Introduction & Q4 2015 Build Lineup
System Builder Marathon Q4 2015
Here are links to each of the five articles in this quarter’s System Builder Marathon (we’ll update them as each story is published). And remember, these systems are all being given away at the end of the marathon.
To enter the giveaway, please fill out this SurveyGizmo form, and be sure to read the complete rules before entering!
- $1184 Gaming PC
- $1055 Prosumer PC
- $895 LAN Box PC
- System Value Compared
- $912 AMD LAN Box PC
System Value Compared
Performance remains a key component of the performance-per-price equation we call “Value”. Last quarter, we tried to squeeze as many high-performance parts into our $800 builds as possible, and every machine failed to provide convincing numbers due to the inadequacies of other components. My Prosumer PC sacrificed graphics power to pay for a better CPU, Eric’s Mini Gaming PC sacrificed CPU capability to pay for more graphics power, and Chris’ Gaming PC sacrificed a little of both to get a better performance balance across the complete benchmark set. Comparing results, we decided that $800 wasn’t enough to satisfy even the most frugal of performance enthusiasts. Cutting down to $650 or so might get us better value in an economy PC, but the extra $150 was just tempting us with high-end parts that other components couldn’t keep up with.
This time around, we spent more money to fix the performance shortcomings of each machine, with Chris taking the lead at $1184. That’s barely below the bottom of the high-end market, but it’s also pretty tough to find any low-end components on his list. Eric stuck closer to home in his $895 expenditure, yet departed completely from his previous AMD platform.
| Q4 SBM Components List | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Row 0 - Cell 0 | Chris' $1184 Gaming PC | Thomas' $1055 Prosumer PC | Eric's $895 "LAN Box" PC |
| Processor | Intel Core i5-6600K: 3.5GHz-3.9GHz, Four Cores, 6 MB Cache | Intel Core i5-6600K: 3.5GHz-3.9GHz, Four Cores, 6 MB Cache | Intel i3-4170: 3.7 GHz, Two Cores, 3 MB L3 Cache |
| Graphics | PowerColor PCS+ AXR9 390 8GBD5-PPDHE Radeon R9 390 8GB | Asus TURBO-GTX970-OC-4GD5 GeForce GTX 970 4GB | Asus TURBO-GTX970-OC-4GD5 GeForce GTX 970 4GB |
| Motherboard | Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI: LGA 1151, Intel Z170, ATX | Gigabyte Z170M-DH3: LGA 1151, Intel Z170, MicroATX | ASRock H97M-ITX/ac: LGA 1150, Intel H97, Mini ITX |
| Memory | Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI: LGA 1151, Intel Z170, ATX | PNY MD16GK2D4240015AR: DDR4-2400 C15, 16GB (2 x 8GB) | Crucial BLS2K4G3D169DS1J: DDR3-1600 C9, 8GB (2 x 4GB) |
| System Drive | Samsung 850 EVO MZ-75E250B/AM 250GB SATA 6Gb/s 2.5" SSD | SAMSUNG 850 EVO MZ-N5E250BW 250GB SATA 6Gb/s M.2 SSD | Samsung 850 EVO MZ-75E250B/AM 250GB SATA 6Gb/s 2.5" SSD |
| Power | EVGA 220-GS-0650-V1 650W Modular, 80 PLUS Gold | SeaSonic SS-400ET: 400W Non-Modular, 80 PLUS Bronze | SeaSonic M12II 620 Bronze 620W Full Modular 80 PLUS Bronze |
| CPU Cooler | Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo | Cooler Master Hyper T4 | Core i3-4170 Included Cooler |
| Platform Cost | $926 | $915 | $680 |
| Storage Drive | Seagate Barracuda ST1000DM003 1TB 7200 RPM Hard Drive | Uses System Drive | WD Caviar Blue WD10EZEX 3.5" 1TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache HDD |
| Optical | Asus DRW-24F1ST 24x DVD±R | None | Asus SDRW-08D2S-U 24X DVD±R |
| Case | Corsair Carbide SPEC-03 ATX | DIYPC MA01-G Black MicroATX | Thermaltake Core V1 |
| Total Hardware | $1,064 | $935 | $795 |
| OS | Windows 10 Home USB Pack | Windows 10 Home USB Pack | Windows 10 x64 OEM |
| Complete System | $1,184 | $1,055 | $895 |
Similarities between certain components are neither coincidental nor collaborative, except for the expected collaboration between readers and writers. Readers of last quarter’s System Builder Marathon recommended that my replacement machine receive the graphics from Eric’s previous machine and the SSD from Chris’, and so it has. As those were also the best components of Eric’s and Chris’ previous builds, they felt no obligation to replace these. Each of us also tried our hand at overclocking, though Eric’s CPU and motherboard were “locked”.
| Test Hardware Configurations | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Row 0 - Cell 0 | Chris' $1184 Gaming PC | Thomas' $1055 Prosumer PC | Eric's $895 "LAN Box" PC |
| Processor (Overclock) | Intel Core i5-6600K: 3.50 GHz - 3.90 GHz, Four Physical Cores O/C to 4.6GHz, 1.39V | Intel Core i5-6600K: 3.50 GHz - 3.90 GHz, Four Physical Cores O/C to 4.5GHz, 1.30V | Intel i3-4170: 3.7 GHz, Dual-Core with Hyper-Threading |
| Graphics (Overclock) | PowerColor Radeon R9 390: <1010MHz Core, 1500MHz Memory O/C to <1155MHz Core, 1740MHz Memory | Asus GeForce GTX 970: <1228MHz GPU, GDDR5-7010 O/C to <1390MHz, GDDR5-7880 | Asus GeForce GTX 970: <1228MHz GPU, GDDR5-7010 O/C to <1400MHz, GDDR5-7410 |
| Memory (Overclock) | 8GB G.Skill DDR4-2400 CAS 15-15-15-35, O/C to DDR4-2800 CL 13-13-13-28, 1.34V | 16GB PNY DDR4-2400 CAS 15-15-15-35, O/C to DDR4-2666 CL 14-14-14-28, 1.24V | 8GB Crucial DDR3-1600 CAS 9-9-9-24, O/C to DDR3-1600 8-8-8-24, 1.5V |
| Motherboard (Overclock) | Gigabyte GA-Z170XP-SLI: LGA 1151, Intel Z170 Stock Clocks | Gigabyte Z170M-DH3: LGA 1151, Intel Z170 Stock Clocks | ASRock H97M-ITX/ac: LGA 1150, Intel H97 Stock Clocks |
| Case | Corsair SPEC-03 | DIYPC MA01-G | Thermaltake Core V1 |
| CPU Cooler | Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo | Cooler Master Hyper T4 | Core i3-4170 Included Cooler |
| Hard Drive | Samsung 850 Evo 250GB SATA 6Gb/s 2.5" SSD | Samsung 850 Evo 250GB SATA 6Gb/s M.2 SSD | Samsung 850 Evo 250GB 2.5" SSD |
| Power | EVGA 220-GS-0650-V1: 650W, 80 PLUS Gold | SeaSonic SS-400ET: 400W, 80 PLUS Bronze | Seasonic M12II Bronze 620W |
| Software | |||
| OS | Microsoft Windows 8.1 Pro x64 | Microsoft Windows 8 Pro x64 | Microsoft Windows 8 Pro x64 |
| Graphics | AMD Crimson 15.11 | Nvidia GeForce 359.06 | Nvidia GeForce 359.06 |
| Chipset | Intel INF 10.1.1 | Intel INF 10.1.1 | Intel INF 10.0.0.27 |
I’ve only been using 1.30V to overclock Haswell CPUs, but I have no problem with the 1.39V setting Chris used to gain a 100MHz overclocking advantage. This is a competition after all, and he hasn’t shown any evidence of his CPU overheating. Real-world users must decide for themselves if the small boost in performance is worth the moderate increase in power consumption.
With the hardware set up, we’re ready to see how these machines run!
