08 System Builder Marathon ~$1250 system components
- Which one is better build?(i7 + GTX 260 216 vs e8500 + HD4870x2)
Related news
Best offers
|
Compaq Presario CQ5210F Mini-Tower... | $415.00 Beach Camera More info |
|
Pavilion p6240f Mini-Tower Desktop... | $549.98 STAPLES More info |
|
iMac All-In-One Desktop (3.06GHz... | $1699.00 ABT More info |
|
iMac All-In-One Desktop (3.06GHz... | $1149.00 MacConnection More info |
|
Pavilion p6210f Mini-Tower Desktop... | $546.98 STAPLES More info |
Popular Searches
- forged alliance benchmark
- supreme commander forged alliance cd key
- 3dmark vantage 1.02
- winzip 11
- run supreme commander forged alliance performance test
- supreme commander forged alliance benchmark mode
- supreme commander forged alliance multi core
- tom s hardware system builder marathon
- sse4 benchmark
- windows live beta 8
- tom s hardware video benchmark
- mainconcept reference review
- vantage 1.02
- crysis 1.2.1
- supreme commander forged alliance not using all memory
Partners
The Games selection
violent :
Interactive Buddy
Unwind on your interactive buddy: Do anything you want to him, it will earn you money, and you can buy other stuff to torture him with.
|
crazy :
Interactive Boogy
Pick one of the 3 songs, hit on the correct keys matching this boy's dance moves.
|
Ads







Looking forward to the side by side Intel vs AMD build-offs for the $500 bracket(hopefully you start doing this)
Also, in future write ups, can you please provide power consumption charts?
Looking forward to the side by side Intel vs AMD build-offs for the $500 bracket(hopefully you start doing this)Also, in future write ups, can you please provide power consumption charts?
Slo,
I'll toss the idea around with our authors. Don't see it being a problem--just have to get everyone outfit with the same equipment and methodology. Thanks for the suggestions!
what about a $750 or $1000 machine - is this not a more realistic price point for most people?
based on these systems, a person should have an idea to build his 750 or $1000 dollar machines.
i like most the $500 machine,the best value,simplicity and efficiency,
only upgrading it to a quad core because i encode HD videos to H264 while surfing the net or watching a video.
only games crysis and supreme c. required more than 3Ghz so a quad is not a big loss to duals in gaming.
id very much like to see the benchmarks from a machine costing somewhere between the $500 and $1500 builds
i bet it would hit the sweet spot!
hi tom's could you tell me where you got the
I could use some more then my 8gb i've got now.
hi tom's could you tell me where you got the
You missed it! That was our limited-time $500 super-computer build. ;-)
And you stuck it in the $1500 machine? I knew you were holding out on that $500 build!
I really enjoy these System Builder Marathons, yeah i'd pick some different components and price brackets, but great stuff anyways. Going with Newegg as a sponsor is a great idea and i sure hope you continue it in the future for other SBM articles. Having a quality retailer like Newegg supply easily available components should really cut down on the logistics of doing these builds and hopefully they can come a bit more often. I'd like to see other SBM brackets e.g. $600 AMD vs. Intel build. Budget quad core builds - AMD 9950 vs. Q6600. Bracket $750 $1,500 $3,000 builds. How about a reader suggested build? Post a bracket, have folks post suggested builds and pick one or a combination of ideas and have your guys put one together. Any way, great job by the staff, good information, brilliant sponsorship by Newegg and a hell of a lot of fun to read, good job.
I'd suggest you upgrade your next $500 build to $650! or lower the $1500 to $1100 or so.
According to a newsletter I received 4 days ago from one of the leading danish retailers, A basic pc costs $350, a basic gaming pc costs $600, and a 'good' (in their terms) gaming system costs $1000 - they're not selling any base pc with better graphics than an 4850, but it still means that they consider the $1000 to be the mainstream, and $600 to be lowend. Ofcourse the actual component price will be lower, but it's not going to be 25% lower.
I like these too, especially the bottom-dollar build which is probably easiest to tweak to improve a specific area.
Nice! Congrats on these four articles!
I read all four of them and I must say I've learned a lot. Although the builds were clearly game-orientated the benchmarks covered a wide range of classical applications used today by most of us, besides games. The synthetic benchmark though don't really help much and, personally, I'd prefer if they would've been replaced with power consumption charts.
Also, in future System Build Marathons, why not build 2 systems in the mid-range price (1200$-1500$), one of which would be game-orientated (dual-core processor+high end graphics card) and the other application-orientated (> 4 GHz overclocked new quad-core processor+mid range graphics card) ? I'm not suggesting to do the same thing for more than one price range because the work would be collosal.
Keep up the good work!
Nice! Congrats on these four articles!I read all four of them and I must say I've learned a lot. Although the builds were clearly game-orientated the benchmarks covered a wide range of classical applications used today by most of us, besides games. The synthetic benchmark though don't really help much and, personally, I'd prefer if they would've been replaced with power consumption charts.Also, in future System Build Marathons, why not build 2 systems in the mid-range price (1200$-1500$), one of which would be game-orientated (dual-core processor+high end graphics card) and the other application-orientated (> 4 GHz overclocked new quad-core processor+mid range graphics card) ? I'm not suggesting to do the same thing for more than one price range because the work would be collosal.Keep up the good work!
Adding power consumption fine - relevant for some people. But don't cut the synthetics ! They may not be relevant for building a pc, but they are relevant for seeing how the old rig at home stacks up. So you know if your 1½ year old $800 rig is still adequate, or if you should build a new $500 rig.
I´d like to see some other game benchmarks besides crysis. lets face it, not every one likes that game an there are some newer games that don´t need that kind of power. some racing games wold be nice.
BTW. great systems. the $500 its awesome
True! Synthetics do help when it comes to that comparison. I didn't think of it. Sorry.
On the other hand, I honestly believe that no 800$ 1½ years old rig can stand up to a today's 500$ rig (so...no need for a synthetic benchmark when it comes to this decision
Also, are you really going to spend 500$ on a new rig if you've spent 800$ 1½ years ago? Since my first Pentium 1 PC, about 10 years ago, I've always doubled the amount of money that I spend on a new PC every two or three years.
Go Crashman !!!! It is good to see someone doing these types of articles. Instead of the fluff advertising articles we normally get.
True! Synthetics do help when it comes to that comparison. I didn't think of it. Sorry.
On the other hand, I honestly believe that no 800$ 1½ years old rig can stand up to a today's 500$ rig (so...no need for a synthetic benchmark when it comes to this decision ). That's because prices drop at half after 1 year and today's overclocking capabilities are way better that 2 years go. Also, bear in mind that applications and games also need newer technologies to be supported by the hardware, not just higher frequencies and capacities.
Also, are you really going to spend 500$ on a new rig if you've spent 800$ 1½ years ago? Since my first Pentium 1 PC, about 10 years ago, I've always doubled the amount of money that I spend on a new PC every two or three years.
Just under years ago I built an intel system for a friend. It had a ga-965p-ds4 board and an e6400 cpu. That cpu still today runs at 3,4ghz - that's more than the e2180 used here. More cache on the new models doesn't make that much of a difference really, so the old $800 mashine would stand up, if just the graphics would be upgraded. Now his mashine sported an all new 8800gtx back then, but we could've gone with a 7950 back then and compared that to the 8800gt now. Anyhow, my $800 was more of a theoretical number than a real one. Just meant to say that synthetics are key for comparison between their build and ours.
As for your upgrade strategy - sounds sensible, but I've only started from scratch twice in my life. When going from my p200 to an athlon 1000 back in 2001 or so, and when I changed from my athlon 2100 to a northwood 2.8 - and I only started over because poor inhouse electrics had broken pretty much all hardware in the old one.
You left out the stock scores in the charts
That was a valuable piece as a lot of people like to see what they can get for their money by overclocking and seeing if it makes it to that next tier. e.g.
($1500pc overclocked) = ($4500pc stock)
Is there anyway you can add it to your charts there?
Thanks!
Another topic for a article: Eco-friendly system. I want to see how low powered a system can be without loosing much performance.
Just under years ago I built an intel system for a friend. It had a ga-965p-ds4 board and an e6400 cpu. That cpu still today runs at 3,4ghz - that's more than the e2180 used here. More cache on the new models doesn't make that much of a difference really, so the old $800 mashine would stand up, if just the graphics would be upgraded. Now his mashine sported an all new 8800gtx back then, but we could've gone with a 7950 back then and compared that to the 8800gt now. Anyhow, my $800 was more of a theoretical number than a real one. Just meant to say that synthetics are key for comparison between their build and ours.
As for your upgrade strategy - sounds sensible, but I've only started from scratch twice in my life. When going from my p200 to an athlon 1000 back in 2001 or so, and when I changed from my athlon 2100 to a northwood 2.8 - and I only started over because poor inhouse electrics had broken pretty much all hardware in the old one.
Wow, freaky. I built my current system in Q1 2007 with an E6400, P965, 7950GT and overclock to 3.4GHz @ 1.45v but step back to 2.56GHz @ 1.1v. Two weeks ago I replaced the 7950 with a 9800GT (8800GT refresh) and gaming performance more than doubled.
And yes, you’re right. My $1000 system still beats the value build.