• How-To

System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: System Value Compared

by
116 Comments

Power Consumption And Efficiency

Our global wattage readings are taken at the power supply’s input, and some of that power is lost within the power supply itself. That means that all of today’s builds pull less than 400 W from the power supply, and any of these builds could have been made a little cheaper by using a less-capacious unit of similar quality.

SSDs typically draws less power than hard drives, so hardware similarities between the $1,000 and $800 machines should theoretically give the more expensive build a lower power signature. This isn't the case, though. So, the $1,000 machine’s excess power draw is probably due to its extra fan and higher memory voltage.

An SSD gives the $1,000 machine a huge boost in our storage-oriented metric. But that boost affects user experience more than program performance. Because of that, it represents only 10% of our total performance score.

The rest of our breakdown used to be: 30% games, 30% encoding, and 30% productivity. Changes to our benchmark suite now make the totals of 30% games, 15% creativity, 15% A/V encoding, 15% productivity, 15% compression, and 10% storage.

Using the slowest configuration as our baseline, we find this quarter's most-expensive machine on top of its efficiency curve by 6.2%. While overclocking can actually improve efficiency, overvoltage has the opposite effect. Each of our overclocked configurations loses this metric to the same system’s baseline operation.

Previous Next
Summary
  1. In Search Of The Best Possible Value
  2. Hardware, Software, And Overclock Settings
  3. Results: 3DMark And PCMark
  4. Results: SiSoftware Sandra
  5. Results: Battlefield 3
  6. Results: F1 2012
  7. Results: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
  8. Results: Far Cry 3
  9. Results: Audio And Video Encoding
  10. Results: Adobe Creative Suite
  11. Results: Productivity
  12. Results: File Compression
  13. Power Consumption And Efficiency
  14. Where's The Value Sweet Spot?
About the author
Thomas Soderstrom

Thomas Soderstrom is a Senior Staff Editor at Tom's Hardware US. He tests and reviews cases, cooling, memory and motherboards.

Read more
Create a new thread in the US Reviews comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
116 comments
Comment from the forums
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • plasmaj12345
    thymanbearpigYou would think with an extra $200 you can get a noticeable difference in fps..


    The only real difference between the $800 and $1000 PC is that the $1000 has an SSD. They both have the same CPU, RAM, and GPU. Gaming should be about the same on both.
  • Crashman
    atomicWARHonestly i would like to see an up-graders marathon. With price points of 600, 800, 1000, 1300, 1600, 2000 covered all using the same case, CD/dvd, and mech HDD (not included in cost). Those are the most common carry over parts besides my water-cooling that carries over build to build. I believe it would be a very useful and realistic use of funds many of your readers could relate to.
    That's an awesome idea too! We could get some old-fashioned Chieftech Dragon (or similarly-popular) cases, maybe some older 700W power supplies and hard drives, match everything and just change the platform. Anyone else think this is a good idea?
  • saxplayingcompnerd
    @thymanbearpig They use the same GPU, most games are GPU bottle-necked. That's how they get nearly the same FPS.
    • Other Comments
  • thymanbearpig
    You would think with an extra $200 you can get a noticeable difference in fps..
  • plasmaj12345
    thymanbearpigYou would think with an extra $200 you can get a noticeable difference in fps..


    The only real difference between the $800 and $1000 PC is that the $1000 has an SSD. They both have the same CPU, RAM, and GPU. Gaming should be about the same on both.
  • saxplayingcompnerd
    @thymanbearpig They use the same GPU, most games are GPU bottle-necked. That's how they get nearly the same FPS.
  • mayankleoboy1
    Something i posted last quarter too :

    Why would all the machines have same percent emphasis on games and productivity apps ? Why would a $600 gaming PC be evaluated similarly to a $800 enthusiast PC ? The percentwise distribution of each metric should be based on what usage the build was meant for.

    Something like : games, apps, storage.

    $600 build : 85%, 15% . (cheapest, best gaming. Very few apps. Doesnt need fast storage. )
    $800 build : 55%, 35%, 10% (slightly better games over apps. Great apps. fast storage for OS + apps OR games)
    $1000 build. : 42.5%, 42.5%, 15% (equally good games and apps. fast storage should be plenty for OS+apps+games)
  • Crashman
    ankit0x1still waiting for 2000$ build
    How about building up the $1000 machine into a dual-GPU added-storage $1600 PC?
  • mayankleoboy1
    can we have a chart of the combined totals of :
    1) FPS in games
    2)time taken in apps
    for each build?

    so that we may draw our own conclusions from the data? I am not entirely satisfied with the conclusions you have drawn.
  • Anonymous
    System Builder Marathons should use a $600, $1200, and $1800 dollar standard.
  • Crashman
    mayankleoboy1can we have a chart of the combined totals of :1) FPS in games2)time taken in appsfor each build?so that we may draw our own conclusions from the data? I am not entirely satisfied with the conclusions you have drawn.
    Percentages are just as accurate, you'll find those on Page 13 along with power numbers.
  • bdizzle11
    For next SBM how about a $800, $1200, $1600. A little bit higher but more spread. I think that would better determine the sweet spot...
  • atomicWAR
    Honestly i would like to see an up-graders marathon. With price points of 600, 800, 1000, 1300, 1600, 2000 covered all using the same case, CD/dvd, and mech HDD (not included in cost). Those are the most common carry over parts besides my water-cooling that carries over build to build. I believe it would be a very useful and realistic application of funds many of your readers could relate to.
  • Crashman
    bdizzle11For next SBM how about a $800, $1200, $1600. A little bit higher but more spread. I think that would better determine the sweet spot...
    I like that idea too! But the $800 PC...would that be the $600 PC with GPU upgrade and an added SSD? Because the $600 PC topped the charts this time.
  • Crashman
    atomicWARHonestly i would like to see an up-graders marathon. With price points of 600, 800, 1000, 1300, 1600, 2000 covered all using the same case, CD/dvd, and mech HDD (not included in cost). Those are the most common carry over parts besides my water-cooling that carries over build to build. I believe it would be a very useful and realistic use of funds many of your readers could relate to.
    That's an awesome idea too! We could get some old-fashioned Chieftech Dragon (or similarly-popular) cases, maybe some older 700W power supplies and hard drives, match everything and just change the platform. Anyone else think this is a good idea?
  • mayankleoboy1
    edit.
  • lunyone
    I would too like to see a system built with the Case/PSU/HD/DVD not included in the price, since most people building their own builds would most likely transfer those parts over (but I would probably upgrade the PSU, because it might be 4-5 yrs. old). So if we just didn't include the Case/HD/DVD into the cost than we could actually subtract about ($35 case/$50 HD/$20 DVD) $100-110 from the build costs on these SBM's. This would leave us with $500/$700/$900 build options, if we would like to consider those price points. I myself would like to see $400/$650/$900 builds with the above mentioned parts left out. This would get us a similar results, unless one would use a different GPU from the $650 to $900 build. One could possibly upgrade the GPU and get a 120/128gb SSD to fit within the $250 difference in price.
  • _Pez_
    maybe avoiding the same hardware between setups would be a better system comparison.

    I think that there is no point of comparison between the last two setups.... I would have picked an amd setup just to change things...
  • atomicWAR
    lunyoneI would too like to see a system built with the Case/PSU/HD/DVD not included in the price, since most people building their own builds would most likely transfer those parts over (but I would probably upgrade the PSU, because it might be 4-5 yrs. old). So if we just didn't include the Case/HD/DVD into the cost than we could actually subtract about ($35 case/$50 HD/$20 DVD) $100-110 from the build costs on these SBM's. This would leave us with $500/$700/$900 build options, if we would like to consider those price points. I myself would like to see $400/$650/$900 builds with the above mentioned parts left out. This would get us a similar results, unless one would use a different GPU from the $650 to $900 build. One could possibly upgrade the GPU and get a 120/128gb SSD to fit within the $250 difference in price.


    yeah i think the PSU is one always worth updating as it is the heart of any system.

    so maybe a psu/cpu/mobo/ram/cooling/graphic +what ever extras you can afford on said budget.
  • agnickolov
    I'd suggest stepping the budget up by $200 for the next SBM - $800, $1000, $1200.
  • agnickolov
    And a comment on the Visual Studio results - the $1000 machine's lead is almost exclusively due to the SSD, not the faster memory. C++ compilation has lots of disk I/O that dwarfs memory access. Speaking as a professional C++ developer myself.
  • Crashman
    _Pez_maybe avoiding the same hardware between setups would be a better system comparison.I think that there is no point of comparison between the last two setups.... I would have picked an amd setup just to change things...
    BS :) Seriously, if you think there's no point in comparing two similar systems, you're completely missing THE point. Two builders were given full license to build anything they wanted within their budgets, and you ended up with two of the same CPU and GPU because those parts were the parts that made the most sense from a value perspective.

    You're saying that these builds should have been coordinated, rather than competitive, and that a builder should have "took one for the team" by using inferior hardware? This was a competition, that's the point.
  • chesteracorgi
    I think the spread between the builds was too small to show a significant difference. I suggest that you increase the spread with $600/$900/$1200 or $700/$1100/$1500 targets. It would give the builders a better chance to differentiate their hardware.
Display more comments
Most Popular
  1. Zotac Introduces Firestorm GeForce Overclocking Utility
  2. MSI G-Series Gaming Motherboard to Pack High-Polling USB
  3. MSI to Use Killer Network Adapters in Laptops, Motherboards
The Latest On Tom's Hardware
Edition
Subscribe to our newsletter
Company
Resources
Other Purch sites
  • © 2018 Purch All Rights Reserved.