System Builder Marathon, Q1 2013: $1,600 Alternative PC
-
Page 1:The Magic Of Anticipation
-
Page 2:CPU, CPU Cooler, And Memory
-
Page 3:Motherboard, Graphics, And Power
-
Page 4:Case, SSD, Hard Drive, And Optical Drive
-
Page 5:The Initial Installation: My First Attempt
-
Page 6:Ten Days, Ten Solutions?
-
Page 7:Starting Over, This Time With Success
-
Page 8:Overclocking
-
Page 9:Test Settings And Benchmarks
-
Page 10:Results: 3DMark And PCMark
-
Page 11:Results: Battlefield 3 And Far Cry 3
-
Page 12:Results: F1 2012 And Skyrim
-
Page 13:Results: Non-Gaming Applications
-
Page 14:Power, Heat, And Efficiency
-
Page 15:The Less-Obvious Benefits Of Spending More
Results: Non-Gaming Applications
The Tom’s Hardware team normally groups application benchmarks by type, but only OpenCL-enhanced Photoshop stood out as a test that might potentially benefit from the $1,600 PC’s second graphics card. We opened up a GPU monitoring program and watched the needle jump between zero and 14% utilization throughout this test.
Visual Studio 2010 also saw moderate performance gains on the new overclocked system, but those gains can only be linked to storage performance and/or chance. This long bench typically shows up to one-minute variance between consecutive runs.
In my search for noticeable changes in performance, I grouped the non-impacted benchmarks together. If you’d like to see exactly how close these results are, simply click on a photo to expand it.
- The Magic Of Anticipation
- CPU, CPU Cooler, And Memory
- Motherboard, Graphics, And Power
- Case, SSD, Hard Drive, And Optical Drive
- The Initial Installation: My First Attempt
- Ten Days, Ten Solutions?
- Starting Over, This Time With Success
- Overclocking
- Test Settings And Benchmarks
- Results: 3DMark And PCMark
- Results: Battlefield 3 And Far Cry 3
- Results: F1 2012 And Skyrim
- Results: Non-Gaming Applications
- Power, Heat, And Efficiency
- The Less-Obvious Benefits Of Spending More
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
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.)
"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.
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...
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
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.)
Once every 12 years is twice in 13 years too often...
Heh, by that I didn't mean to dismiss your hardship. Sorry to hear it, definitely!
And thanks for all the hard work. Excellent article.
I have a serious question for you. Does Tom's know about the overclocker's secret when it comes to RAM? I've been amazed that you guys don't use it in your enthusiast builds, ever. It's pretty much the most overclockable ram ever seen, is low profile, and only costs $50 for 8GB.
I don't want to spoil the name and tell everyone, but, well... it's the only ddr 3 ram out there that uses a 22nm process.
really appreciate the hard work and the excellent, interesting article.
i liked the gigabyte board choice, better than asrock extreme4.
one question - do the recent events related to asrock extreme4 change your recommendations, especially with heavy air coolers? how about other motherboards (incl. asrock) that seem to offer better features in exchange for pcb strength?
imo mid/mini/tower cases should include some kind of standardized, customizable suspension support(from the case ceiling) for heavy air coolers. the suspension could be made from wire or metal/plastic (resizable) rods etc. or make more cases like cooler master haf xb lan box. aio coolers like nzxt kraken x40 may be an alternative.
My system is an I-7 2600K CPU and so maybe with the larger mounting surface of the 3570 CPU there may be other considerations. But if that was true, we would read about this problem in the Newegg reviews and we simply don't see the problem that you mention. You may want to look at your installation method.
You know what would be better still? Through bolts to the motherboard tray, like we see on SSI-CEB boards.
But Intel tried that with BTX, and nobody bought it. I personally blame Intel for not making BTX an extension of ATX, since cross-compatibility could have helped the cooler support mechanism and cooling tunnel survive market resistance.
I think that this is one of the reasons that Intel decided to go with CLCs for Sandybridge-e CPUs. When I had to RMA a CPU (i5 2500K) last year the tech at Intel was aghast at my not using their standard cooler. When I told him that I knew that Intel was using CLCs for their SB-e line and couldn't object, he laughed and approved the RMA.
I agree with Crashman about the cooler OEMs supplying a stiffening motherboard tray, that distributes the torque, if they are using oversized heatsinks.
I was actually more interested in this article than in the normal evaluations of systems because of your story of tribulations with the motherboard and CPU. I'm glad to know that you pursued the problem to its end because I would have had problems affording 4 mobos and 3 CPUs.
And I am sticking to CLCs in my gaming builds and recommendations in the fora. A CLC may be a bit more expensive and a little less efficient that an air cooler, but I have had yet to see one crack a motherboard and the cascading problems you experienced.