System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: $1,600 Alternative PC
Results: 3DMark And PCMark
3DMark gets a 45% boost from the $1,600 PC’s second GPU, but its scores get even more interesting when we overclock. Tuning our machines boosts the $1,000 build by a mere 20%, but pushes the $1,600 PC even higher, giving us more bang from the same overclock.
A CPU bottleneck limiting the second GPU might help explain that disparity; processor overclocking would help open up that bottleneck. On the other hand, all GPUs are overclocked by a greater percentage than the CPUs. We’re probably seeing benefits from a combination of factors, including a faster CPU configuration and the $1,600 PC's beta graphics driver, which was added to solve an issue with OpenCL benchmarks in CrossFire.
PCMark also benefits from the $1,600 PC’s CrossFire configuration. Though the alternative motherboard’s firmware might also have been responsible for a boost in SSD performance, storage scores are scarcely affected.
Current page: Results: 3DMark And PCMark
Prev Page Test Settings And Benchmarks Next Page Results: Battlefield 3 And Far Cry 3Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
-
Crashman Azn CrackerAren't the 7870 myst only $240 a piece?See This?Reply
Article TextThe prices in that table were what we paid when the parts were ordered, and a lot of them changed over the last six weeks. For example, the PowerColor card is $20 less, per board. Other prices are up. All told, then, the total cost of buying our machine and replicating the build is within $20 of our original invoice. -
mikenygmail Please call the graphics cards 7870 LE from the start, like this:Reply
"Video Cards: 2 x 7870 LE - PowerColor PCS+ AX7870 Myst Edition"
After all, it is much more than a standard 7870.
I had no idea it was the LE until I got to the third page. -
Crashman mikenygmailPlease call the graphics cards 7870 LE from the start, like this:"Video Cards: 2 x 7870 LE - PowerColor PCS+ AX7870 Myst Edition"After all, it is much more than a standard 7870.I had no idea it was the LE until I got to the third page.In AMD/ATI model lingo, LE stands for a cut-down part. So a Tahiti-LE wouldn't be a 7870 LE, it would be a 7950 LE. The fact that it carries the 7870 model number is unfortunate, but the article attempts to make it clear that this is indeed a Tahiti-LEReply
-
Crashman StickmansamWhy not the 7870XT like Sapphire calls it?That's fine, please tell AMD to do the re-brand!Reply -
pyro226 "a board damaged a processor that in turn damaged every board it touched, which in turn would damage every processor it touched" and ram damaging a CPU?Reply
I think I'm a bit afraid to build computers now. If either of those situations would have happened to my $600 build, I would have cried and given up... -
Fulgurant pyro226"a board damaged a processor that in turn damaged every board it touched, which in turn would damage every processor it touched" and ram damaging a CPU?I think I'm a bit afraid to build computers now. If either of those situations would have happened to my $600 build, I would have cried and given up...Reply
That sort of thing happens once in a blue moon. Don't let it bother you.
I guess Tom's tale of woe summarizes why Intel recommends against higher than 1.575 volts on the memory controller of Ivy/Sandy:
http://www.intel.com/support/processors/sb/CS-029913.htm#4
IntelWhat are the Intel® Core™ i7 desktop processor DDR3 memory voltage limitations?Intel® recommends using memory that adheres to the Jedec memory specification for DDR3 memory which is 1.5 volts, plus or minus 5%. Anything more than this voltage can damage the processor or significantly reduce the processor life span.
In any case, the performance benefits of overclocking memory on a Sandy/Ivy platform seem so miniscule that it's scarcely even worth considering. Buy memory capable of an appropriate speed @ 1.5V, and leave it be.
(I know Tom mentions Intel's position on memory voltage on the last page of the article, but I wanted to re-emphasize it because I've seen literally hundreds of people dismiss Intel's statement on various hardware forums. When sites like Tom's Hardware push limits, even for questionable performance gains, we all benefit -- but when someone who's on a budget and might not know any better pushes limits on his own, hard-earned hardware, the results might be tragic. Tom's experiments with this stuff so we don't have to.) -
Crashman pyro226"a board damaged a processor that in turn damaged every board it touched, which in turn would damage every processor it touched" and ram damaging a CPU?I think I'm a bit afraid to build computers now. If either of those situations would have happened to my $600 build, I would have cried and given up...I told Chris the system was cursed, but he refused to let the project go after the seventh day. Three more days rescued the content, if not the hardware...Reply
FulgurantThat sort of thing happens once in a blue moon. Don't let it bother you.Once every 12 years is twice in 13 years too often...