Skip to main content

System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: $1,000 Performance PC

Could We Have A Value Winner At $1,000?

This month, I was forced to give up $1,000 worth of my budget to create a tighter comparison when we get the chance to break down value. But last quarter's $2,000 setup won't be a part of that story. So, I'll draw my comparisons now. We know that it cost twice as much and came nowhere near delivering two times as much performance. This is our chance to quantify the difference.

Serving up 83% of the previous build's performance, today’s half-priced machine gets a 61% value boost from its lower price. Both systems gain value from free overclocking, which is technically free. However, this quarter's overclocked value leads our previous effort by around 66%.

Gaming value becomes even more important when a PC is built expressly for that purpose. We’d like to say that today’s build turned into a capable gaming platform by accident, but we always knew that leaving out enhancements that don't affect performance would limit the utility of this machine to the most performance-sensitive workloads.

With that in mind, Q4 2012's advantage in games is larger than its overall performance lead (when we factor in the other benchmarks). But that advantage is still not large enough to overcome its astronomical increase in price.

  • samuelohagan
    Isn't this basically the same thing as the $800 pc but with an ssd?
    Reply
  • mayankleoboy1
    The only thing i could have tried to change in this build was to get a 64GB SSD , get a 500GB HDD , and if i have any money left, try to get a HD7950.
    Otherwise, not much wriggle room here. Nice build!
    Reply
  • Chairman Ray
    I'm not sure if having an SSD without an HDD is an attractive option for most people. 240GB goes by pretty fast.
    Reply
  • samuelohagan
    I think they should have compared the benchmarks with Q4 $1000 pc.
    Reply
  • lightofhonor
    It actually plays Skyrim WORSE than the $800 build...
    Reply
  • dscudella
    It's the same PC as the $800 build except they just swapped out the HDD for an SSD. Dissappointing.
    Reply
  • where do you order your PC parts?
    Reply
  • Crashman
    mayankleoboy1The only thing i could have tried to change in this build was to get a 64GB SSD , get a 500GB HDD , and if i have any money left, try to get a HD7950.Otherwise, not much wriggle room here. Nice build!No point, We Like Our Games To Load Fast!!!Chairman RayI'm not sure if having an SSD without an HDD is an attractive option for most people. 240GB goes by pretty fast.Programs can eat most of a 240GB drive up. In fact, I just shrunk a copy of the test suite, with OS and games, to 132 GB.

    Using the drive performance measurement to reflect program load times means loading all the programs on the SSD. And that explains why SSD capacity wasn't sacrificed to make more room in the budget for an HDD.
    lightofhonorIt actually plays Skyrim WORSE than the $800 build...Nobody knows why, but the $800 PC did use a newer GPU driver.dscudellaIt's the same PC as the $800 build except they just swapped out the HDD for an SSD. Dissappointing.So it's going to lose the Day 4 Value Roundup, right?
    Reply
  • mayankleoboy1
    dscudellaIt's the same PC as the $800 build except they just swapped out the HDD for an SSD. Dissappointing.
    Looking from another perspective, these two builds, with two different builders, with $200 difference, just show(again) how much better price/performance wise are Intel CPU's and AMD GPU's.
    Reply
  • mayankleoboy1
    CrashmanNo point, We Like Our Games To Load Fast!!!
    I see your point, but I'd rather see slower game loads and better FPS , than faster game loads and lower FPS. And, the OS is accelerated in both cases anyway.
    Reply