Skip to main content

Digital Storm Vanquish 5 Gaming Desktop Review

Gaming Benchmarks

Alien: Isolation

The Digital Storm Vanquish 5 spars with the other GTX 1080 desktops in the field, taking first, second and third-place finishes at 4K, 1080p and 1440p, respectively. Each of the GTX 1080-equipped systems scores within 1 FPS of each other, and the GTX 1070 obviously comes in last (and will continue to do so, at varying margins, throughout our review). All of the systems can easily handle Alien: Isolation at any resolution and setting.

Ashes of the Singularity

Ashes of the Singularity receives minimal performance gains from CPU overclocking, but the results show the minute differences a higher-clocked CPU can make, with the Avatar's 4.7GHz overclock on top and Digital Storm's modest 4.4GHz clock rate following slightly behind. The variances in performance between the GTX 1080 systems is negligible, and even the performance gap between the lowest-scoring 1080-equipped PC and the GTX 1070 is not as significant as other titles in our test suite.

Bioshock Infinite

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

Bioshock Infinite's results remain much the same, with the Vanquish 5 scoring wins at 3840 x 2160 and 2560 x 1440, but falling into the expected performance rankings at 1920 x 1080. None of the GTX 1080 systems struggle to keep Bioshock above 70 FPS even at 4K, and the GTX 1070 only dips to a 56.11 FPS average at the most-demanding settings.

DiRT Rally

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

The benchmark results for DiRT Rally illustrate the same trend we see in the Ashes of the Singularity results, with the Digital Storm Vanquish 5 taking second place finishes. Again, the variance in performance between the GTX 1080 PCs are negligible, but they all can barely manage to keep above 30 FPS at 3840 x 2160 in DiRT Rally.

Grand Theft Auto V

Image 1 of 5

Image 2 of 5

Image 3 of 5

Image 4 of 5

Image 5 of 5

The Digital Storm Vanquish 5 duels with the Avatar and our test rig in the early scenes of the Grand Theft Auto V benchmark, never outpacing or trailing either system by a significant margin. The Chase scene is the longest portion of the test, and it provides the best measure of real-world performance in GTAV. It's at this point that the Vanquish 5 takes the lead at every tested resolution, but the difference is once again under 1 FPS between the GTX 1080 desktops.

GRID Autosport

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

GRID Autosport is a game that sees big gains with better platform performance, and the moderate CPU overclock (4.4GHz) and increased memory frequency (2666MHz) of the Vanquish 5 earns it a narrow first place finish at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440. At 4K, the impact of CPU and memory performance diminishes and puts the pecking order back in its expected lineup, with Digital Storm coming in a close second place. However, all of the games perform beautifully in GRID Autosport, with even the GTX 1070 averaging 73.19 FPS and only dipping below 60 FPS for a moment at the game's highest settings.

Hitman

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

The Asus GTX 1080 Turbo graphics card inside the Vanquish 5 outperforms the Founder's Edition-equipped systems (the Avatar and our test rig), though only by a narrow margin, in the Hitman DirectX 12 benchmark results. The GPUs are near-identical on paper (same clock rates), with only the shroud and cooling of the Asus GTX 1080 Turbo differing from the Founder's Edition graphics cards. The simplified cooling could allow for longer boost clock states and a slight advantage in certain workloads (we've seen the Vanquish 5 slide into the win in a few places so far), but again, the performance difference is indiscernible to the human eye.

Metro: Last Light Redux

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

Metro: Last Light Redux is an extremely reliable benchmark for weeding out differences in GPU performance. With all three of the GTX 1080 systems featuring the same GPU clock frequencies, it shouldn't be surprising that they score identical average frame rates in multiple places, with the Vanquish 5 in a tie with the Avatar for the highest average framerate at 1920 x 1080, achieving 90.33 FPS. The minimum framerate is the only discerning factor for a "winner" at this resolution, with the Vanquish 5 falling short of the top spot in only the 1080p test, with a second-place 23.59 FPS minimum.

At 2560 x 1440, there aren't any identical scores, but the performance difference between the Vanquish and its similarly-equipped competition is less than 1 FPS with both minimum and average framerates. Digital Storm pulls out a narrow win with a 51.33 FPS average, despite having a lower minimum framerate than the Avatar. Amazingly, all three GTX 1080-equipped machines average exactly 21 FPS at 3840 x 2160 (does that mean we scored a hat trick?), which was surprising enough for us to retest the Vanquish 5 with a second three-pass benchmark run (we also did this when we saw the same results in the Avatar review). To our shock (and triggering an overwhelming feeling of deja vu), the result remained the same in Metro: Last Light Redux at 4K, where the Vanquish 5 takes the token win with a slightly higher minimum framerate.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Similar to Metro, Rise of the Tomb Raider exhibits negligible differences in framerates between the GTX 1080-equipped systems, with the Vanquish 5 landing in second place to the Avatar at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440 by less than 1 FPS. Digital Storm clutches a win at 3840 x 2160 by only 0.07 FPS, but all of the systems are bogged down with unplayable framerates at this resolution without lowering the demanding settings.

The Division

Up until now, the Vanquish 5 was making out pretty well in this little GTX 1080 three-way death match. However, The Division gives the Vanquish 5 one of its few third-place finishes, with Digital Storm's entry falling short of even our reference rig. Overclocking and memory speed did no favors for Digital Storm in this game, but the results are once again within a negligible margin.

Thief

Image 1 of 3

Image 2 of 3

Image 3 of 3

The Digital Storm Vanquish 5 finishes our test suite strong with wins at 1920 x 1080, 2560 x 1440, and 3840 x 2160 in the Thief benchmark tests. We can't stress enough that the performance difference between the GTX 1080-equipped desktops in most of these tests are so minimal that you won't physically see it, but Digital Storm manages another victory just the same.

  • esco_sid
    Hmm did pcpartpicker build of same for $1553 not sure if its worth it for ~$500 markup i think would be more reasonable for about +300 and they pay less for the parts than costs us to build it.
    https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ZqbJpb
    Reply
  • kewlguy239
    19033383 said:
    Hmm did pcpartpicker build of same for $1553 not sure if its worth it for ~$500 markup i think would be more reasonable for about +300 and they pay less for the parts than costs us to build it.
    https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ZqbJpb

    I'm not going to debate that it's entirely possible to source the components for less money. However, I'll gently remind the community that these types of systems aren't meant for DIY enthusiasts. Whether we want to acknowledge it or not, there is a market for high-end PCs for customers with zero technical knowledge. The price point is low for the market it's aimed at (see the AVADirect Avatar at $2,300), and its all about perspective. A $500 markup (as you estimated) may be (and often is) worth it to someone who lacks the expertise to build it themselves.
    Reply
  • neieus
    19033383 said:
    Hmm did pcpartpicker build of same for $1553 not sure if its worth it for ~$500 markup i think would be more reasonable for about +300 and they pay less for the parts than costs us to build it.
    https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ZqbJpb

    I would agree with you also but I think their justification is not just trying to turn a small profit but also the after sale support warranty they'd provide as added value.
    Reply
  • MWP0004
    19033414 said:
    19033383 said:
    Hmm did pcpartpicker build of same for $1553 not sure if its worth it for ~$500 markup i think would be more reasonable for about +300 and they pay less for the parts than costs us to build it.
    https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ZqbJpb

    I would agree with you also but I think their justification is not just trying to turn a small profit but also the after sale support warranty they'd provide as added value.

    To be fair, building a computer is an incredibly daunting task for a first time builder. Let alone buying $1500 worth of parts and then being concerned about damaging something while building, incompatibilities, etc. So I can see where high-end prebuilts have their place. Not every PC gaming enthusiast is a PC enthusiast as well, I suppose.
    Reply
  • neieus
    19033406 said:
    19033383 said:
    Hmm did pcpartpicker build of same for $1553 not sure if its worth it for ~$500 markup i think would be more reasonable for about +300 and they pay less for the parts than costs us to build it.
    https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ZqbJpb

    I'm not going to debate that it's entirely possible to source the components for less money. However, I'll gently remind the community that these types of systems aren't meant for DIY enthusiasts. Whether we want to acknowledge it or not, there is a market for high-end PCs for customers with zero technical knowledge. The price point is low for the market it's aimed at (see the AVADirect Avatar at $2,300), and its all about perspective. A $500 markup (as you estimated) may be (and often is) worth it to someone who lacks the expertise to build it themselves.

    Right after I posted my comments that thought came to mind also. This isn't a system for DIY like most of us here as they've done all the work for you. I see nothing wrong with their price personally and glad to see it wasn't in the $3000+ area which they sometimes can reach. After all this is the reason some of us decided to build our own being that it would be cheaper and having more control over what's placed in. That trade off however is that we have to do our home work on the parts and provide our own support with RMA etc.
    Reply
  • esco_sid
    19033406 said:
    19033383 said:
    Hmm did pcpartpicker build of same for $1553 not sure if its worth it for ~$500 markup i think would be more reasonable for about +300 and they pay less for the parts than costs us to build it.
    https://pcpartpicker.com/list/ZqbJpb

    I'm not going to debate that it's entirely possible to source the components for less money. However, I'll gently remind the community that these types of systems aren't meant for DIY enthusiasts. Whether we want to acknowledge it or not, there is a market for high-end PCs for customers with zero technical knowledge. The price point is low for the market it's aimed at (see the AVADirect Avatar at $2,300), and its all about perspective. A $500 markup (as you estimated) may be (and often is) worth it to someone who lacks the expertise to build it themselves.

    I would have to disagree there are way cheaper systems with similar components such as http://www.microcenter.com/product/467634/G426_Desktop_Computer for $1700 its pretty close to what it actually would cost us ourselves and has same(almost) specs than the Vanquish shouldn't this win the award ?

    Reply
  • why_wolf
    hrm, at that price point if you're going to have an optical drive it should at least be a blu-ray capable one.
    Reply
  • mitchyams
    this is such an ugly looking build who would pay 2 grand for this garbo lmao
    Reply
  • sillynilly
    That case is so nasty - reminds me of the $10 cases you could pick up at Fry's (probably still can!)
    Reply
  • ashburner
    I paid around $1600 in November for a similar build from ibuypower. Except the ddr4 is 3000, the primary Ssd is an Intel 600p 1tb, and it has a secondary ssd in the form of an ADATA 480 gb. It also came with a bluray writer, mechanical keyboard and decent mouse, gaming headset, 3 free games, and a $100 Windows store credit. I definitely could not build it for that price.
    Reply