System Builder Marathon, June 2011: Value Compared

Deals
By published

Benchmark Results: 3DMark And PCMark

3DMark loves AMD's Radeon HD 6970s, handing a big win to the new $2000 system’s CrossFire configuration. CrossFire also helps separate the dual-Radeon HD 6850 $1000 build from its single-Radeon HD 6950 $500 counterpart. Perhaps the most surprising drop-off happens when you shift from the $1000 machine to the $500 system.

SSD drives weren’t as common when the previous version of PCMark was developed, and this new version appears designed to give less of a scoring advantage to systems that use them. A closer look at individual test scores provides a better idea of how much the spread is changed.

While the performance gap still appears significant between solid-state- and hard drive-based systems, the larger difference appears to be a 90% decrease in transfer rate. These systems obviously didn’t slow down that much, and the results instead indicate new testing methods for the new benchmark, complete with new biases.

Thomas Soderstrom
Thomas Soderstrom
Thomas Soderstrom is a Senior Staff Editor at Tom's Hardware US. He tests and reviews cases, cooling, memory and motherboards.
37 Comments Comment from the forums
  • jricha51
    Would it be possible for me to run the same benchmarks? I have a AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ Windsor 2.8GHz Socket AM2 89W Dual-Core Processor (don't laugh). It is time to upgrade. I am considering the 2500K. Will I get 10X-20X faster video encodes? Even more?
    Reply
  • haplo602
    can you guys run the phoroxin test suite pts/multicore set in the future ? usualy the other sets are worthless but the multicore is a nice one to see.
    Reply
  • compton
    Well, here's to another SBM. For the last several quarters I've been lamenting AMDs inability to keep pace with Intel's relentless cadence. I sincerely hope that the next round of SBM will feature a AMD processor -- even better if it can claw out a spot one of the big-boy builds. I know I decided not to wait to get my Sandy on, but it AMD can come anywhere close I'll sell my SB rig on ebay. AMD, you know what you have to do, and if you can do it with Bulldozer, I'll be waiting in line to get one.
    Reply
  • jestersage
    Hmmm... that ridiculously cut-down asrock mobo in the $500 build makes me want to see another 'portable' lan-gaming-rig SBM. Emphasis on the portable because the SBM that tackled that theme came up with some really 'big' cases that still needed 2 hands to carry.

    With itx form factor increasingly available on the market for cases, PSUs, mobos, and even HSFs, I think another round might come up with a more exciting SFF-SBM.
    Reply
  • SpadeM
    jricha51Would it be possible for me to run the same benchmarks? I have a AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ Windsor 2.8GHz Socket AM2 89W Dual-Core Processor (don't laugh). It is time to upgrade. I am considering the 2500K. Will I get 10X-20X faster video encodes? Even more?
    See for yourself http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/30?vs=288

    Reply
  • DavC
    jricha51Would it be possible for me to run the same benchmarks? I have a AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ Windsor 2.8GHz Socket AM2 89W Dual-Core Processor (don't laugh). It is time to upgrade. I am considering the 2500K. Will I get 10X-20X faster video encodes? Even more?i doubt it will be that much of an improvement. Got a friend who upgraded from a 5000+ to i3-2100 and the improvment on video conversion was around 2-3 times quicker. I'd imagine the jump from the i3 to an i5 would be about the same for that task, so i'd guess it would be 5x faster or so.
    Reply
  • whysobluepandabear
    Anyone should have seen this coming, mid-range is ALWAYS the best value.


    You pay to have the latest and greatest, but like said, it carries diminishing returns.


    With that being the case, It's pretty amazing what you can get these days for under $500. Obviously the $1000 build is in a MUCH better position to be upgraded, as the PSU and Mobo give you greater options. The case and cpu-cooler also are breaking points for me - leaving the $1000 build as the most sensible; In terms of performance and future upgrade paths.
    Reply
  • whysobluepandabear
    DavCi doubt it will be that much of an improvement. Got a friend who upgraded from a 5000+ to i3-2100 and the improvment on video conversion was around 2-3 times quicker. I'd imagine the jump from the i3 to an i5 would be about the same for that task, so i'd guess it would be 5x faster or so.Not quite. If whatever he's doing can utilize Quick Sync, then expect some BLAZING ass encoding times.

    The 2500k on a Z68 with Quick Sync can dramatically cut down times....
    Reply
  • jricha51
    See for yourself http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/30?vs=288

    Thanks for the link. Did AMD release 2 different 5600+? "AMD Athlon X2 5600+ - 2.9GHz - 1MB L2" and "AMD Athlon 64 X2 5600+ Windsor 2.8GHz Socket AM2 89W Dual-Core Processor"

    On all video benchmarks you linked to, the i5 was ~3-5 times faster. My ancient dual core is hanging in there a bit better than I expected. But I think my CPU is a generation older than that link (2.8 vs 2.9GHz)??? And since it is not all about GHz, mine may suck more than it looks?

    The charts I find with my exact CPU (like http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/desktop-cpu-charts-q3-2008/Nero-8-Recode,838.html )have older benchmarks and don't include the newer chips.

    Not quite. If whatever he's doing can utilize Quick Sync, then expect some BLAZING ass encoding times.

    The 2500k on a Z68 with Quick Sync can dramatically cut down times....

    Does handbrake use Quick Sync? I do some video editing and light gaming, but mostly converting formats & compressing video in handbrake.

    Reply
  • cknobman
    More likely is that a gamer would buy a value-oriented system for resolutions of up to 1680x1050.

    I disagree with you here. I have been gaming with a $500/dollar value build for a while now and I refuse to go lower than 1920x1080. Due to that being the standard resolution for high definition and most monitors today start there and go up I think this is a more realistic starting point for resolutions for anyone building a NEW computer (considering they are buying a NEW display to go with it).
    Reply