Introduction and Product Tour

The Digital Storm Equinox has a pleasant, understated look and relatively thin dimensions for a high-end gaming laptop. However, the GTX 1070 Max-Q-powered system suffers from a flimsy lid, mediocre battery life and a mediocre display. Those who buy the $1,875 Equinox can expect outstanding overall performance and good cooling.

Specifications

Exterior

The first thing you’ll notice about the Equinox is that, well, there’s not much to notice at all! The Equinox’s understated design is a nice change of pace from the hyper-aggressive and flashy gaming laptops you find everywhere today. If you’re shopping for a gaming laptop that you can carry shamelessly in public, then the Equinox’s subdued aesthetics should be on your radar.

The Equinox’s top cover is constructed out of metal with a matte black painted surface. Near the top, you’ll find Digital Storm’s company logo painted in gray. We noticed that the top cover will flex with a moderate amount of pressure, which in turn bends the display. The Equinox is quite thin and light, so users will likely travel with it; in this case, you’ll have to make sure your bag has adequate space and that you don’t pack bulky items next to the laptop's lid.

Speaking of the lid, the bezels surrounding the display are relatively thin, measuring 0.625” thick. On the top, you’ll find a 2.0 megapixel HD webcam surrounded by a pair of array microphones.

The bottom panel and interior area are also constructed out of metal. Thankfully, they don’t have flexing issues. In the interior area, you’ll find a Digital Storm badge on the bottom left and the power button at the top right.

The bottom panel features two long rubber feet and plenty of ventilation cutouts for the cooling solution.

The speakers are located on the top end of the interior area, just above the keyboard. This is the best place to position the speakers because they won’t be obstructed by your hands while typing.

The Equinox’s dimensions are quite thin for a gaming laptop; it’s 0.7” thick and weighs only 4.4 lbs, making it ideal to take on-the-go if not for the lid’s flexing issue. You’ll find two sets of exhaust vents on the back for the CPU and GPU heat fins, as well as an additional GPU vent on the left.

There are plenty of I/O ports, which should appease most of your needs, including VR. On the left, you’ll find an HDMI port, two Mini DisplayPorts, two USB 3.1 Type-C ports and two USB 3.0 ports. The right side hosts a headphone jack, microphone jack, another USB 3.0 port, a multi-card reader and a Gigabit Ethernet port.

Display

The Equinox features a 15.6” Full HD (1920x1080) IPS display with a snappy 144Hz refresh rate and a matte finish. However, it's not a particularly bright panel, clocking in at just 263 nits on our light meter, which is about 20 nits less than the average mainstream gaming laptop. It covers a modest 113 percent of the sRGB color gamut, which is 14 points below average.

Input Devices

The Equinox features a full-length keyboard and number pad with a translucent font that allows the RGB illumination to peer through without light bleed. The keys are well-spaced making for a comfortable typing experience.

The touchpad is quite smooth and responsive, and its matte surface prevents surface drag. On the top left of the touchpad you’ll find a fingerprint reader, which makes logging into Windows seamless. Finally, two separate left and right clicks are located on the bottom.

Interior

Accessing the Equinox’s interior is simple. There are 11 screws securing the bottom panel to the rest of the laptop; remove these, and the panel will pop right off. At the rear, you’ll find the cooling solution, consisting of three fans, a CPU and GPU heat sink, five heatpipes and two sets of heat fins.

On the front, you’ll find the 55Wh battery, the M.2 SSD slot and an HDD slot. In between these is an Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 9560, which handles the Equinox’s wireless capabilities. Finally, two DDR4 memory slots are located in the middle.

Software

The Equinox is based off the Clevo P955ER, so it uses Clevo’s updated Control Center 2.0 software. From here, you can monitor system resources, adjust fan profiles, customize keyboard backlighting and more.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Synthetic Benchmarks

The Equinox features Intel’s new 8th-generation Core i7-8750H, an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q design, 16GB of DDR4-2400 memory, a 500GB M.2 SSD and a 15.6” FHD IPS display with a 144Hz refresh rate.

This is the first laptop we’ve tested with an Intel Coffee Lake CPU, so we don’t have any apples-to-apples comparisons to make just yet. In this review, we’ll be comparing the Equinox to a handful of Kaby Lake-based laptops released at around the same price point.

Now for the competition.

The closest comparison we can make is against the Gigabyte Aero 15X, a fellow Max-Q GTX 1070 laptop. It contains a Core i7-7700HQ, 16GB of DDR4-2400 memory, a 256GB M.2 SSD and a 15.6” FHD IPS display. We've praised the Aero 15X for its stellar performance, especially in battery life.

We’re using the Acer Predator Helios 300 as our lower-end alternative. It’s equipped with a Core i7-7700HQ, a GTX 1060, 16GB of DDR4-2133 memory, a 256GB M.2 SSD and a 15.6” FHD IPS display. The Helios is yet another highly recommended laptop due to its outstanding value.

Raising the stakes, we’re throwing in the MSI GE63VR Raider, which features a traditional GTX 1070 graphics card. On top of this, it has a Core i7-7700HQ, 32GB of DDR4-2400 memory, a 512GB M.2 SSD and a 15.6” FHD display with a 120Hz refresh rate. This comparison will illustrate the graphical performance between the Equinox’s Max-Q GTX 1070 and a regular one.

Finally, the highest-end system in our roundup is the Acer Predator Triton 700, which houses a beefy Max-Q GTX 1080. It also contains a Core i7-7700HQ, 32GB of DDR4-2400 memory, a 512GB M.2 SSD and a 15.6” FHD IPS display with Nvidia G-Sync.

3DMark

3DMark’s graphics benchmarks act as a prelude to our gaming benchmarks. The Equinox delivers outstanding graphical performance comparable to that of the Aero 15X, although neither stack up to the GE63VR Raider’s standard GTX 1070. However, the Equinox exhibits outstanding performance during the CPU-bound physics tests thanks to the Coffee Lake’s higher core count.

Cinebench R15

If 3DMark’s benchmarks best highlight GPU performance, then Cinebench is its CPU equivalent. The Equinox’s i7-8750H delivers outstanding rendering scores, delivering 11%-17% and 32%-34% faster than the i7-7700HQ-based laptops. However, Cinebench’s OpenGL shading test is GPU-bound, so the Equinox’s frame rate falls short of the MSI Raider and Acer Triton.

CompuBench

CompuBench has a platform-based Video Processing test and a GPU-bound Bitcoin Mining test. The Equinox’s 6-core CPU grants it a slight edge in VidProc against the Aero 15X and GE63VR Raider, but the Triton 700’s Max-Q GTX 1080 keeps the Equinox from first place. Furthermore, the Equinox lags behind the GE63VR Raider and Triton 700 due to the former's weaker GPU.

IOMeter

We perform an IOmeter test on each laptop’s primary drive to measure basic random and sequential read and write speeds. The laptops contain the following SSDs:

• Acer Predator Helios 300 - Micron 1100 256GB
• Acer Predator Triton 700 - SK Hynix Canvas S300 256GB * 2 RAID 0
• Digital Storm Equinox - Samsung 960 EVO 500GB
• Gigabyte Aero 15X - Samsung SM951 256GB
• MSI GE63VR Raider - Samsung PM871 512GB

The Equinox’s 960 EVO exhibits outstanding 4K random (QD2) speeds comparable to the Aero 15X’s SM951, allowing it to run application-based tasks with ease. However, it doesn’t deliver the raw read speeds that the Triton 700’s RAID configuration does. Similar results can be seen in 128K sequential speeds, although the 960 EVO far outperforms the RAID configuration in write speeds.

PCMark 8

We use PCMark 8’s Microsoft Office and Adobe creative tests to simulate a common workday workload. These tasks are platform-based, so systems with powerful CPUs and fast storage solutions perform best.

If you’re looking for a concrete performance increase from the i7-8750H’s extra cores, look no further than Adobe Creative applications. The Equinox outperforms even the Triton 700 by a longshot thanks to the i7-8750H. It exhibits a slight boost in Microsoft Office performance, but this is a slim gain, and you likely won’t notice much of a difference while typing Word documents or using Excel spreadsheets.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Gaming Benchmarks

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation

Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation is one of the most demanding titles available, and we witness the Equinox take a heavy hit in performance; it delivers 28.33 FPS in Crazy settings with MSAA set to x8.

The Equinox is the first laptop we’ve tested using Ashes of the Singularity: Escalation, so we don’t have proper comparison metrics to make.

Grand Theft Auto V

Grand Theft Auto V is one of the more demanding titles in our suite, but the Equinox delivers respectable performance during most of the benchmark scenes. The only exception is the Vinewood Sign scene, which is notorious for dragging even the most powerful gaming systems to their knees; for example, the Triton 700 only barely manages 40 FPS.

Interestingly, the Equinox doesn’t show a notable improvement over the Aero 15X, despite its higher-core i7-8750H.

Hitman

Hitman is notorious for being a CPU hog, so this should be the perfect opportunity for a 6-core processor to shine, right? Sadly, this isn’t the case. Once again, the Equinox doesn’t offer an improvement over the Aero 15X’s frame rate. In fact, the Equinox underscores the Aero by about 6%. However, keep in mind that the Equinox’s display has a higher refresh rate than the Aero (60Hz), so the former appears to perform faster.

Middle-earth: Shadow of War

Middle-earth: Shadow of War, features a fairly balanced and manageable workload. The Equinox delivers 69.33 FPS at Ultra settings and FXAA, so you can easily enjoy 60 FPS.

Middle-earth: Shadow of War is a new addition to our laptop gaming benchmarks, so we unfortunately don’t have any comparison data to provide.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Rise of the Tomb Raider is one of the most demanding AAA titles in this generation, and it’s a GPU-intensive one at that. As such, this means that the i7-8750H’s two extra cores don’t provide the Equinox much of an improvement over the the Aero 15X. The only way to improve performance is with a stronger GPU.

The Division

The Division is a platform-based title offering a moderate benchmark workload. Most mid-to-high-end laptops will perform well here, even at maximum settings. The Aero 15X and Equinox go head-to-head yet again, with the latter’s stronger CPU offering no edge over the competition.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Battery Life And Thermal Testing

Battery Test

To test battery life while gaming, we set each laptop’s battery profile to Balanced while running Tomb Raider’s built-in benchmark at the lowest detail preset. The frame rate is locked at 30 FPS through GeForce Experience’s Battery Boost to limit the strain on the battery. Meanwhile, a script running in the background monitors and time stamps the system’s battery percentage. The laptops are set to hibernate once battery levels reach 5%. We test the battery life at 200 nits.

On our web surfing battery test, which involves continuous surfing over Wi-Fi at 150 nits, the Equinox lasted a slightly-better 2 hours and 49 minutes which is 54 minutes less than the average premium gaming laptop.

The Equinox contains a 55Wh battery, which is larger than both the Helios 300 and GE63VR Raider. However, the 6-core Intel Core i7-8750H consumes more power during our battery rundown, which pulls the Equinox’s maximum battery life down to around 75 minutes of run time while gaming.

Of course, laptop vendors should strive for longer battery life. For example, the Aero 15X contains a massive 94.24 Wh battery and therefore outlasts the competition.

Thermal Testing

We use our Optris PI 640 infrared camera to measure the laptop’s thermals. To complement our thermal images, we take the average and maximum temperature from GPU-Z’s thermal log. For more information about how we test, check out our Measurement Science article.

Although battery performance was somewhat disappointing, we’re pleased to find that the Equinox exhibits outstanding cooling. At idle, the GPU heat sink expels a cool 36°C (97°F). After a 15 minute Furmark stress test, our Optris detects around 66°C (151°F). Referencing our GPU-Z thermal log, we find the GPU diode averaging 57.11°C (135°F) and maxing out at 60°C (140°F). This makes the Equinox the coolest laptop in our roundup and one of the coolest laptops we’ve tested thus far.

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Price Analysis And Conclusion

Versus the Competition

The Digital Storm Equinox is the first of many Coffee Lake Mobile laptops that have arrived in our lab, and we’re pleased to find that it offers great value as a thin-and-light gaming laptop. At the time of writing this review, you can find our configuration of the Equinox for $1,875.

The closest comparison in our roundup was the Gigabyte Aero 15X, which is currently $2,300. For more than $400, you’ll get near-identical gaming performance and storage speeds, a display with a lower refresh rate and warmer gaming temperatures. However, the Aero 15X has considerably better build quality and a much larger battery.

If your budget is in the same ballpark as the Equinox’s asking price, then the MSI GE63VR Raider is an attractive option as well. It has much better build quality, and its standard GTX 1070 allows it to outperform the Equinox in pure gaming, but it's not as thin or light.

If you’re looking for something more affordable than the Equinox, you will be pleased with what the Acer Predator Helios 300 has to offer. The Helios can be found on Amazon for $1,156, saving you over $700. Its GTX 1060 will deliver most of the performance that the Equinox can, has longer battery life and is built more sturdily, but the major tradeoffs are its size, weight and aesthetics.

Bottom Line

The Equinox is no doubt an attractive laptop, and the addition of the Intel Core i7-8750H is a no-brainer. Last year, an equivalent Max-Q laptop would easily cost at least $200 more than the Equinox’s asking price, and you would have been stuck with a Core i7-7700HQ. The i7-8750H’s extra cores deliver outstanding performance in Adobe applications. Plus, the Equinox has a top-notch cooling solution.

Digital Storm's laptop isn’t without its faults. For a system that's meant to be carried, it has very weak battery life and a dull screen that won't look good in a bright room. If you're looking for equal parts slim and powerful, however, the Equinox is definitely worth considering. 

MORE: Best Gaming Laptops

MORE: Gaming Laptop Previews

MORE: All Laptop Content

Digital Storm announced the new Equinox gaming laptop. Powered by a i7-8750H CPU and a GTX 1070 Max-Q GPU, the laptop has adequate gaming horsepower for its 15”, 144Hz, 1080p screen, yet isn’t too unwieldy.

It’s been a long time since we’ve seen a gaming laptop from Digital Storm. The introduction of Nvidia Max-Q GPUs shifted the market from large and bulky machines that were more portable desktops than laptops to svelte and premium machines that are easier on the eyes and the back. Now it seems Digital Storm is ready to join the likes of Asus, MSI, Gigabyte, Acer by releasing its own take on the contemporary gaming notebook.

Much like its competitors, the Equinox combines the newest of Intel’s 45W mobile CPUs (Coffee Lake-H) and Nvidia’s Max-Q GPUs in a 15” chassis that is only 0.73” thick. Specifically, the Equinox has a six-core i7-8750H, a GTX 1070 Max-Q, up to 32GB of DDR-2400 memory, aN M.2 NVMe SSD up to 2TB, and an optional 2.5” SSD up to 4TB. The laptop’s screen is a 15” IPS panel with 1080p resolution. Unfortunately, the screen doesn’t have G-Sync support to take full advantage of its 144Hz refresh rate.

At its default configuration, which includes 16GB of RAM and a 512GB M.2 SSD, the Equinox costs $1,956. A maxed-out Equinox costs over $5,000, but the only differences are in the memory and storage department. Digital Storm said the Equinox will start to ship in early May.

LAS VEGAS, NV -- Digital Storm unveiled a new small form factor (SFF) gaming system called Project Spark that leverages a micro STX motherboard and MXM graphics cards to achieve its impressively tiny footprint.

The Digital Storm Project Spark is no larger than a vase (we photographed it with a pair of headphones for scale), measuring in at only 6 x 4 x 12 inches. Tempered glass panels expose the left and right side’s interior to display the motherboard and storage, respectively. The black aluminum chassis gives it a sleek look, and remote-controlled RGB LED interior lighting adds a definitive "wow" factor.

The Spark may be tiny, but it packs a performance punch with a micro STX ASRock (Intel Z370 chipset) motherboard. Final specs are yet to be determined, but the unit Digital Storm had in its CES suite has an Intel Core i7-8700K processor, 32GB (2 x 16GB) of DDR4-SODIMM memory, and a Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 8GB GDDR5X MXM graphics card. It supports up to three M.2 2880 storage devices (SATA or PCIe NVMe) and can also be equipped with up to two 2.5” SATA HDDs or SSDs. (We know that you'll be able to configure the Spark with a GTX 1060, too.)

We sussed out several additional features during our meeting with Digital Storm at CES. The Spark has some kind of gigabit Ethernet connectivity (judging by its RJ45 port), and we spied a wireless networking module above the three M.2 storage slots. Along with the antennas on the back panel, we can presume that it has 802.11ac Wi-Fi connectivity.

There are four USB 3.0 ports (they're blue) on the rear panel, in addition to two USB ports on the right side panel (next to the windowed storage), but we can’t confirm the revisions of the front USB ports (but we'd guess that it's USB 2.0 from the non-blue ports). Display output is limited to HDMI, mini-DisplayPort, and DisplayPort, the revisions of which remains unknown. Digital Storm also stated that the external AC adapter draws 320W of power, which gives the Spark enough juice to handle the combination of an i7-8700K and GTX 1080.

The Spark’s customization options don’t stop at the hardware level – the Digital Storm SFF gaming rig can be configured with custom hardline open-loop liquid cooling for both the CPU and GPU, with a 120mm radiator (which resides on the top panel), something not often (if ever) found in a device this small. You can also opt for a custom paint job.

Spark is no longer a "project," with Digital Storm stating that we should see the system in Q2 of this year, starting at $1,299 (with a GTX 1060 inside).

Introduction & Product Tour

Maingear has had a good year. Through partnerships with HP (the Maingear Omen X) and Razer, in addition to former Voodoo CEO and tech legend Raul Sood joining the company, we’ve seen Maingear grow into a brand-name custom shop that offers a plethora of PC configurations, along with its signature hot rod-inspired paint shop.

Although Maingear is most known for its high-end custom water loops and premium automotive finishing, the company debuted its budget-friendly Vybe gaming desktop PC last year, bringing Maingear’s custom PC mastery to a more comfortable price point. Starting at $999 for VR-ready configurations (and $699 for budget setups), the Vybe lacks the custom paint options and open-loop liquid cooling of the company’s pricier offerings, but we wanted to see what Maingear’s conservative side had to offer.

Much to our dismay, Maingear pulled out all the stops with the Vybe configuration it sent us, single-handedly decimating our original expectations with a beast of a gaming PC equipped with an Intel Core i7-7700K overclocked to 5.0 GHz, an NVMe PCIe SSD, and dual Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition graphics cards in SLI. Ringing up for $3,842, this Maingear Vybe gives us an insanely powerful hardware set with everything but the kitchen sink (open-loop cooling and custom paint). Time to see how the not-so-budget-oriented premium configuration of the Vybe performs in our test suite.

Specifications

Exterior

The Maingear Vybe in our lab doesn’t feature the flashy custom paint we’re used to seeing with other premium PC configurations from the company (although this can be accommodated, starting at $499), but the modified NZXT S340 mid-tower ATX chassis is eye-catching in its own right. The case’s feet have been modified from its original specification to increase stability, and indeed, the Vybe is sturdy where it sits. The solid front panel doesn’t allow for an optical drive, but it gives the Vybe a sleek look with a Maingear logo and matte black finish. Maingear also ships the Vybe with an external USB DVD-RW drive, so we don’t miss the unsightly (and nearly obsolete) optical drive protruding from the front of the case.

The left side panel features an acrylic window that showcases the interior components, which are bathed in RGB LED lighting. This premium add on usually costs a cool $69, but Maingear is offering the remote-controlled light strip for free during its back-to-school sale. The underside of the chassis features a PSU dust filter, which is easy to remove and keeps your power supply clean. The top of the chassis has a 140mm exhaust fan.

The front-panel I/O is also located on the top of the case, with two USB 3.0 ports residing next to the power button. To the left of the USB ports are two audio jacks (one headphone-out, one mic-in). The motherboard’s connectivity is more expansive, with USB 3.1 (Gen 2) Type-C  and Type-A ports (capable of up to 10 Gbps data rates) powered by an ASMedia ASM2142 chipset, two USB 3.0 ports, and three USB 2.0 ports wired directly to the motherboard’s Z270 chipset.

Display output on the motherboard comes in the form of an HDMI 1.4 port and a DisplayPort 1.2 interface, but Maingear capped these off, directing customers to the two GPUs, which sport six DisplayPort 1.4 interfaces, two HDMI 2.0 ports, and two DVI-D ports between them. You can connect to the internet using the RJ-45 port, which is powered by a Qualcomm Killer E2500 Gigabit LAN controller.

Interior

Inside the Vybe, an MSI Z270 Gaming M7 motherboard is loaded with an Intel Core i7-7700K processor, which Maingear overclocked to a stable 5.0 GHz for a $49 Redline Overclocking service fee. A 240mm liquid cooler (branded as the Maingear Epic 240 SuperCooler) takes in cool air at the front of the chassis with the aid of two 120mm NZXT case fans. Ambient heat is driven from the chassis by a rear 120mm fan and top 140mm fan.

The Vybe’s 16GB (2 x 8GB) kit of Kingston HyperX DDR4-2666 has above-average speed, with a CAS latency of 15-17-17-35. These tight timings should help in memory intensive workloads, and the capacity is also more than adequate for most AAA game coming down the pipeline. Two Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition graphics cards are linked together with a familiar green high-bandwidth SLI bridge, and similar to the CPU, Maingear overclocks the GPUs (+100 MHz core, +150 MHz memory) with the purchase of its Redline Overclocking service.

One of the motherboard’s M.2 slots (between the GPUs) features an M.2 Shield, which is just a metal mounting plate used to dissipate heat from a socketed SSD. The interface is occupied by a 512GB Samsung 960 Pro NVMe SSD, which is rated for up to 3,500 MB/s sequential read speeds. The size and speed of the primary storage is ideal for even enthusiast gamers, and getting a higher capacity SSD would assuredly sink a lot more money into the build. The SSD is complimented by a 2TB 7,200 RPM Seagate HDD (accessible from the right side panel in the 3.5” drive bay), and the total storage capacity and potential primary storage performance of the Vybe mirrors what many price-conscious DIY enthusiasts would go with in their own builds.

A sleek PSU shroud hides a fully modular Corsair AX860i power supply, but you can access it from the right-side panel. Maingear recently changed up its configurators, and it now offers EVGA-branded PSUs in the Vybe. The AX860i in our review unit was replaced by an EVGA Supernova 850W PSU in the same price class as our sample’s AX860i, but either of those are adequate enough to power the beastly SLI rig, so we shouldn’t see too much of a difference between what we have in front of us and what Maingear offers today.

The PSU’s stock ATX, CPU, and PCIe power cables are connected to red, individually-braided cables (for an extra $99), which connect to the motherboard in the visible (main) chamber of the chassis. The red cables and the aforementioned remote-controlled RGB LED light strip give the Vybe some much-needed aesthetic wow factor, but the customized Maingear cable shroud running up the right side of the motherboard also makes the interior stand out. The cable management is also pristine, with all of the case’s wires, power, and data cables (visible or not) all neatly tied down without obstructing airflow or fan blades.

Software And Accessories

The Maingear Vybe doesn't come with any trial software or bloatware, but Maingear loaded GeForce Experience and MSI Afterburner with an overclocking preset for the GPUs, pushing the core clock up by 100 MHz and the memory clock by 150 MHz. Customers should appreciate the simplicity of the installation, which came loaded with all of the latest drivers, firmware, and Windows updates.

Maingear also ships the Vybe with all of the components' manuals, spare parts, and accessories, giving users the ability to upgrade without worrying about missing cables, screws, mounts, or software (it even comes with its Windows 10 retail box and product key). The complete set of individually-braided CableMod PSU cables are also included.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Synthetic & Productivity Benchmarks

We tested the Maingear Vybe against similarly configured and priced competition, including the Digital Storm Velox. The Velox goes for considerably more money than the Vybe, but they are almost identical in component sets. Both feature an Intel Core i7-7700K overclocked to 5.0 GHz and two Founder’s Edition GeForce GTX 1080 graphics cards in SLI. However, Digital Storm overclocked the GPU cores slightly higher (Maingear added 100 MHz, Digital Storm added 150 MHz), but Maingear also bested Digital Storm’s memory clock increase of 50 MHz by 100 MHz (in other words, the Vybe video memory is boosted by 150 MHz). The Velox also sports faster memory (DDR4-3000) at a higher capacity (32GB), but the primary storage between the two dueling systems is identical (a 512GB Samsung 960 Pro NVMe SSD). The Velox and Vybe are destined to duke it out for GTX 1080 SLI supremacy throughout our benchmark suite.

We also included metrics from our recent review of the AVADirect Avatar, which sports the same CPU (a Core i7-7700K) and a single GTX 1080 Ti under the hood. Although the Avatar's CPU isn’t clocked as high as the SLI-enabled systems in the field (4.7 GHz), the Founder’s Edition GTX 1080 Ti graphics card should give the GTX 1080-SLI-equipped systems a run for their money in games and workloads where SLI scaling is weak (or non-existent), even at its stock clock speeds. The Avatar’s primary storage (a 250GB Samsung 960 EVO NVMe SSD) should also show the contrasting performance between Samsung’s EVO and Pro series SSDs.

Finally, we loaded our Z270 test rig up with another EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 graphics card and ran our benchmark suite with SLI enabled (where applicable), and the stock-clocked CPU and GPUs should show us exactly how much performance Maingear’s overclocking can provide. The full specifications of our test rig are listed below:

Comparison Products

Test System Configuration

3DMark

The Maingear Vybe vies for 3DMark dominance against the Digital Storm Velox, with the GTX 1080 SLI-equipped gaming rigs coming within 200 points of each other’s overall score in all the varying Fire Strike benchmarks. The Vybe manages to upend the Velox in the Physics portion of the tests by a small margin, primarily due to a slight lead in CPU frequency (we observed the Velox and Vybe achieving CPU frequencies of 4999 MHz and 5010 MHz, respectively). This is likely because of slight variances in each systems platform (motherboard), which can affect base clock stability and where a 5.0 GHz setting will actually sit comfortably.

This slight lead in CPU horsepower nets the Vybe wins in the Combined portions of Fire Strike and Fire Strike Extreme, but when GPU horsepower becomes more important at 4K (Fire Strike Ultra), the Velox’s slightly higher GPU clock pushes its Combined score above the Vybe. Switching to DX12 with Time Spy flips the script: the Vybe edges out a win against the Velox in the Graphics test, but falls slightly behind in the CPU test.

Cinebench R15

Cinebench R15 puts the spotlight on the processor, and the slight advantage we saw in the Physics portion of the Fire Strike benchmarks is reaffirmed here. The Vybe achieves slightly higher CPU rendering scores (single and multi-threaded) against the Velox. However, the OpenGL test favors Digital Storm’s sample, which leads the Vybe by 3.38 FPS.

CompuBench

Because CompuBench doesn’t test multi-GPU configurations, the Vybe (and its similarly equipped comparisons) falls behind the AVADirect Avatar’s GTX 1080 Ti. It also trails the Velox’s slightly higher-clocked GPU by roughly 5 FPS in the Video Processing test and by just about 5 MH/s in the Bitcoin mining test. Clock speeds pay dividends in CompuBench, but real-world applications (using both GPUs) would put the likes of the Vybe and Velox (and even our test rig, in this configuration) ahead of the Avatar and its single GPU if mining is the goal.

Storage Test

The Maingear Vybe’s 512GB Samsung 960 Pro NVMe SSD is exceptionally fast, reaching sequential read and write speeds closer to its advertised maximum than its competition (with identical or near-identical SSDs). Its 4K random read and write performance is also at the top of the class, and we suspect that better thermals (possibly aided by the motherboard’s M.2 Shield) played a role in the Vybe’s landslide sequential performance victory.

Sandra Memory Bandwidth

The Maingear Vybe’s 16GB (2 x 8GB) kit of Kingston HyperX DDR4-2666 hits its marks in the Sandra Memory Bandwidth tests, outperforming the Avatar’s similar (and identically branded) 16GB kit of DDR4-2400. When we reviewed the Velox, we weren’t including the Sandra memory bandwidth tests in our suite, so we don’t have any data for it in this particular benchmark. However, we’d predict it would be a win in at least the single-threaded test; the Velox had a 32GB (4 x 8GB) kit of DDR4-3000. The Maingear Vybe does attain an exceptionally high total memory bandwidth in the multi-threaded portion of the test, thanks to its tight CAS latency of 15-17-17-35.

PCMark 8

The Vybe finishes the productivity portion of our benchmark suite strong, achieving top scores against the comparison systems in the PCMark 8 application tests. Maingear’s significant storage performance advantage carries it to a sizeable lead (over 300 points) in the Adobe Creative application benchmark, but the Vybe and Velox are neck-and-neck in the Microsoft Office test, separated by only 14 points.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Gaming Benchmarks

Alien: Isolation

The Maingear Vybe manages to upend the Velox in Alien: Isolation at 1920 x 1080, where the average framerate is limited by CPU performance. The same slight (nearly negligible) performance lead we saw in the 3DMark Fire Strike Physics tests carries the Vybe to the narrow 1080p win, but once the graphics start to play a larger role at higher resolutions, we see the Digital Storm system outperform the Vybe by a small fraction, thanks to its higher GPU overclock.

Ashes of the Singularity

The Vybe scores a surprise win in the DX12 version of the Ashes of the Singularity tests, besting its similarly equipped competition by a few FPS at all tested resolutions. The CPU-intensive benchmark puts a spotlight on the same performance advantage we saw in the 3DMark Fire Strike and Alien: Isolation tests, where the Vybe comes out on top with its ever-so-slightly higher CPU clock rate.

Bioshock Infinite

All of the SLI configurations in the field experienced high frame time variances in the Bioshock Infinite benchmarks, evidenced by the similarly low minimum framerate shared by the Vybe, Velox, and Z270 test rig at all tested resolutions. The Avatar trails behind the pack in average framerate with its single GTX 1080 Ti, but it nets much better minimum framerates than the dual-GPU setups. The Vybe can’t keep up with the Velox’s higher-clocked GPU, but by the time you turn the resolution up to 4K, the performance difference is negligible, and none of the tested SLI systems have issues keeping average framerate in the triple digits at 3840 x 2160.

DiRT Rally

The Maingear Vybe falls in where you’d expect it to amongst the other dual-GPU PCs in the field, besting our Z270 test rig (at stock clock speeds) and falling slightly behind the Velox and its higher-clocked GPU. However, SLI scaling is not as advantageous in DiRT Rally as it has been in other games, and the Avatar pulls out the win in this particular title when you turn up the resolution. A single GTX 1080 Ti Founder’s edition narrowly bests our GTX 1080 SLI test rig and comes within a .02 FPS average of the Vybe at 2560 x 1440. At 4K, the Avatar steals the win from the Velox by a few FPS.

Grand Theft Auto V

GTAV gives us more predictable results, with the Maingear Vybe regaining its second-place position and the Avatar sinking back down the stack. The Vybe crushes the most demanding settings the game has to offer at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440, but at 4K, all of the systems in the field dip below 60 FPS. However, the GTX 1080 SLI systems still see a sizable lead in average framerates over the Avatar’s GTX 1080 Ti at 3840 x 2160, with all three dual-GPU PCs floating around a comfortable 45 FPS.

GRID Autosport

The Maingear Vybe clings to its second-place finish in the GRID Autosport benchmarks, lagging behind the Digital Storm Velox by a small, negligible margin. None of the PCs in the field have any issue averaging above 115 FPS at 3840 x 2160, and GRID doesn’t push the graphics workload as heavily as other games in our suite. The Avatar’s win over our stock-clocked Z270 test system also suggests that performance is most correlated with CPU clock rates than GPU performance in this particular game.

Hitman

When we first benchmarked Hitman using DX12 and multiple GPUs (when we reviewed the Velox), we encountered some stability issues, so we resorted to testing the rig with multi-graphics support disabled. Although subsequent driver updates and game patches have alleviated much of these issues, we wanted to keep our data sets for this round of desktop reviews comparable, so we tested the Maingear Vybe in the same manner.

As such, the AVADirect Avatar handily beats the GTX 1080-equipped systems with its GTX 1080 Ti. The SLI rigs line up in the usual arrangement, with the Vybe netting better average framerates than our Z270 test bench and sitting hot on the heels of the Velox.

Metro: Last Light Redux

The GPU-intensive and SLI-accommodating Metro: Last Light Redux benchmark returns us to the natural order of things, with the Maingear Vybe trailing the first-place Velox in average framerates by a narrow margin at all tested resolutions. The Avatar also returns the bottom of the chart by a considerable margin. SMAA plays a role in the Vybe’s (and the other systems’) less-than-savory average framerate at 3840 x 2160, but you can dial back a few details or turn off the AA to push it well above 60 FPS.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

We recently went back to using DX11 in the Rise of the Tomb Raider benchmarks, a change we made after our review of the Digital Storm Velox. To keep data sets comparable, we included a DX11 and DX12 chart, comparing the applicable systems in each version of the test.

The Maingear Vybe predictably outperforms our Z270 GTX 1080 SLI test bench and the Avatar using DX11, taking a first-place win in the absence of the Digital Storm Velox. Putting the two custom-shop SLI rigs head to head in the DX12 version of the test puts things in perspective, with the Velox edging out the Vybe by less than 1.5 FPS at all tested resolutions.

The Division

Similar to Hitman, multi-GPU DX12 support in The Division was shoddy when we first tested the Velox, so we resorted to testing the game with a single GPU enabled. This puts the Avatar and its GTX 1080 Ti in the lead against the GTX 1080 SLI-equipped systems, which fall into line in their usual formation (with the Velox leading the Vybe by a small margin).

Thief

As an older game, Thief sees significant performance gains with higher clock rates, with the Maingear Vybe and Velox pushing far past our Z270 test rig and the Avatar. Although the Vybe again trails the Velox in average framerates by 5-6 FPS at all tested resolutions, it has no issues averaging above 90 FPS at 3840 x 2160.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Price Analysis & Conclusion

The Maingear Vybe offers top-tier 4K gaming performance with an Intel Core i7-7700K on a Z270 motherboard overclocked to 5.0 GHz with a 240mm liquid CPU cooler and two Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 graphics cards in SLI. It also sports moderate productivity chops with its 512GB Samsung 960 Pro M.2 NVMe SSD and a speedy 16GB (2 x 8GB) kit of Kingston HyperX DDR4-2666. Coupled with a flashy remote-controlled RGB LED light strip, red individually braided power cables, and Maingear’s aesthetic case modifications, the Vybe houses a component set any gaming or PC enthusiast would be lucky to own.

Its primary competitor among the units we've tested is the Digital Storm Velox, which comes in at a significantly higher price than this configuration of the Maingear Vybe. Although the Velox narrowly bests the Vybe in the majority of our benchmark suite with its higher GPU core clockrate, the performance difference is nearly negligible, and the price-to-performance ratio winner in this showdown is easily Maingear.

When it comes to custom shop PCs, raw performance only tells half of the story. The Vybe offers plenty of aesthetic bonuses, many of which are also offered in the Velox (RGB LED lights, colored cables, modified cases). However, it lacks RGB LED fans and a custom paint job (which the Velox has), and Maingear’s automotive paint service starts at an additional $499. However, adding the paint would still put the Vybe’s price tag slightly lower than the Velox, which currently sits around $4,737 as it was configured for our review. Maingear stakes its reputation on its custom paint process (we know, we’ve seen it in action), but the premium cost can be a turn-off for performance and price-oriented shoppers, and this configuration of the Vybe (sans paint) would likely appeal to those consumers—although the price tag is still in the premium range.

The Vybe also lacks an internal optical drive (which we’re totally okay with, and it comes with an external DVD-RW drive) and has less memory and storage capacity compared to the Velox, which sports a slim DVD-RW drive, double the RAM (32GB DDR4-3000), and 1TB more HDD space. This also makes it harder to determine a true value winner between the two competing systems, as increased storage and memory capacities will only appeal to those who need it for specific workloads, and it certainly impacts final pricing. Without an identical sample from each shop, it's premature to declare a winner; we've got a few more systems on the test bench before we begin making some definitive recommendations.

Still, the Vybe provides a level of performance and quality that PC enthusiasts aim for in their own DIY systems, and Maingear sent us a beastly system any gamer would be proud to own. If you take away all the pricey hardware and extras, you’re still left with a custom-built and overclocked gaming PC with a sleek look, a lifetime warranty (with a free three-year comprehensive warranty as part of the back to school sale), and expert craftsmanship starting at $699, and for that, the Maingear Vybe is Tom’s Hardware Approved.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Introduction & Product Tour

The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition desktop gaming PC we're reviewing today uses an Intel Core i7-6700K. We do have several gaming PCs with more updated processors on the test bench, and we'll be finishing those reviews and publishing them during the rest of this summer, and we'll revisit some of these models in their newer forms later this year as well. However, this Lenovo-Razer love child is still available for purchase.

This PC is sitting at $1,700, as Lenovo looks to clear out its remaining stock of Intel Skylake processors at more attractive prices for those who may not want to build their own. Lenovo bundles the Y900 with Razer-branded gaming peripherals, including an RGB mechanical keyboard and gaming mouse.

Specifications

Exterior

The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition features a black steel and plastic chassis, with RGB LED accent lighting adorning the front panel (which resembles carbon graphite, but isn’t) and its bottom edges. An optical drive is hidden behind a hinged 5.25” bay cover, which can be opened by pressing the button at the bottom right corner of the top slot.

The top panel sports fins that direct ambient heat up and away from the case, but there isn’t a fan under them to aid that effort. The top panel is also where the power button resides, with the front panel I/O nearby on the top edge of the case where the front and top meet. Four USB 3.0 ports, an SD card reader, and 3.5mm headphone and microphone jacks give you plenty of connectivity in a convenient spot.

The back of the chassis features the rear motherboard I/O panel, which includes four USB 3.0 ports, two USB 2.0 ports, and a PS/2 combo port (for those old-school keyboard enthusiasts). A single gigabit Ethernet port (powered by a Qualcomm Killer E2400) can get you online if your router is nearby. The motherboard also has DVI-D, HDMI 1.4, and D-Sub ports for display output. However, these interfaces have been capped off with a plastic cover, because the primary output is the dedicated GPU, with its three DisplayPort 1.3 ports in addition to an HDMI 2.0 and DVI-D port.

The front panel can also be removed by pulling on the bottom left side of the panel, and it swings open like a door hinged on the right side. This exposes the front fan dust filter in addition to the optical drive, if you ever need to replace it or add another. The underside of the case features a removable dust filter for the power supply air intake, which easily slides in and out so you can keep it clean.

To open the case, the Y900 features a clever locking mechanism for the windowed (left) side panel. On the back of the chassis, just above the rear output fan, there is a locking switch. Pressing it to the left unlocks the side panel from the case. Pushing down on the back end of the top panel (which is actually a button) will pop the panel out, with an inner ledge of it acting as a hinge along the bottom edge of the case (left to right). This is different from traditional cases, which are usually seated this way along the front of the case (from top to bottom).

Interior

Under the hood, we’re greeted with a familiar system layout, with an interior that is more in line with a DIY case than a big-box brand chassis. An Intel Core i7-6700K sits atop a custom Lenovo ATX motherboard with an Intel Z170 chipset, and it’s cooled by a black aluminum heatsink with a 120mm fan. Airflow should be adequate with two 120mm front intake fans, a 120mm rear exhaust fan, and the aforementioned CPU heatsink fan. Oddly, the rear fan has LED lights, but it’s the only one of the four that does.

A single 16GB stick of DDR4-2133 resides in the memory slot furthest to the right of the CPU. We’re somewhat disappointed by the single RAM module, which can hamper performance in memory-intensive workloads. The DVD-ROM and its SATA power and data plugs are visible just to the right of the memory, and it’s attached to the case with a convenient push-button locking mechanism for easy removal.

An Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition graphics card is seated in the primary PCIe x16 slot, portending gaming greatness. The rear PCIe plates (and GPU) are held down by a special plastic locking mechanism, which makes adding or removing PCIe cards easier. The case also features a GPU bracket, which is attached to the front end (blower side) of the graphics card to give it added support and prevent GPU droop. It is locked in place by a sliding tab; pushing down on it will release the GPU from the case.

A 256GB Samsung PM951 NVMe SSD is installed in the motherboard’s PCIe 3.0 x4 M.2 slot, located below the GPU. This should provide excellent sequential read and 4K IOPs performance. Directly below that, the Qualcomm Killer Wireless AC 1535 module is installed in another M.2 interface. The 1TB 7200 RPM Seagate HDD is mounted in a removable 3.5” drive bay at the bottom right of the case (with an empty 3.5" tray for another drive, if you want to add one down the line), and the total storage capacity of the system is quite standard for the average consumer. However, there is also an unused 2.5" bay above the high-capacity storage, and it's nice that Lenovo gives you the ability to build up if the stock capacity doesn't suit your needs.

An unbranded 650W 80 Plus Bronze certified power supply is installed in the bottom rear of the case, with its braided cables fed to the backside (right side) of the case interior. The RGB LED controller is mounted at the bottom of the chassis, between the PSU and 3.5” drive bay, and it uses a USB 3.0 front panel plug to connect to the motherboard.

The cable management isn’t the neatest in the world, with the PCIe power cables attached to the GPU haphazardly bundled together near the 5.25” drive bay. However, this isn’t a deal-breaker, as the windowed side panel reveals little more than the glow of the graphics card. Removing the right-side panel reveals an organized mess of cables. Metal clips built right into the case hold the cables down, with a large plastic locking clip for the main batch of cables. This is a nice touch, but we’d imagine replacing the power supply or a fan wouldn’t be a fun foray.

Software & Accessories

A definite downside to a big-brand gaming PC is the amount of extra software (often called bloatware) that comes with the product. The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 is no different in this sense, coming pre-loaded with CyberLink Power2Go, PowerDVD, DAI, and a trial of Microsoft Office. However, the company also included an App Explorer, which suggests available software from Lenovo's partners, but doesn't automatically install it. There are also decidedly useful applications, including Lenovo Nerve Center, which allows you to turn on the automatic CPU overclock and monitor temperatures, and Lenovo Rescue System, which could be a lifesaver in the event of a critical system failure such as a corrupted OS or virus infection.

A Razer co-branded gaming PC wouldn’t be complete without company-branded peripherals and software. The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition comes with a Razer Blackwidow Chroma mechanical keyboard and a Mamba Tournament Edition gaming mouse. To support these devices, Razer software utilities including Comms, Cortex, Surround, and Synapse are all pre-loaded.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Synthetic & Productivity Benchmarks

We put the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition up against similarly configured competition, including the Acer Predator G1 and the Digital Storm Vanquish 5 (a 2016 Tom’s Hardware 'Approved' award winner). Although the Predator features a less powerful Core i7-6700, it’s priced similarly (and also includes a keyboard and mouse) to the Lenovo and features the same Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition graphics card. The Digital Storm is nearly identical, with a Core i7-6700K overclocked to 4.4GHz and an Asus GeForce GTX 1080 Turbo graphics card, which sports the same clock rates as a Nvidia Founder’s Edition GPU.

We included results from our Z170 test bench with its Intel Core i7-6700K, 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4-2133, and an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition graphics card under the hood to see if the Lenovo exceeded our baseline (stock settings) test rig. We also added our recent Tom’s Hardware Approved Award winner, the Gigabyte Gaming GT, to see how the attractively priced GTX 1070-equipped SFF gaming rig holds up against Lenovo’s costlier Razer-co-branded option.

The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition comes with Nerve Center, a utility that lets you enable a preset overclock setting that pushes the Core i7-6700K up to 4.5 GHz. This is a moderate boost in clock rate, and it's higher than the Vanquish 5’s overclock of 4.4 GHz.

The 16GB module of DDR4-2133 has a CAS latency of 15-15-15-36, and it runs in single-channel mode. The Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition graphics card runs at its reference base and boost clock frequencies of 1607 MHz and 1733 MHz, respectively.

Test System Configuration

3DMark

The 3DMark Fire Strike results show that the Lenovo Y900 Razer Edition has a slightly lower graphics score than that of the other GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition-equipped gaming PCs (the Predator G1 and our reference rig). The Lenovo only beats the Acer’s Physics scores in Fire Strike (all of them) thanks to a higher-clocked CPU, but we also noticed that the processor wasn’t reaching its full overclocked 4.5 GHz the Nerve Center overclocking software suggested it could hit during the processor-focused portion of the test. Instead, it settled for a steady 4.3 GHz as the CPU load increased (this occurred throughout every version of Fire Strike), and it trails the Digital Storm Vanquish 5 (which has a steady 4.4 GHz overclock) with its Physics Score.

Switching to Time Spy and its DX12 API, the Y900’s CPU score falls below that of even the Predator G1, but the graphics score improves to keep pace with the other GTX 1080s (although it is still slightly lower).

It appears something is holding back the potential of the CPU and GPU, even thought our tests don't show any indication of thermal throttling. Temperatures reached as high as 75°C and 78°C for the CPU and GPU, respectively, which is within each component’s thermal limit, and the CPU clocked down to 4.3 GHz well before it approached that peak (it happened as soon as the workload switched to the CPU-bound test phases).

We suspect that the custom Lenovo Z170 motherboard’s power phases, or a performance penalty from Nerve Center (which we observed using 2-5% of the CPU resources even at extended idle periods) could be to blame for this phenomenon. With software-controlled overclocking, especially something as simple as a one-button solution, a varying degree of limitations and operation parameters could potentially lower the expected performance of a component, especially if it’s power-related.

Cinebench R15

Moving to a benchmark strictly for the CPU, the Lenovo Y900 Razer Edition performs admirably, besting our reference rig’s Core i7-6700K at stock clocks but falling short of the Digital Storm Vanquish 5’s 4.4 GHz overclock. Once again, the processor mostly stayed at 4.3 GHz for these tests (instead of Nerve Center’s maximum of 4.5 GHz, which it would occasionally hit), so the placement for single and multi-threaded results isn’t surprising.

However, the OpenGL tests show the IdeaCentre Y900 falling below even the Gigabyte Gaming GT (with a GTX 1070), again indicating that something isn’t quite right about the graphics setup. However, our test rig also falls below the Gigabyte PC in the OpenGL shading test, and it could be more indicative of the Gaming GT’s factory overclocked graphics card than a major shortcoming of either of the other two systems.

CompuBench

The results of the Compubench tests also portend possible issues with the Lenovo Y900’s platform, which scores below our test rig (at stock CPU and GPU settings) in both the Video Processing and Bitcoin portions of the benchmark. This definitely points to an issue with the hardware not achieving its full potential.

Storage Test

The Lenovo’s 256GB Samsung PM951 M.2 NVMe SSD predictably takes the lead against the other systems (which sport SATA-based SSDs) with impressively high 4K read and write IOPs and 128K sequential read speeds. However, the sequential write performance of the drive is not ideal (it’s below even the SATA-based SSDs). Then again, it’s not supposed to be high to begin with. Although NVMe SSDs have the potential for extremely high data transfer speeds, Samsung rates the PM951 for just up to 1,000 MB/s for sequential reads and 280 MB/s for sequential write performance, so the Lenovo’s primary storage is actually performing above par for its specifications.

Sandra Memory Bandwidth

We recently added Sandra’s Memory Bandwidth benchmark to our suite, and with our Z170 test bed no longer available (it was a personal system I recently parted with) we don’t have any baseline data to compare it to. However, we did recently include the test results in our Gigabyte Gaming GT review, and the memory is similar enough (same total capacity, speed) to see how the Lenovo’s single-channel configuration stands up against a dual-channel setup. The Gaming GT may feature SODIMM memory, but that shouldn’t affect total peak memory bandwidth in any severe way with the CAS latency (15-15-15-36) and frequency (2,133 MHz) being the same.

As predicted, the 16GB single-channel module of DDR4-2133 in the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition desktop operates at a little over half of the peak total memory bandwidth of the dual-channel Gigabyte Gaming GT. For gaming, this usually isn’t a factor, but memory-intensive workloads and applications will see a significant difference in performance compared to a dual-channel setup.

PCMark 8

Speaking of memory performance, the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition falls behind even our Z170 test rig in the PCMark 8 application benchmarks, and the single-channel memory is to blame. Usually, a CPU overclock and speedy storage see gains in these test results (the Lenovo still bested Acer’s Predator G1, which has a slower processor and SATA-based SSD), but the memory also plays a crucial role in these real-world application tests. Because of this (and despite it), the Lenovo is unable to upend any of the Core i7-6700K- equipped systems.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Gaming Benchmarks

Alien: Isolation

Switching to purely gaming workloads, the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition starts our round of benchmarks off with impressive performance against the competition, averaging the highest framerates at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160. However, 1920 x 1080 is another story, where the Y900 falls to third place. However, these framerates are nothing to be ashamed of; the system averages just over 80 FPS with the eye candy turned all the way up at 4K. And all of these scores are relatively close.

Ashes of the Singularity

Once again, the Lenovo seems to struggle behind the other GTX 1080-equipped systems at 1080p, falling behind even the Acer Predator G1 (and its less-powerful processor). However, as the resolution gets higher (and the GPU has to work more), the Lenovo pulls ahead of the pack, trailing only the Vanquish 5 at 2560 x 1440 and leading the pack at 4K. It seems as if the platform is struggling with power delivery and having trouble deciding when to initiate CPU and GPU boost states.

The temperatures are still not to blame for this strange behavior (we’ve barely hit 80°C in our game tests so far), and GPU-Z has consistently shown Pwr and VRel warnings while testing (particularly at 1080p), which indicates issues with power delivery. The GPU still enters the boost state, but it’s not for long periods of time, and it usually occurs coinciding with the aforementioned GPU-Z warnings. We also observed Nerve Center taking up to 5% of the CPU resources, but at this point, we’re suspecting it has less to do with software and everything to do with the platform’s power phase design.

Bioshock Infinite

The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Ediiton seems to offer more stable performance in Bioshock Infinite, sliding into the third-place position at all tested resolutions behind our GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition-equipped test rig and above Acer’s Predator G1. Even at 4K, the Y900 easily averages above 60 FPS, but the minimum framerate is indicative of high frame time variances, which could be an issue caused by sub-par power delivery. However, at 2560 x 1440, the Lenovo scores the best minimum framerate (we reran the tests to be sure). The Y900 Razer Edition’s performance thus far has left us scratching our heads.

DiRT Rally

DiRT Rally isn’t particularly taxing at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440, with all of the PCs achieving excellent framerates (even the GTX1070-equipped Gigabyte Gaming GT nets just under 60FPS) when the settings are cranked to the maximum. However, at 4K, the bottleneck quickly shifts and the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition takes its proper place in the lineup, beating out our test bed (at stock CPU settings) with its modest overclock but falling short of the Digital Storm Vanquish 5 (which has a slightly higher overclock) by an extremely small margin.

Grand Theft Auto V

The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition falls into a familiar place in GTAV performance, falling behind the Acer Predator G1 at 1920 x 1080. However, the Lenovo pulls ahead of the G1 at 2560 x 1440 and 4K (another familiar occurrence), but it still comes up short against our test bed, albeit by an extremely small margin. The GPU struggled with whether or not it should go into a boosted state at lower resolutions, with the clock rates mostly riding the base frequency of 1607 MHz, despite no indication of thermal throttling.

GRID Autosport

The GRID Autosport results sees the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition jumping position at every tested resolution. At 1080p, it falls behind even the Gigabyte Gaming GT (with a GTX 1070), but it still pushes enough performance to beat out the Acer Predator G1. However, moving up to 2560 x 1440 puts the Lenovo in dead last. The 3840 x 2160 results are even more perplexing, with the Lenovo taking a position below our GTX 1080 Founder’s Edition test bed and above the Acer Predator G1.

We theorize that new driver updates could have affected performance in GRID Autosport from the time we tested our reference rig and the Digital Storm Vanquish 5. We also see the CPU playing a role in these strange results, as the game couldn’t hold a steady clock rate throughout the benchmark (we observed short-lived peaks of 4.4 GHz, with the processor mostly staying around 4.3 GHz. Even more bewildering, there was no evidence of thermal throttling.

Hitman

The Hitman results in DX12 also tell a similar story, with the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition placing dead last among its GTX 1080-equipped brethren at 1920 x 1080 and 2650 x 1440. However, cranking the resolution up to 3840 x 2160 sees the Lenovo shoot to the top of the chart, averaging almost 5 FPS more than the Digital Storm Vanquish 5, despite having the worst minimum framerate in the group.

Metro: Last Light Redux

The Metro: Last Light Redux benchmark results show the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition at the bottom of the GTX 1080 barrel at 1080p and 1440p, beating only the GTX 1070-equipped Gigabyte Gaming GT. Again, we observed the GPU failing to reach its boost frequency, mostly settling at its base clock of 1607 MHz. Cranking the resolution up to 3840 x 2160 gives it a leg up over the Acer Predator G1, but it still falls precariously short of our reference PC and the Vanquish 5, which sport GPUs with the exact same clock rate. However, the Vanquish 5 and our test rig were likely not having any issues with the GPU reaching its boosted clock frequency.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

In another surprising turnout, the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition sits at the top of the heap in the Rise of the Tomb Raider benchmark, besting even the Digital Storm Vanquish 5 at all tested resolutions. We noticed the Lenovo maintained rock-solid CPU and GPU clock rates in this particular game, and we’re now more than convinced that the erratic nature of the Y900 Razer Edition’s performance lies in its Lenovo-crafted power phase design, which seemingly has a mind of its own, depending on the game.

The Division

The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition seems to have finally found its legs, and similar to the ROTR results, it bests the Digital Storm Vanquish 5 at all tested resolutions. However, another anomaly occurs in these results: our test bed manages to push ahead of both the Lenovo and Digital Storm offerings at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160, despite the two machines having a higher CPU clock rate. This could be due to driver differences at time of testing. Either way, the Y900 Razer Edition is in the proper performance ballpark in The Division.

Thief

We may have spoken too soon about the Lenovo finding its groove; the IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition finishes our benchmark suite at the bottom of the Thief charts at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440, getting upended by even the Gaming GT and its GTX 1070. However, once the bottleneck shifts to the GPU at 3840 x 2160, we see the Lenovo pull ahead of the Gaming GT, and it take its place at the bottom of the pile of GTX 1080-equipped PCs. Once again, we observed erratic CPU and GPU clock rates in this game (with zero evidence of thermal throttling).

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Price Analysis & Conclusion

The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition appears to give gamers everything they could want in a powerful PC with an attractive and stylish chassis (adorned with RGB LED lighting), Razer-branded RGB peripherals, and the ability to overclock the powerful Core i7 CPU with the push of one button. However, our testing revealed a mixed bag of performance, with all signs pointing to a CPU and GPU that don’t have the proper power delivery to maintain their respective boosted frequencies, resulting in sub-par performance against even our stock-clocked Z170 reference rig in many of the gaming benchmarks.

The cause of this appears to be a combination of Lenovo’s Nerve Center overclocking software overhead (which consumed up to 5% of the CPU’s resources, even at idle) and the platform’s power phase design (CPU and GPU clock rates weren’t consistent). The Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition had occasional moments in the sun (see the Rise of the Tomb Raider and storage test results) where it seemed to be performing as intended, but its inconsistency left us disappointed.

The single 16GB module of DDR4-2133 memory has a lower peak memory bandwidth than a dual-channel kit, and we saw lower performance in memory-intensive workloads because of it. However, the 256GB Samsung PM951 M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD actually performs above par for the device’s specifications, with impressive sequential read and 4K random read and write IOPs performance.

At its original price of $2,500, the Lenovo IdeaCentre Y900 Razer Edition wouldn’t even be a consideration for most enthusiasts, but at a reduced cost of $1,700, it wouldn’t be the worst starting point for those looking for a powerful and flashy gaming PC with Razer-branded peripherals included. The only downside is that we had to wait until Skylake processors were being cleared out for it to reach that price.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Introduction And Product Tour

With Intel’s Kaby Lake processors finally hitting the market, Digital Storm wanted to give us a look at one of its new Z270 gaming PCs. The Digital Storm Velox is an Intel Core i7-7700K and Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080-equipped, custom painted powerhouse with RGB LED fans and lights, and it’s not for the faint of heart or the low in cash. At $4,737, the Velox is one of the most expensive desktops we’ve had in our lab, and we’re about to find out if the performance and posturing matches the price, or if it’s all just hype and flashy lights.

Specifications

Exterior

The Digital Storm Velox has been redesigned, with many noticeable improvements over the previous version of the chassis, which featured an acrylic windowed panel that also had an air intake above it. However, the new custom-designed, forged-steel full tower case’s right side is all window, giving you a clear view of the interior hardware with its RGB LED lighting strip and case fans. The left side panel sports an air intake that lines up with the underside of the motherboard ILM, and the bottom of the case is elevated with a sleek black sub frame, allowing air to flow under the chassis. Furthermore, we were shocked at the system’s weight distribution; it was well balanced and made moving the device noticeably easier than some of our other recently reviewed machines, despite not having any handles and the additional GPU.

As with all right-sided window cases, the components are upside down compared to traditional (and more prevalent) cases with the components viewed from the left side. That alone makes the Velox unique, and its Apollo White custom paint job (for an added cost of $150) pushes the aesthetic even further with a sleek two-tone look. The glossy (yet not shining) finish is indicative of expert craftsmanship and care, and it stands out in a sea of common black left-sided cases.

The previous version of the Velox had a rather large front-panel I/O, but the new chassis reduced it to two USB 3.0 ports, an SD card reader, audio in/out jacks, and a USB 3.1 (Gen 1) Type-C port capable of 5 Gb/s data rates. What’s more, the slots are all hidden behind the white-painted panel, blending seamlessly into the case. The only front-panel device that stands out against the white (besides the Digital Storm emblem) is the slim-tray DVD-RW drive, but even the black optical drive looks good in the two-toned case.

The rear panel is all black, except for the I/O and GPU ports. The motherboard features four USB 3.0 ports and four USB 2.0 ports, in addition to two USB 3.1 ports (a Type-C and Type-A), both capable of data transfer speeds up to 10 Gb/s. Onboard video output options from the motherboard are limited to an HDMI 1.4 and DisplayPort 1.2 interface, but who needs those when you have two graphics cards under the hood? The GPUs each sport an HDMI 2.0 and DVI-D port, as well as three DisplayPort 1.2 interfaces, and needless to say you’ve got plenty of options for connecting multiple displays.

The side panels are thin (think poster board), light (again, poster board), and easy to remove, and they can be likened to a pair of breakaway pants (don’t inquire as to how I know that) – they come off with a simple upward tug. There are no hinges, screws, edges, or rails to line up. The case uses a unique locking mechanism to fasten the panels tight, with the main body sporting receptacles for the panels’ posts, which lock into place with a gentle tap or a little pressure once they are lined up.

Interior

Once inside, we’re greeted with an intimidating, yet easily accessible set of components that would make most enthusiasts squee tears of joy. A freshly minted Intel Core i7-7700K is overclocked to an impressive 5.0GHz using a 100MHz base clock and an all-core multiplier of 50. Curiously, most every other BIOS setting is on Auto, with the exception of the XMP memory profile and an adaptive voltage setting for the CPU that gets the chip up to speed with 1.36V of power.

We were skeptical about the stability of the company’s Stage 3 ($99) overclocking service (particularly because of the simplicity of the BIOS settings), but the processor remained rock solid during our stress tests (Prime 95 for several hours), with only occasional jumps in voltage (isolated and short spikes up to 1.39V) to stabilize the system. We’re accustomed to seeing vendors achieve extreme overclocks using static voltages, but Digital Storm’s use of the motherboard’s built-in features to attain stable clock frequencies and voltage regulation speaks to the company’s acumen with the hardware it offers.

The CPU is seated on an Asus Maximus IX Hero Z270 motherboard, a feature-rich ROG-branded offering with dual M.2 PCIe x4 slots, six SATA 6Gbps ports, and several gamer-centric technologies. The audio jacks (front and rear panels) are fed with the company’s SupremeFX S1220 codec, and customizable LED lighting adorns the PCH and rear I/O covers.

The motherboard’s two PCIe 3.0 x16 slots from the CPU sport metal-reinforced connectors to accommodate heavy graphics cards, and that’s probably a worthwhile feature for the Velox’s GPU setup, which consists of two EVGA Geforce GTX 1080 8GB GDDR5X graphics cards in SLI (complete with an LED-lit EVGA high-bandwidth bridge). The cards feature reference (Founder’s Edition) clock rates with EVGA’s ACX 3.0 cooling, but Digital Storm included its Graphics Boost service (for $45), which purportedly overclocks the GPU to its maximum stable clock rate. For this particular GPU setup, that limit seems to be an additional 150Mhz on the core clock (giving the GPUs a 1,757MHz base clock, 1,883 boost) and 50MHz on the memory clock, with the power and temperature limits at maximum.

A 512GB Samsung 960 Pro M.2 NVMe SSD is hidden underneath the powerful graphics cards, and a 3TB 7,200 RPM Toshiba HDD gives you plenty of total storage space for just about anything a gamer could throw at it. The memory DIMM slots are all occupied with a 32GB (4 x 8GB) kit of Digital Storm’s DDR4-3000Mhz (ADATA modules) with CAS timings of 16-16-16-36, which offers speed and capacity above par for the average user.

We didn’t expect too much from the left side of the case when we removed the panel, but we were delighted to not only see neat and cleanly-run cables and more places to mount storage drives, but also a 120mm input fan for the underside of the motherboard’s ILM and two of the Thermaltake Riing controller hubs, which power a total of six Riing RGB LED case fans.

Three of the Riing RGB LED fans are 140mm and mounted behind the front panel (running vertically) as intakes; two 120mm Riing fans are positioned at the top of the case, with another towards the bottom, above the motherboard’s rear I/O panel. A Corsair H115i 280mm closed loop CPU cooler is mounted behind the front panel fans, and it sports two Corsair-branded 140mm fans on the inner side of the radiator, pulling the air into the case. An RGB LED light strip lines the bottom and left edges of the case, and it comes standard with the Velox (no additional charge).

The rig is powered by an 80+ Gold certified EVGA Supernova 850 G2, which features a single 12V rail with 70.8A of juice. The fully modular PSU makes it easy for Digital Storm to weave the cables cleanly throughout the chassis and connect to the individually-braided white cables attached to the CPU, ATX power, and GPU inputs. This aesthetic extra contributes to $69 of the total bill, but it adds to the two-tone theme that this Velox review sample embraces. The remaining modular PSU (and SATA) cables are also expertly tucked away.

Software And Accessories

Digital Storm didn’t load the Velox with what one could consider “bloatware,” but it did install Corsair Link to control and monitor the CPU cooler, in addition to MSI Afterburner to do the same for the graphics cards, which the company overclocked past the factory settings (for an additional $45).

We didn’t see these programs loaded in the Vanquish 5 Digital Storm recently sent us for review, but then again, that particular sample didn’t have a fancy i-series Corsair water cooler or GPU overclocking services performed on it, and it seems Digital Storm will ship your system with only the software it needs to achieve its desired performance threshold.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Synthetic And Productivity Benchmarks

The Digital Storm Velox is unlike any of our other recently reviewed desktop systems, with a brand-new Intel Core i7-7700K overclocked to 5.0GHz, a premium Z270 motherboard, a Samsung 960 Pro SSD and a manually overclocked GTX 1080 SLI configuration. Because the Velox looks to be the most powerful system we’ve tested in recent memory, we threw the most powerful of our recently tested gaming desktops at it to see if anything could hang tough with Digital Storm’s $4,737 monster.

The CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400 will show us what an entry-level (and still relevant) X99 platform with a six-core Intel Core i7-6800K processor, 16GB of quad-channel DDR4-3000, and a single factory-overclocked EVGA GTX 1080 can do against the Velox’s 7^th generation (Kaby Lake) CPU clocked to the limit and its manually-overclocked EVGA GPU setup. The Syber M will also provide an excellent contrast to the Velox in games or apps that favor CPU core count over clock rate.

The AVADirect Avatar will give us an idea of how the previous generation’s CPU and platform will hold up against the Velox’s newest components, with an Intel Core i7-6700K overclocked to 4.7GHz and 16GB of DDR4-2400 attached to an Asus Maximus XIII Gene (Z170) motherboard with a Founder’s Edition GTX 1080.

We weren’t able to assemble our Z270 test bench in time for this review (don’t worry, we have one coming), but we did include the data from our previous Z170 reference system with an Intel Core i7-6700K, 16GB of DDR4-2133, and a Founder’s Edition GTX 1080, all set to default speeds.

Comparison Products

Test System Configuration

3DMark

Not surprisingly, the Digital Storm Velox dominates the 3DMark benchmarks, yielding only to the CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400 in the Physics portion of the test due to the latter's increased CPU core count. However, the Velox scores over 1,000 points higher than the next quad-core Intel offering clocked at 4.7GHz (the Avatar) in the processor-intensive portion of the benchmarks. Graphics scores for the Velox are over double than the single-GPU GTX 1080 desktops in the field in the Fire Strike and Fire Strike Extreme tests. Digital Storm's beast also comes close to twice the performance of the other systems in Time Spy and Fire Strike Ultra tests, and the results are as expected, considering the overclocked dual-GPU setup.

Cinebench R15

The Digital Storm Velox crushes the Single CPU Rendering test in Cinebench R15, thanks entirely to the i7-7700K's beefy 5.0GHz overclock. However, the Syber M again surpasses the Velox in the multiple CPU Rendering benchmark, which favors core count over clock speed. However, Digital Storm's offering retakes the lead in the OpenGL Shading test, achieving 191.21 FPS and leaving the Z170 systems in the dust.

CompuBench

CompuBench performs a variety of workloads on the system, but we cherry-picked the Bitcoin and Video Processing results to get a snapshot of its CPU and GPU productivity performance. The Velox scores higher than the other systems in the field in the Video Processing portion of the test due to its CPU clock rate (5.0GHz), but because the Bitcoin test doesn't support multi-GPU setups, the CyberpowerPC Syber M again takes the lead with its factory-overclocked GPU and two more CPU cores.

Storage Test

The Velox's 512GB Samsung 960 Pro outclasses the competition's SATA-based SSDs, and even the Syber M's 512GB Intel 600p NVMe SSD. It doesn't achieve the high 4K random or 128k sequential performance threshold Samsung advertises, but to get the drive running anywhere near that fast you'd have to disable C-States and Intel SpeedStep to start. However, the performance of the Velox's primary storage significantly outpaces every other desktop we've reviewed so far.

PCMark 8

As expected, the Digital Storm Velox finishes the productivity portion of our benchmarks on top, besting both the overclocked AVADirect Avatar and six-core CPU-equipped CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400. The Creative Test performance of the Velox is helped by its dual GPU setup, in addition to the highly overclocked CPU, which improves the results in both the Creative and Office portions of the PCMark8 benchmark.

Gaming Benchmarks

Alien: Isolation

There's little doubt that the Velox's GTX 1080 SLI configuration will continue to place it above the single GPU systems in the field, and Alien: Isolation doesn't tax any of the desktops below an 80 FPS average, even at 3840 x 2160. However, it's interesting to note that at 1080p, the Velox averages a ridiculously high 333.12 FPS, and even at 4K resolution the Digital Storm beast averages 132.27 FPS.

Ashes of the Singularity

We had to dial back Digital Storm's overclock to get the Ashes of the Singularity benchmark to run correctly, not because it was unstable, but because Ashes didn't seem to want to complete the DX12 benchmark without crashing when MSI Afterburner was running (which is a requirement for the overclock to take effect). To be sure we even loaded default GPU clocks with Afterburner, but the error persisted despite our troubleshooting. Only after closing down the overclocking tool were we able to complete the test with multi-GPU support enabled (we made sure it wasn't that, too). We theorize this may only occur with the DX12 version of the test, but we were able to get consistent results from the Velox after shutting down the program.

Although the GPU overclock was disabled for this test, enabling multi-GPU support gave the Velox a sizable lead over the other systems with only one graphics card. Whereas all of the GTX 1080-equipped systems all fall into a narrow pocket of performance, the Velox sees gains of roughly 38% at 1080p and about 47% at 2560 x 1400 and 3840 x 2160 over the single-card competition in the Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks.

Bioshock Infinite

We reinitialized Afterburner for the remainder of the tests, bringing the GPUs up to Digital Storm's intended clock rate (+150MHz Core Clock, +50Mhz Memory Clock). However, for a benchmark like Bioshock Infinite, we really didn't have to. Even at 3840 x 2160, the Velox achieves an average framerate of 136.4 FPS. Oddly, it also scores the lowest minimum framerate at every tested resolution, but the stutter is consistently early in the benchmark and about where all the others make their minimum framerate mark.

DiRT Rally

DiRT Rally is a title that stresses the whole platform, and even the Digital Storm Velox is brought below a 60 FPS average at 4K resolution. However, it still leads the field in this benchmark at all tested resolutions, although not by a considerable amount at 3840 x 2160 (its 51.9 FPS average is only 11.56 FPS ahead of the next closest competitor, the Avatar). This is one game where the SLI scaling isn't as effective at higher resolutions.

Grand Theft Auto V

The Digital Storm Velox sees more moderate gains in Grand Theft Auto V. At 1920 x 1080, the SLI GTX 1080s net roughly a 38% gain in average FPS over the Avatar, which leads the systems with single GPUs with 72.65 FPS (the Velox crushes this with 100.94 FPS). However, the gains become more substantial at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160, with an average framerate increase of about 74% and 87%, respectively, over the Avatar. GTAV seems to like SLI at higher resolutions, but even the Velox simmers down to an average framerate of 46.47 FPS at 4K at the game's highest settings.

GRID Autosport

The massive power of dual EVGA GTX 1080 graphics cards in SLI is lost on the GRID Autosport benchmarks, with the Digital Storm Velox hitting a ceiling at around 153-to-155 FPS at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440. This isn't much better than the systems with only one GPU in them, and it's not until you hit 4K that you see a significant difference in performance between the Velox and its next closest competitor, the Avatar.

Hitman

The Hitman benchmark is another DirectX 12 test, and multi-GPU support was completely borked (we could not run the test with SLI enabled), so we turned off SLI and ran the benchmark with a single, manually overclocked GPU. This of course brings the beastly Digital Storm Velox down to comparable framerates against the other GTX 1080-equipped systems, but the Velox remains on top, barely, with its slightly higher GPU clock rate. The factory-overclocked EVGA GTX 1080 SC inside the Syber M is close behind, but the Founder's Edition-equipped systems (the Avatar and our reference rig) fall behind by a larger (yet negligible) margin in the GPU-intensive benchmark.

Metro: Last Light Redux

Metro: Last Light Redux is another GPU-stressing gaming benchmark that pushes even the Velox's SLI graphics configuration below 60 FPS at 4K on the highest settings. However, the SLI scaling of the dual GTX 1080s sees amazing returns in Metro, with an additional 78% average framerate performance at 1920 x 1080 over the second place Syber M and its single factory overclocked GTX 1080. Once you crank up the resolution, the performance gains from SLI reach roughly 94% and 101% (over the single card Syber M) at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160, respectively.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

We return to another DirectX 12 benchmark with multi-GPU support to see if scaling in SLI is any better, and this time around Rise of the Tomb Raider sees similar returns as Metro: Last Light Redux, with a roughly 92-to-104% increase in average framerate performance over the second place Syber M's single factory-overclocked GPU at all tested resolutions. 

The Division

The Division heavily favors GPU clock rate, and you would think the Velox is a shoe-in for top honors in this particular gaming test. However, we run the benchmark with DX12, and multi-GPU support goes out the window (and makes it crash, similar to our Hitman tests), putting the Velox in a single-GPU showdown against the competition in the field. Digital Storm's overclock proves potent, with the Velox taking the lead over the factory-overclocked GTX 1080 in the Syber M at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440. However, we're shocked with the first (and only) second place finish for the Velox at 4K, where the Syber M was just slightly more stable, beating out the Velox by 0.6 FPS.

Thief

The Digital Storm Velox finishes our test suite strong, with Thief bringing back SLI functionality and bringing the system back to its dominant glory over the single card gaming rigs. We can safely assert that two GPUs are better than one in most cases, and the aging Thief benchmark enjoys increasingly higher returns on the SLI configuration as you turn up the resolution. At 1920 x 1080, the Velox achieves a roughly 25% better average framerate over the second-place Syber M, but this increases to about 49% at 2560 x 1440, and 79% at 4K. 

Price Analysis And Conclusion

When Digital Storm sent us its Vanquish 5 for review, we were surprised how conservative the boutique custom shop could be with its moderate aesthetic and performance enhancements, in addition to the reasonable price tag. When the Velox arrived at our lab, it literally brought a storm of pure power as devastating as its MSRP, showcasing nearly every special treatment and upgrade that the company has to offer (less of custom open loop water coolers).

The Digital Storm Velox is simply the most powerful gaming PC we've had the pleasure of testing in recent memory, and it's no surprise considering its specs. An Intel Core i7-7700K is overclocked to an impressive 5.0GHz on an Asus Maximus IX Hero motherboard with 32GB (4 x 8GB) of DDR4-3000 and a pair of manually-overclocked EVGA GTX 1080 ACX 3.0 graphics cards in SLI. It also doesn't hurt that it's also one of the most aesthetically pleasing systems we've recently reviewed, with its custom Apollo White paint job and two-tone theme, RGB LED case fans and lighting strip, and a sweet RGB LED SLI bridge and motherboard. However, when you reach into your wallet for that $4,737, you may start to have shooting chest pains, or at least feel lightheaded.

It would be difficult to deny that the price makes this particular configuration of the Velox a pipe dream for most people, and we'll likely hear again our community express its displeasure at anything that isn't a link to a cart full of parts. However, Digital Storm has presented us with our first review sample that exceeds what novice-to-average DIY enthusiasts can do with its custom paint job, individually-braided ATX, CPU, and GPU power cables, and right-sided custom chassis. In addition, Digital Storm's beefy CPU and GPU overclock is remarkably stable, and we're not sure if even a seasoned PC builder could offer a better aesthetic value or performance threshold for much less. Sure, its possible, but we'd also offer that there's a certain value to a custom shop that can and will throw multiple aesthetic and performance-enhancing services into a unique gaming PC, especially for those who can't build or tweak it themselves.

Furthermore, just because the price is decidedly high doesn't mean we can't appreciate everything that went into the Digital Storm Velox. The chassis is both original and stylish, and the choice of hardware is strikingly similar to a system I would configure for myself (my personal gaming rig is just the previous-generation CPU, chipset, and GPUs, down to the brand). Being a DIY PC enthusiast, I can honestly say I couldn't pull off a better execution of cable management (I would say after over 100 PCs, I've become pretty good at it, too), and i certainly don't know how to/have time to paint a case myself, certainly not to to the quality Digital Storm provides. The company overclocked the CPU and GPU to levels I would personally feel comfortable with if I had built it myself, and the whole implementation of the Velox speaks to the company's expertise in the system building segment.

If you shave off the gratuitous extras, which consists of a $99 CPU and $45 GPU overclocking service, the custom paint job ($149), the RGB LED fans ($119), and the individually-braided white cables ($69), you still get a custom-designed chassis housing a new Kaby Lake i7-7700K, 32GB of RAM, a 512GB Samsung 960 Pro SSD, a 3TB HDD, and dual GTX 1080s in SLI for $4,256.

But then you're stripping away much of what's awe-inspiring about this particular sample. Besides, there's absolutely nothing about the way Digital Storm configured this gaming PC that was intended to save money. The company is staking its craftsmanship against other custom shop rigs that offer insanely customized and fine-tuned gaming systems that may interest a novice computer enthusiast, a hardcore PC gamer, or even a seasoned DIY veteran looking for a custom paint job and cabling in a dominant, overclocked, and SLI-equipped powerhouse. Until we see what others vendors have to offer at this price point, it would be difficult to justify the Velox over more affordable alternatives if you can't easily part with that much scratch.

The Digital Storm Velox certainly isn't a value buy; it's a selfish, luxury impulse (possibly mid-life crisis) purchase that could appeal to those with the cash and/or the crazy idea that no one can have a PC better than theirs. And if you buy a Digital Storm Velox, it's a good possibility that you could achieve that goal.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Digital Storm showcased an upcoming revision of its Bolt-branded custom-built small form factor (SFF) gaming PC, the Bolt X, at CES 2017. Although the company didn’t tell us when we’d be seeing the new device hit the market, we can safely assert that it will likely be after the launch of AMD’s Ryzen CPUs, with Digital Storm saying that it would support both Intel 7^th generation (Kaby Lake) and the upcoming AMD flagship processors.

The Digital Storm Bolt X’s redesigned chassis is sleeker than previous models with a repositioned front-panel I/O, and the company also ditched the optical drive. It still sports a tempered-glass side panel and options for the company’s HydroLux Hardline tubing and up to a 280mm radiator. Full hardware specifications of the Bolt X are currently unavailable, but Digital Storm said it would accommodate Intel and AMD mini-ITX motherboards with each respective company’s new CPUs, up to 32GB DDR4, and graphics cards up to Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan (Pascal) and the upcoming AMD Vega GPUs.

We asked Digital Storm why it shifted from a number-based name scheme for its Bolt-branded PC revisions, and the company explained that when it developed the Bolt X, the X represented a variable that the company had not yet decided on. However, the X stuck and the variable became a constant, giving us the Bolt X.

One variable we’re not sure of is the starting price, which we imagine would land somewhere near its predecessor’s minimum configuration (currently starting at $1,906). However, with AMD Ryzen pricing currently unknown and the company’s clear intention of offering the new red-team CPUs, the Bolt X could come in at a much lower starting price point. Digital Storm didn’t offer a specific release date for the Bolt X (it’s also still a variable), but the company said we could expect to see it arrive in Q1 2017.

Introduction And Product Tour

When CyberpowerPC heard we were back in the gaming desktop review business, the company was anxious to get its Syber M Xtreme 400 in our hands, and we were excited at the prospect of testing an entry-level X99 platform against our recently-reviewed Z170 systems to see if the performance of a six-core Intel Core i7 processor and a factory-overclocked GeForce GTX 1080 graphics card could warrant the $2,200 price tag. Time to see if the Syber M makes the grade.

Specifications

Exterior

The CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400 features a custom-designed ATX mid-tower chassis with an angular, yet sleek appearance. For a mid-tower case, it’s sizable, measuring 18.26 x 8.66 x 20.82". It also comes loaded with aesthetic extras, including orange LEDs that adorn the optical drive bay access door and a grill underneath the front end of the case that projects the Syber logo. This chassis is unique among the other desktops we’ve tested, and you won’t find it anywhere else, except from CyberpowerPC.

The top of the case features a removable ventilated panel that gives you access to the backside of the 240mm water cooler, making it easy to clean. The left side panel window showcases an LED-illuminated PSU shroud bearing the Syber logo, with a clear view of the GPU, motherboard, and its other attached components. However, aside from the PSU shroud and GPU LEDs, the interior of our review sample lacks additional lighting, leaving the upper part of the motherboard in the dark. However, if you're partial to well-illuminated interiors, the company also offers remote-controlled RGB LED strip options for the Syber M Xtreme 400.

The rear motherboard panel sports a USB 3.1 Type-C and Type-A port (one each) capable of 10Gb/s data rates. The Type-C port also features 40Gb/s speeds with Thunderbolt 3, and it can provide video output at up to 4096 x 2304 at 60Hz. However, because the X99 platform doesn’t have integrated graphics, the motherboard comes with an adapter cable that allows you to connect one of the dedicated GPU’s DisplayPorts to the motherboard’s DisplayPort input to enable video output through the USB Type-C port. It’s a neat feature, but we can’t see many people being in a position where they would need to connect a display to a Type-C port over the GPU's DVI-D, HDMI 2.0, or three DisplayPort interfaces.

The motherboard also sports three USB 3.0 and two USB 2.0 ports, in addition to a PS/2 keyboard/mouse port. The five audio jacks (center, subwoofer, speaker-out, line-in, line-out, mic-in) and S/PDIF connector are powered by a Realtek ALC1150 codec that supports up to 7.1 channel audio. The front panel I/O consists of two USB 3.0 ports and two USB 2.0 ports, in addition to a mic-in and headphone out jack. A Blu-ray burner is hidden by an LED-illuminated swinging panel (door) that bears the CyberpowerPC logo.

Interior

The Syber M Xtreme 400 is equipped with an Intel Core i7-6800K processor, which features six cores and 12 processing threads. CyberpowerPC overclocked the CPU cores, with single and dual-core operation hitting 3.8GHz. However, engaging more than two cores will limit the CPU multipliers to 35, resulting in a 3.5GHz maximum frequency.

These aren’t huge gains by any means (the base frequency of the CPU is 3.4GHz), but the $19 Pro OC overclocking service guarantees up to a 10% gain or more, and that’s exactly what you get (around 11%, at least, with dual-core operation). An all-core clock frequency of 3.8GHz would have been considerably better, and maybe that’s what you get with the Extreme OC service, which guarantees up to 15% (or more) performance from the base CPU clock rates. However, we don’t get that treatment with this particular review sample, and we’ll have to reserve judgement until we see how the CPU tuning plays out in our benchmark suite.

The processor is seated in a Gigabyte X99P-SLI motherboard. Four of the eight memory DIMM slots are occupied with a 16GB (4 x 4GB) kit of ADATA XPG Z1 DDR4-3000 memory, with CAS timings of 16-16-16-37. The quad-channel memory controller and above-average frequency should provide excellent performance in memory-intensive workloads, despite the somewhat-standard capacity.

Loaded with an Intel Core i7-6800K, the 28 PCIe lanes running to the motherboard support up to 4-way AMD CrossFire and 3-way Nvidia SLI (900 series and below) configurations, with three slots operating in x8 mode and the bottom x16 slot operating in x4 mode when occupied. There also two PCIe 2.0 x1 slots to add a wireless or capture card. The main x16 slots also feature stainless steel shielding that reinforces the PCIe connectors with extra strength for heavy graphics cards.

The M.2 slot is loaded with a 512GB Intel 600p NVMe SSD, and the 2TB HDD is mounted in the 3.5" drive bay (which is accessible from the right side panel). This is plenty of storage for the average user, and the SSD capacity is par for the course. Further expansion options include multiple SATA 6 Gb/s ports (for a total of 10), two of which make a SATA Express connector.

The single EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 SC graphics card features a base clock of 1,708MHz and a boost frequency of 1,847MHz, which should (on paper) provide a modest performance boost in games and GPU-intensive tasks compared to graphics cards with reference (Founder’s Edition) clockrates. CyberpowerPC ships the Syber M Xtreme 400 with the latest version of the GPU, with the updated VBIOS and added thermal pads, so we shouldn’t run into the same temperature issues some were reporting with the ACX 3.0-cooled graphics card prior to the update.

The CPU is cooled by a beefy Asetek 570LXL LCS closed-loop liquid cooler, which features a 240mm radiator and a copper cooling plate. The radiator sports two of the 120mm Corsair AF120 fans, exhausting heat out the top of the case. Two more of these fans adorn the front of the chassis, which pull air from the illuminated grating on the bottom front end of the PC. There’s also a Corsair AF120 fan exhausting air out the rear, and the upgraded fans account for $63 of the bill ($24 for radiator fans, $39 for case fans).

The Syber M is powered by a Corsair CS650M 80 Plus Gold certified power supply, which is hidden by a sleek PSU shroud and features a single 12V rail with 51A of juice. Although this is plenty of power for the system as it’s configured, we’re somewhat put off by the seemingly-minimalist wattage. However, if you want to upgrade to something with more power (if you’re looking to upgrade to SLI down the line) then you’ll have to throw a little more money down.

The case’s power supply fan intake has a built-in removable filter, making it easy to clean. The semi-modular PSU’s attached ATX and CPU power cables are braided, but the modular PCIe, SATA, and molex cables are flat and smooth, so they aren’t the easiest to tuck away inconspicuously. However, CyberpowerPC’s cable management leaves the visible interior looking clean and tight. The right side panel hides the excess (and 3.5" drive bays), with everything tied up as neat as one could set it, considering the mix of PSU cables.

Software And Accessories

We’ve omitted this section in our other recent desktop reviews, primarily because those vendors didn’t ship their products with any additional pre-loaded software or accessories, such as a keyboard or mouse. CyberpowerPC didn’t do much in the way of software, but it did load the Intel Turbo Max Technology 3.0 software, which allows you to select specific programs and give them a boost in single-threaded clock frequency. However, we left this utility unaltered, and it wasn't enabled in our testing. Other than that, there isn't any additional pre-loaded software.

However, you do get a motherboard box full of the component’s manuals and accessories, including additional PSU and SATA cables, the case’s PCIe lane plates and 3.5" bay cover, multiple color assortments of rims for the upgraded Corsair fans, and that DisplayPort adapter that we mentioned earlier (to enable USB Type-C video output).

The Syber M also comes with a company-branded gaming mouse, with an LED-lit logo and multiple gamer-centric buttons. The center buttons below the scroll wheel adjust the DPI on the fly, and there are also sniper and turbo shot buttons, along with forward and backwards movement buttons near the thumb rest. Under the bottom cover, there are five weights you can remove to adjust how it feels in your hand, and the mouse is a nice bonus that doesn’t affect your price tag.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Synthetic And Productivity Benchmarks

To compare the performance of the Syber M Xtreme 400, we used the recently reviewed AVADirect Avatar and Digital Storm Vanquish 5 to see where the X99 platform (and its six-core CPU) stacked up against Z170 machines. The AVADirect system is priced about $100 higher than the Syber M Xtreme 400, which currently sits at $2,208 after all the upgrades and extras. The Avatar’s overclocked i7-6700K (set to 4.7GHz) should be a stark contrast to CyberpowerPC’s offering in single-threaded application performance, and possibly even some games (Syber M’s CPU clock rate is 3.8GHz at single and dual-core operation, 3.5GHz at three cores or more). Digital Storm's Vanquish 5 has a similar configuration as the Avatar, but it's clocked to 4.4GHz and features 16GB of DDR4-2666 (instead of DDR4-2400, like the Avatar).

We also looked to our custom-built Z170 test bench to see where default i7-6700K, dual-channel DDR4 memory, and Founder’s Edition GTX 1080 performance stacks up against the Syber M’s factory-overclocked EVGA graphics card (1,708MHz base, 1,847MHz boost clock), higher memory frequencies, and entry-level X99 processor. The full specifications of our reference system are listed below:

Test System Configuration

3DMark

Not surprisingly, when 3DMark specifically stresses the CPU, the CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400 tops the charts with its six-core processor. However, the Syber M falls slightly behind the Avatar with its Overall score in the Fire Strike benchmark. The Combined score is also noticeably different when comparing the overclocked AVADirect offering and CyberpowerPC’s specimen, with the Avatar coming out on top. This is because at this particular resolution (1920 x 1080), Fire Strike favors CPU clock rate over core count, and as such, Digital Storm’s overclocked Vanquish 5 also takes a narrow lead over the Syber M in the Combined results. However, the six cores are able to overcome the quad-core i7-6700K at default settings in the Founder’s Edition GTX 1080-equipped test bench.

Cranking up the resolution with Fire Strike Extreme and Ultra yields more favorable results for the six-core X99 platform of the Syber M Xtreme 400, which takes a narrow win in the Overall, Graphics, and Combined tests at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160. CyberpowerPC’s offering also tops the chart in the Time Spy results, with the Syber M leading the Avatar’s Overall score by 230 points.

Cinebench R15

It’s no surprise that the Syber M Xtreme 400’s Core i7-6800K falls to the bottom of the group with Single CPU Rendering in our Cinebench R15 benchmark. Clock rate is king for this particular test, and the Syber M’s overclocked CPU trails even our default i7-6700K by 200MHz, resulting in roughly a 20 point difference.

However, the Syber M also predictably takes a significant lead in the Multiple CPU Rendering test, scoring 1202.36 points, with a 178.53 point lead over the Avatar’s quad-core processor clocked at 4.7GHz. The CPU core count advantage and factory overclocked GPU also place the Syber M on top in the OpenGL Shading test, although by only about 2 FPS, over the Avatar.

CompuBench

Once again, the Syber M’s increased CPU core count and factory-overclocked GPU prove to be advantageous against our custom-built reference system at default settings in the Video Processing portion of the CompuBench test. However, the Vanquish 5 and Avatar still place ahead of the Syber M thanks to their overclocked CPUs.

The Bitcoin Mining test overwhelmingly favors GPU clock frequency, and the Syber M’s EVGA GTX 1080 SC gets the edge over the other systems, all of which feature GPUs with Founder’s Edition (reference) clock rates.

Storage Test

Although the CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400 performs admirably against the other systems in our storage tests, the results are hardly anything to write home about. The Syber M’s 512GB Intel 600p SSD is an NVMe SSD, and as such, it’s rated for up to 1,800MB/s sequential read speeds. So why couldn’t it break 700MB/s in our 128K sequential read test? The drive is capable of short bursts of sequential data reads at those advertised speeds, but as soon as the SLC memory buffer is full, the SSD is bottlenecked and will perform only as fast as the slower memory cache will allow.

This isn’t a knock against CyberpowerPC. The choice of storage keeps the cost lower (than say, a Samsung 950 Pro), and it still musters better sequential performance than a standard SATA SSD. However, the random 4K read IOPS of the Intel 600p are dismal, and the 4K random write speeds are par for SATA-based SSDs. But average users will appreciate the SSD speeds, despite how shortchanged it may appear to the enthusiast eye.

PCMark 8

CPU clock rate once again plays a pivotal role in the PCMark 8 test results, with the Syber M placing last in the Office benchmark (which favors higher single and dual-core clock rates) and barely beating out our reference system in the Creative test. The overclocked i7-6700K systems see huge gains in this test, and the Syber M’s i7-6800K simply can’t keep up with its mild overclock.

Gaming Benchmarks

Alien: Isolation

CyberpowerPC’s Syber M Xtreme 400 starts off our gaming tests on the right foot, commanding the lead at all tested resolutions in the Alien: Isolation benchmarks. The overclocked EVGA GPU is the primary reason for this, and although the gains aren’t substantial (you really won’t know the difference between 81.15 FPS and 83.97 FPS at 4K), a win is a win.

Ashes of the Singularity

At 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440, the CyberpowerPC Syber M yields only to the AVADirect Avatar in the Ashes of the Singularity benchmarks. Although we see some marginal gains from the Avatar’s CPU overclock (particularly at lower resolutions) that result in negligible wins against the other Core i7-6700K-equipped PCs, the Syber M’s six-core processor and overclocked GPU lend to a narrow victory at 4K.

Bioshock Infinite

The Syber M Xtreme takes second-place honors in the Bioshock Infinite benchmarks at 1920 x 1080 and 2560 x 1440, trailing the top spot by slightly less than 2 FPS. However, the CyberpowerPC offering pulls ahead of the pack, though barely, once you crank up the resolution to 4K.

DiRT Rally

DiRT Rally is more platform dependent than other games in our suite, and the results speak to the performance differences between higher clocked quad-core and lower clocked six-core processors. The Syber M falls behind the overclocked i7-6700K systems at 1080p, but the six cores of the i7-6800K are able to push framerates past the stock performance of the quad-core competition (our test rig). The Syber M catches up to the Vanquish 5 (clocked at 4.4GHz) at 2560 x 1440, taking a second-place finish, and it hashes out another narrow win at 3840 x 2160.

Grand Theft Auto V

Grand Theft Auto V is another title that can see gains with platform performance, but the impact of the lower clocked CPU inside the Syber M can be seen throughout the benchmarks, with the CyberpowerPC offering often placing dead last, albeit with a few narrow second and first place finishes here and there. Despite its factory-overclocked GPU, the Syber M spars with the other systems instead of pushing better performance because of its lower CPU clock.

GRID Autosport

Similar to DiRT Rally, the GRID Autosport results illustrate the same trend of rewarding higher clocked CPUs with small gains. The Syber M is able to outpace our test rig (with default CPU and memory settings), but the overclocked i7-6700K-equipped Vanquish 5 and Avatar take the lead at 1080p, and they both take turns besting the Syber M at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160.

Hitman

The Hitman benchmark rewards higher GPU clock rates with modest performance gains, with the CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400 taking the lead at all tested resolutions. Although the Digital Storm follows close behind, the Syber M commands slightly more than a 2 FPS lead against it.

Metro: Last Light Redux

Metro: Last Light Redux is most responsive to GPU performance, with the Z170 platforms and their identical GPU clock rates scoring nearly-identical (and in some spots, identical) framerates. Not surprisingly, the factory-overclocked EVGA GTX 1080 SC inside the Syber M gives it the edge on the competition, with a lead that starts off at 2 FPS at 1920 x 1080, but dwindles to 0.33 FPS when you crank up the resolution to 3840 x 2160.

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Similar to Metro: Last Light Redux, the results in our Rise of the Tomb Raider tests show the Syber M besting the other systems in the field with diminishing returns as you crank up the resolution. The factory-overclocked GPU’s increased clock rates can only do so much until the VRAM (which is not overclocked by EVGA) becomes the bottleneck, and the difference in performance between the higher clocked graphics card in the Syber M and the reference clocked competition becomes negligible. When you reach 3840 x 2160, the results are almost indiscernible, with the Syber M only taking the win by 0.54 FPS.

The Division

The Syber M Xtreme 400 is seated at the top of the pack with The Division. The lead is highest in the 2560 x 1440 test, where the Syber M scored 67.7 FPS against the second place Avatar with 65.1 FPS (for a difference of 2.6 FPS). The lead isn’t substantial enough to call dominant, but you can see where the 101MHz base clock and 114MHZ boost clock increase of the Syber M’s factory-overclocked GPU can pay off at the most demanding settings.

Thief

At 1920 x 1080, the Syber M doesn’t fair much better than the AVADirect Avatar, falling below only the Vanquish 5 by a little less than 5 FPS. However, at 2560 x 1440 and 3840 x 2160, the CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400 once again ascends to the top of the group, finishing out our test suite with a respectable win/loss ratio against the other systems in the field.

Price Analysis And Conclusion

CyberpowerPC threw us a curve ball with its X99-equipped Syber M Xtreme 400, particularly because our primary focus has been on Z170 desktops thus far. The advantages of the Syber M's six-core processor stand out in our benchmark results, but average users will find that if they aren't running CPU-intensive games and applications, an i7-6700K-equipped system will often fare marginally better with it's higher clock rate. However, the factory-overclocked EVGA GTX 1080 SC graphics card gives us notable increases in performance in GPU-intensive workloads, and although these wins are mostly by negligible differences, CyberpowerPC offers us our first look at what a factory-overclocked GPU can do against reference-clocked cards (the rest of the systems we've tested) in a variety of benchmarks.

We were somewhat disappointed at the overclock settings used in the Syber M. Although the base clock of the i7-6800K was increased by 400MHz (the same amount as Digital Storm's i7-6700K-equipped Vanquish 5), it will only achieve this clock rate in single and dual-threaded workloads, with the CPU clocked only 100MHz higher than the 3.4GHz base clock (3.5 GHz) when it engages more than two processing cores. We feel an all-core overclock could have further cemented the performance gains we saw in multi-threaded benchmarks, and given a more-compelling example of its potential to users actually looking for that kind of performance. However, it's among one of the least expensive overclock services we've seen lately, and you definitely get a modest boost in clock rate compared to the base frequency, despite it being only for a couple of the six cores.

The X99 chipset is rich with features, which includes a quad-channel memory controller, 10 SATA 6 Gb/s ports, stainless steel-reinforced PCIe x16 slots, and multi-GPU support. CyberpowerPC took advantage of the robust Gigabyte X99P-SLI motherboard by loading the Ultra M.2 slot with an NVMe SSD. However, we weren't particularly impressed with the 512GB Intel 600p's performance, but because it offers higher-than-SATA sequential performance and keeps the price-per-gigabyte of the SSD down, we can forgive the less-than-stellar benchmark results. Looking at the price, we can't be disappointed with the capacity and speed of the Syber M's primary storage, and 2TB of HDD storage is plenty of room to store a sizeable game library.

We were impressed with the custom-designed Syber M chassis, which gives the system a unique look compared to the sea of "me-too" cases many vendors use to build their custom PCs. It can accommodate more than what our sample was configured with (think custom water loops), and there are plenty of spots to throw extra storage drives. The PSU shroud is a great bonus, and similar to the front 3.5" bay door, it glows orange and gives the Syber M a definitive "wow" factor by hiding all the excess cable and illuminating the left side panel window.

At $2,208, the CyberpowerPC Syber M Xtreme 400 is exactly $100 cheaper than AVADirect's Z170 offering. The Avatar's price is affected by LED lighting (with remote) and its $25 overclocking service, which could be considered a balance of performance and aesthetic value. However, the Syber M puts aesthetics in the back seat to performance, with fan upgrades (non-LED, although they do come with colored rims) totaling $63 and a modest overclock for $19. Forgoing these extras, you still get an X99 platform with an Intel Core i7-6800K (cooled by a 240mm liquid-cooling radiator), 16GB of quad-channel DDR4-3000, an EVGA GTX 1080 SC graphics card, and a 512GB NVMe SSD in an accessible, custom-designed chassis for less than $2,150 ($2,126 to be exact), and we think that's fairly reasonable (and impressive).

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Follow us on Facebook, Google+, RSS, Twitter and YouTube.

Introduction And Product Tour

Digital Storm is well known for its powerful (and expensive) custom desktop PC builds, but what you may not know is that the company offers modest and affordable configurations, too. Enter the Vanquish 5, a VR-ready gaming desktop featuring an Intel Core i7 processor, 16GB of memory, and an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 under the hood, all for an uncharacteristically-low price of $2,045. Does the Vanquish 5 offer enough bang for the buck? We're going to find out.

Specifications

Exterior

The Digital Storm Vanquish 5 features a gray Corsair 230T mid-tower ATX case, with only the company emblem and a sticker to identify its origins. The plain chassis is meant to keep the cost down, but it includes a rear 120mm output fan (attached to a radiator and another 120mm output fan) and two 120mm LED front intake fans, which illuminate the front grill with a static blue hue. The top of the case is ventilated and has mounts for 120 and 140mm fans and radiators, but they are unoccupied and simply act as a passive exhaust.

The left side panel sports an angular window that showcases the power supply, graphics card, and CPU cooler. The window is also lit up by an added RGB LED light strip that borders the bottom edge and halfway up the back panel. The strip is remote controlled, and you can create your own mix of colors and alter the effects from the palm of your hand, without software. It gives an otherwise plain case an exciting aesthetic bonus that has “gamer” written all over it.

The side panels are easy to remove, with a single thumb screw holding them in. However, they don’t detach like a traditional case, and you have to slide the panel towards the front of the chassis to remove it (most case panels slide toward the rear).

The motherboard I/O isn’t as robust as other feature-rich motherboards, with only two USB 3.0 and two USB 2.0 ports on the rear panel. However, there is a USB 3.1 Type-C port with up to 10 Gb/s data rates, in addition to a PS/2 port for old-school keyboards and mice. The rear audio jacks (six) are powered by a Crystal Sound 2 chip, and the motherboard also sports a DVI-D port and an HDMI 1.4 interface. The front panel I/O (located above the Asus DVD-RW optical drive) consists of two USB 3.0 ports, mic-in and headphone out jacks, and the power and reset buttons.

Most graphics cards feature three DisplayPorts and one HDMI output, but the Asus GTX 1080 Turbo inside the Vanquish 5 sports two DisplayPort 1.4 interfaces and two HDMI 2.0 ports, in addition to a DVI-D port. The extra HDMI interface makes it easier for VR gamers to connect their HMD without the need for an adapter. However, depending on your choice of headset and how many peripherals you need to plug in, you may find the limited USB connectivity difficult to overcome.

Interior

The Vanquish 5 houses an Intel Core i7-6700K quad-core processor overclocked to 4.4GHz on all four cores, which is rather safe for a company notorious for insanely-overclocked custom systems. However, the non-aggressive CPU clock rate should provide a modest performance boost and adequate stability.

The CPU is seated on an Asus Z170-E ATX motherboard, which has a limited feature set, but it’s an ideal entry-level board for a Z170 chipset. It even supports two-way AMD CrossFire and Nvidia SLI, but the third PCIe x16 slot only has two lanes running to it, which cuts it off from three-way Crossfire compatibility and would slice the bandwidth of a PCIe 3.0 x4 SSD in half. It’s probably better to fill that slot with a wireless Ethernet or capture card, rather than PCIe storage. However, the M.2 slot supports PCIe 3.0 x4 SSDs, so you could still upgrade to a next-gen storage device at full bandwidth, if you’re so inclined.

Digital Storm equipped the Vanquish 5 with a 250GB Samsung 850 EVO SATA 6Gb/s SSD, in addition to a 2TB 7,200 RPM Toshiba HDD. With three of the SATA ports already occupied (remember the optical drive) that leaves you with just three more SATA ports (two of which make a SATA Express interface) to expand your storage. However, the configured storage setup offers ample SSD capacity for your operating system and primary productivity apps.

The company-branded 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4-2666 modules (which are really just ADATA modules) feature a CAS latency of 16-16-16-39, which should provide exceptional stability with the less aggressive timings. The graphics card is an Asus GTX 1080 Turbo, which features the same clock frequencies (1607MHz base, 1733MHz boost) as the Nvidia Founder’s Edition GPU, but it sports a plastic shroud instead of a beefy vapor chamber. The lone dual ball bearing fan exhausts heat out the back of the machine, and an LED-lit Asus logo highlights an otherwise plain graphics card. Digital Storm didn’t overclock the GPU in our review sample, but you can add $45 to the tab if you want some extra GPU performance, if you aren’t the tinkering type.

The aforementioned 120mm front LED fans blow air directly over the 3.5" and 2.5" drive bays with a clear shot to the GPU, and two 120mm Corsair fans attached to a Digital Storm Vortex 120mm radiator in a “push/pull” configuration exhaust heat out of the rear of the case. The cooler resembles a Corsair H55 with its circular copper block, mounting brackets, and thinner non-braided black tubing.

The Vanquish 5 is powered by a semi-modular EVGA Supernova NEX 750B PSU. It's 80 Plus Bronze certified and features four 12V rails, each offering 20A of juice. Only a few ports on the PSU are used, but Digital Storm gives you the extra cables (along with all the other components' accessories and manuals) if you need to power some more internal devices.

The cable management isn't anything to write home about, but to be fair, the Corsair 230T doesn't offer many places to hide them. The main interior's exposed cables are neatly zip-tied, and it's about as clean as you can run them, given the chassis. However, they are banded together rather tightly, and it could prove difficult to reroute any of the existing cable work if you wanted to make some changes under the hood. Removing the right side panel shows us where all the excess cable went, with a wad of wires doing the best it can to remain inconspicuous. However, upon closer inspection, we can't say we could have done much better considering the cable management limitations of the case.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Synthetic And Productivity Benchmarks

We used our custom-built Z170 test rig and the AVADirect Avatar that we previously reviewed to compare the performance of the Vanquish 5 to similarly-equipped systems. All of the aforementioned machines feature a water-cooled Intel Core i7-6700K at varying levels of tuning, 16GB of memory, an SSD, and a GTX 1080 GPU. We also wanted to see what AVADirect's $2,500 offering could do against Digital Storm's conservatively-configured (considering the company's reputation) system, which rings up for hundreds less than the Avatar system.

Digital Storm's Stage 1 overclocking service gets the processor to 4.4GHz on all four cores. The performance boost usually costs $49, but this service is free (and automatically applied) to the Vanquish lineup, so you aren't actually paying anything extra for the boosted clock rate. AVADirect clocks its quad-core CPU at a generous 4.7GHz (for an added $25, which is cheap by comparison to Digital Storm's normal fee), and our test rig is set to the default 4.0GHz (4.2GHz boost) clock rate of the i7-6700K.

Memory frequencies (and CAS timings) between the systems are different across the board as well, with the Vanquish 5 clocked the highest at 2666 MHz. The Avatar's memory is tuned to 2400 MHz, and our test system is set to a default 2133 MHz. We switched between Founder's Edition GTX 1080 and 1070 GPUs in our custom rig to see how the vendor's varying choice of graphics cards affects performance against Nvidia's reference design, but we likely won't see too much of a variance in GPU performance between these GTX 1080 samples, which all sport the same base and boost clock frequencies. The full specs of our test bench are listed below:

Test System Configuration

3DMark

The Digital Storm Vanquish 5 places second throughout the 3DMark benchmarks, thanks primarily to the 4.4GHz overclock on the processor. This boosted the Physics and Overall scores of Fire Strike (regular, Extreme, and Ultra) and CPU score in Time Spy higher than our reference system (with a GTX 1080) at default clock rates, but it couldn't achieve the same heights as AVADirect's beefy performance boost, which puts the Avatar at 4.7GHz. Graphics scores between the GTX 1080-equipped systems were extremely close across the board, and our test system is in last place when we throw in a Founder's Edition GTX 1070.

Cinebench R15

The Cinebench results enforce the CPU performance hierarchy, with the Vanquish 5 falling in between the Avatar (clocked at 4.7GHz) and our custom test rig (set to the i7-6700K's default 4.0GHz). This shouldn't come as a surprise; both overclocked systems see impressive gains from their increased clock rates.

CompuBench

Looking at the CompuBench results, we see the Vanquish 5 in a familiar placement on the chart with the Video Processing results, which again slides in between the Avatar (at the top) and our test rig (in third place) thanks to its CPU performance. However, we see the Vanquish take its first win in the Bitcoin mining test, where GPU performance is the only factor. Since all of the GTX 1080-equipped systems have the same GPU clock rate, the victory isn't overwhelming (a measly 3.32 MHash/s), but a win is a win.

Storage Test

We didn't expect the Vanquish 5's 250GB Samsung 850 EVO SSD to win a performance battle against its bigger brother (a 500GB Samsung 850 EVO) inside the Avatar, but that's exactly what happened in our 4K random read/write tests at QD2. However, the 4K random results are almost identical between the Avatar and the Vanquish, and we could just as easily flip a coin to discern the performance difference at these settings. The 128K sequential performance numbers put the Vanquish back into the second place position, which is no surprise considering that higher-capacity SSDs can achieve greater sequential performance in most cases.

PCMark 8

Digital Storm's CPU overclock is effective in the PCMark 8 benchmarks, landing the Vanquish 5 in the middle of the other GTX 1080-equipped PCs in the field once again. The benefit of the CPU performance boost is less apparent in the Office portion of the test, where the Vanquish only beats out our test rig by about 375 points and trails the Avatar by 665 points.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

Price Analysis And Conclusion

Price Analysis And Conclusion

Digital Storm surprised us with what it can do at the mainstream level, when it isn't cramming $3,000 worth of hardware into a case painted like a sports car and overclocked like you're going for some kind of record. The Vanquish 5 is a simple configuration that still allows for some serious horsepower under the hood, with a modestly-overclocked Intel Core i7 processor, a GTX 1080, and 16GB of DDR4-2666 (the speed of which is above average compared to the other systems we tested).

Some could see the 250GB Samsung 850 EVO SSD as minimalist (in capacity), but a higher-capacity SSD won't make your games run any better once loaded, and it's adequate for the OS and a few of your prioritized apps. Furthermore, the 2TB HDD offers plenty of space for your games and files, and the total storage capacity (SSD + HDD) of the Vanquish 5 exceeds that of the Avatar, which is priced considerably higher.

The Vanquish 5's gray metal panels set it apart from the typical black cases saturating the market, and the components under the hood are easily accessible if you want to tinker or upgrade. The side panel window showcases everything you would want to see (water cooling, GPU, PSU) while hiding the less glamorous internal devices (storage, optical drive, and their cages). The front intake LED fans illuminate the case and front grill in a blue hue, and Digital Storm further increased the aesthetic value with an added software-free remote-controlled RGB LED light strip, making the Vanquish 5 stand out even more.

Whereas the Avatar's form factor, Founder's Edition GPU, Gold-certified PSU, and feature-rich motherboard could be grounds for a premium, Digital Storm offers a system that meets (or exceeds, in a few cases) the Avatar's performance for hundreds of dollars less. The Vanquish 5 can't hang with the Avatar in productivity benchmarks and games that favor CPU performance, but the Avatar's 300MHz CPU performance boost obviously helps it here. If performance is the single most important buying factor, the negligible differences between the Vanquish 5 and the other systems we've tested (so far) make Digital Storm stand out as a value choice at $2,045.

DIY enthusiasts will argue that you can just build a similar system for even less money (a recurring topic in the comments section of our desktop reviews and news coverage), but Digital Storm's pricing is considerably closer to what you would spend on a similarly-configured PC if you decided to give it a go yourself. Our own benchmark system would run around $2,000. Furthermore, remember that not everyone is technically savvy enough to construct a computer on their own (the meme with thermal paste inside a CPU socket comes to mind), and these types of custom-built desktops are an ideal choice for uninitiated consumers looking for a powerful, non-cookie-cutter gaming rig.

USB connectivity is a drawback to the Vanquish 5's entry-level Z170 motherboard, but if you're hurting for more places to plug in, you could add a front-panel USB hub or PCIe card. The Vanquish 5 has plenty of room for expansion, with another PCIe 3.0 x 16 lane (which operates at x8 with the already-occupied slot), a PCIe 3.0 x2 slot, three PCIe x1 slots, and room for more SATA drives and an M.2 SSD. If the Vanquish 5 is lacking something you want, you can definitely find a place to add it later. We weren't thrilled with the zip-tied PSU cables (tie wraps would have been more enthusiast-friendly), but otherwise, we can't say we'd do a better job with the interior cable management (considering the case's limited cable-hiding space).

The Vanquish 5 is the embodiment of Digital Storm's conservative side, offering the most bang for the buck that the company can muster. To that point, it didn't let us down, and we were impressed at not only the base components, but also the tweaks and extras that make it feel like you are getting serious value behind every dollar you spend on your new VR-ready gaming desktop. We'll hold off on awarding a prestigious Tom's Hardware Recommended or Editor's Choice award until we see what our other upcoming reviews bring, but we're more than convinced Digital Storm's Vanquish 5 deserves to be Tom's Hardware Approved for its compelling performance, aesthetics, and price.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All PC Builds Content

Follow us on Facebook, Google+, RSS, Twitter and YouTube.

Hands-On And First Impressions

[Editor's Note: The following content is intended to be a first look, with some hands-on impressions and a few benchmarks. We have added display and thermal image testing to our test protocols, and more benchmarks are imminent for full system reviews.]

Digital Storm is known for crafting custom PCs using a variety of components. The company also offers a number of additional services like case painting, interior lighting and custom loop water cooling. Creating specialized desktop systems remains its forte, but Digital Storm brought something different to the table today: the Digital Storm Aura is an all-in-one gaming PC featuring Nvidia’s GTX 1080 and a 34-inch curved display.

Specifications

Our Aura contains an overclockable Intel Core i7-6700K processor, the recently-released Nvidia GTX 1080 Founders Edition, and 16GB of DDR4-2666MHz memory. Our Aura is also equipped with a 512GB Samsung 950 Pro M.2 SSD, and a 1TB HGST TravelStar 7K1000 HDD. The Aura’s starting configuration contains an Intel Core i5-6500, a 4GB GeForce GTX 960, no SSD, and the same HDD.

Exterior

Starting from the front, the display bezel measures 15mm wide and features a sturdy metal construction with a matte black finish. Taking a closer look, you’ll see a separation on both bottom ends of the bezel; the bezel is composed of two pieces of metal, one for the bottom and one encompassing the top, left and right sides. The bezel is unadorned save for the Digital Storm logo on the bottom center and two symbols corresponding to Display and Power on the bottom right.

Unlike the matte bezel, the Aura’s backside consists of a large, glossy plastic panel. The back panel has three large ventilation areas for the CPU, the GPU, and radiators. The back doesn’t feel incredibly premium, and removing it drops its rigidity altogether. Furthermore, the glossy plastic is a fingerprint and scratch magnet.

The system is supported by a robust metal stand with long feet, which prevent the system from shaking. Impressively enough, the stand can support 31.4 lbs of weight and is capable of supporting a bit more depending on the Aura’s configuration. The stand’s hinge gives the display about 20 degrees of vertical tilt and no horizontal adjustment. The range of tilt might seem restrictive, but considering that the rather heavy system is tightly packed into such a small enclosure, offering more robust angles isn’t practical. The hinge doesn’t support vertical flipping either, but there isn’t much reason to flip a 34-inch display vertically, let alone a curved display.

Inputs and Outputs

Starting from the top, there is one USB 3.0 port intended for the Aura’s webcam.

The I/O on the back includes one USB 3.0 port, one headphone jack, one microphone jack, one USB 2.0 port, and an MMC/SD card reader.

Removing a plastic plate reveals easy access to the bottom I/O; the ports you’ll find depend on your motherboard and graphics card configuration. In our case, the Gigabyte Z170N-Gaming 5 offers one PS/2 port, one USB 3.1 Type-C port, three USB 3.0 ports, one USB 2.0 port, one DVI-D port, one HDMI port, two SMA antenna connectors, one RJ45 port, five audio jacks (Center/Subwoofer Speaker Out, Rear Speaker Out, Line In, Line Out, Mic In) and finally, one optical S/PDIF Out. The GTX 1080 Founders Edition provides one DVI-D port, one HDMI port, and three DisplayPorts.

You’ll find the monitor’s I/O, consisting of two HDMI ports, one DisplayPort, one Mini DisplayPort, and an audio jack, a few inches from the GTX 1080’s I/O. By default, a discrete HDMI cable runs from the GTX 1080 to one of the monitor’s ports, but if you upgrade the graphics card in the future, you shouldn’t be limited by the display’s port selection. If for some reason you’d like to run the Aura’s display as a standalone monitor, you can route a longer cable from your system of choice.

Interior

Accessing the inside of the Aura is easy. Simply remove the back panel I/O cover to reveal five screws. Remove these as well as the five screws on the top of the panel. Remove the panel carefully, because there is a fan cable splitter connecting the fan header to both the Vortex All-In-One liquid cooler as well as a Scythe SY1212SL12H 120mm fan that's attached to the back cover with rubber mounting screws.

To the left are the blower fan and shroud, which direct air to the Vortex's radiator. Digital Storm couldn't comment on the dimensions of the radiator, but it appears to be roughly 162mm x 36mm x 40mm. Below the fan shroud is an Enhance Electronics ENP-7145B2 450W power supply. 

To the right is the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition; with the way the GTX 1080 is positioned, the blower-style shroud will expel air from the bottom of the Aura. The Aura's chassis and back cover have numerous vents for airflow.

Speakers

The Aura has two rear-facing speakers that offer decent clarity and an excellent range of volume, reaching high volumes with little distortion. However, the Aura's back panel obscures the speakers slightly; this is a minor complaint, and future iterations can solve this issue by placing cutouts on the back panel right above the speakers.

Display

The Digital Storm Aura sports an impressive 34-inch WQHD (3440x1440) curved display. The display in question is the Samsung LTM340YP01, which has an a-Si TFT-LCD panel.

Beneath the bottom right corner of the bezel, you’ll find a power button and a small joystick for display options. Pulling the stick towards you opens the main menu, and subsequent pulling acts as  “Forward” in the menu. Pushing the joystick away from you does the opposite. When outside of the menu, pushing the joystick away opens the video port selection, while pushing away in the main menu acts as a “Back” function. Pushing left opens the backlight adjustment slider, and pushing right opens the volume slider. As you might’ve guessed, left and right are used to adjust sliders and options in the main menu and video port selection.

MORE: Best Deals

MORE: Hot Bargains @PurchDeals

MORE: Best Gaming Monitors

Benchmarks And Conclusion

How We Test

We're using an updated First Look testing suite, which underwent several changes over the past few months. As usual, PCMark 8 measures system performance under home, creative, and work productivity loads. 3DMark Fire Strike and Unigine Valley measure synthetic gaming alacrity. Real gaming frame rates are recorded using built-in benchmarks from Bioshock Infinite and Metro: Last Light Redux.

This time around, we include thermal readings from our Optris PI640 Infrared Camera. Additionally, and fittingly, the Aura is the first system to include display measurements.

The Digital Storm Aura is unique in that it's the first desktop gaming system tested with our First Look suite, let alone one with a WQHD display. The charts below compare the Aura to previously tested systems using a more conventional resolution. An additional chart illustrates the Aura’s performance over multiple graphical presets at its native 3440x1440 resolution.

Since the Aura is technically a desktop system, we're sizing it up against a PC based on Intel's Core i7-6700K, an Asus Z170 Maximus VIII Hero motherboard, 32GB of G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-2133 memory, a 512GB Samsung 950 Pro M.2 NVMe SSD, Corsair's H100i v2 AIO liquid cooler, and Corsair's HXi 850i 80 PLUS Platinum-rated power supply, all inside of a Corsair 750D case. We switched between one EVGA GeForce GTX 980 reference card, one EVGA GeForce GTX 980 Ti FTW, and two MSI Gaming GTX 980 4Gs in SLI.

Additionally, we pit the Aura against Origin PC's EON17-SLX and MSI's GT80S Titan SLI gaming laptops. The EON17-SLX is priced a lot like the Aura, and it sports a Core i7-6700K, a mobile GeForce GTX 980, 16GB of DDR4-2133 memory, a 256GB Samsung 950 Pro NVMe M.2 SSD, and a 1TB Seagate Hybrid SSHD. Meanwhile the GT80S Titan SLI is composed of a Core i7-6920HQ, 32GB of DDR4-2133 memory, two 256GB PCIe SSDs in RAID 0, a 1TB 7200 RPM HDD, and two mobile GTX 980s in SLI.

We would have liked to run a few of these benchmarks against a desktop PC with the same CPU and GPU, but our lone machine running that configuration was also busy cranking out all of the most recent GPU reviews. We think this is a good representative mix of comparable hardware and price configurations.

Synthetic Benchmark - PCMark 8

Using the same CPU, PCMark's Home and Work modules generate similar results across the board. In particular, the Aura exceeds most systems except for the EON17-SLX in the Home test, whereas its Work score trails in comparison. The Aura enjoys a healthy lead through the Creative test thanks to its GeForce GTX 1080 Founders Edition card.

Synthetic Benchmark - 3DMark Fire Strike

When it comes to raw graphics performance, the Aura isn’t top dog. The desktop system and MSI's GT80S Titan SLI, both equipped with two GTX 980s, pull ahead of Digital Storm's machine. However, the Aura wins overall, earning the highest Fire Strike, Physics, and Combined scores. We also set the Fire Strike, Extreme and Ultra presets to the Aura’s native resolution to see how well the GTX 1080 performs at 3440x1440. The Extreme and Ultra presets are virtually the same except for the resolution. Setting each to 3440x1440 incurs little performance degradation.

Synthetic Benchmark - Unigine Valley

Once again, the Aura falls short of the desktop with GTX 980s in SLI, but manages to surpass the GT80S and its mobile GTX 980s. Naturally, Digital Storm has no problem overtaking the less powerful systems.

Gaming Benchmark- Bioshock Infinite

As predicted by Fire Strike and Valley, the Aura doesn't take first place in our Bioshock metric. It falls short of the GTX 980s in SLI, trades blows with the GT80S Titan SLI, and even performs slightly worse than the GTX 980 Ti when it comes to average frame rate. Still, the Aura is a top performer, especially at high resolutions, and Bioshock Infinite isn’t particularly graphics-bound. At its native resolution and using the game's highest settings, the Aura maintains an average of 98.02 FPS; don't be afraid to crank up the details in this one.

Gaming Benchmark - Metro: Last Light Redux

Metro: Last Light Redux is much more taxing, so a playable average frame rate is harder to achieve. At 1920x1080, the Aura maintains more than 60 FPS. At 3440x1440, the Aura suffers a substantial performance hit. Our High preset, which uses High Quality textures, SSAA, Anisotropic Filtering at x16, Normal motion blur and High tessellation, yields an average of 53.2 FPS. It's easy to get 60 FPS by tweaking this preset.

Thermal Testing

We use an Optris PI640 camera for measuring temperatures inside the Aura. Check out Measurement Science: Taking Accurate IR Thermal Readings for more information on how we use this sophisticated piece of equipment. In short, temperatures are taken after 10 minutes at idle, after running eight threads of Prime95 for 10 minutes, and after running FurMark at the Aura’s native resolution for 10 minutes.

Given such a densely packed system, thermals were one of our major concerns when Digital Storm told us what our sample had inside. At idle, the system remained relatively cool, although the chipset reached a toasty 58.8°C.

During Prime95, the CPU reached 50.2°C, which is well below its threshold. No doubt, its thermal performance is helped by Digital Storm's compact Vortex AIO Liquid Cooler. A low-profile air cooler probably would have had more trouble exhausting heat, particularly paired with a Broadwell-E-based processor. If you plan on doing any overclocking, definitely grab the AIO solution.

The GTX 1080 Founders Edition, with its blower-style fan, reached 75.2°C. Some Nvidia customers might question whether the Founders Edition card is necessary, but an AIO system like the Aura is one application where a centrifugal design is preferable to axial fans. Because the Aura’s components are tightly packed, the last thing you want is warm air recirculated inside of the system.

Display Testing

This is the first time we’re including display measurements in a First Look, and what better way to debut the test than on a 34-inch screen. Measurements are taken at stock settings using a SpectraCal C6 colorimeter. At the lowest brightness point, the Aura's panel achieves a minimum white luminance of 74.6647cd/m², a minimum black luminance of 0.0742cd/m², and a contrast ratio of 1006.6:1. It has a maximum white luminance of 267.9906cd/m², a maximum black luminance of 0.1612cd/m², and a contrast ratio of 1662:1.

The Aura's brightness is set to 150cd/m² for our contrast, gamma, grayscale and saturation tests. Uncalibrated, the Aura runs blue at higher brightness levels. Reds are also undersaturated.

After adjusting the Aura's gamma to 2.2 and color temperature to 6500K, our results improve dramatically.

But Is It Worth It?

Boutique builders like Digital Storm charge a premium for custom systems. Moreover, all-in-ones tend to cost more if only for their unique form factor. As a result, the Aura is destined to be an expensive machine. Our configuration came in at $3377, though the base build, which features an Intel Core i7-6700, an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1060, 16GB of DDR4-2666 memory, and a 1TB hard drive, costs $2272. Playing with the configurator for a few minutes, I was able to drive the price down to $1788 using a Core i3-6320, a GTX 950, 8GB of memory, and the factory CPU cooler.

For around $1600 we could build a nearly equivalent system including a curved 34-inch monitor and a generous budget of $200 for the case. In this example, the mark-up for labor isn't terrible, especially for a boutique AIO. However, you can easily match our $3377 configuration with a beefier power supply and an even higher $300 case budget for around $3000. Additionally, the GeForce GTX 980 SLI setup that beat the Aura in most of our can be built for about $100 less.

Simply put, anyone shopping for the convenience of an AIO pays more and gets less, component for component. AIOs generally aren't as powerful as their desktop counterparts, they cost more, aren't as upgradeable, and usually can't game. With the Aura, you get the freedom to upgrade, and this certainly is built for gaming. It also lets you consolidate your monitor and separate PC.

But even for a boutique-built system, our Aura costs a lot. Its attractiveness depends on how much you value the form factor. The machine exemplifies clean aesthetics and clutter-free presentation above all else, and for those who value those attributes, the hefty price tag won't be as big of an issue.

MORE: Best PC Builds

MORE: How To Build A PC

MORE: All Gaming Content

Follow us on Facebook, Google+, RSS, Twitter and YouTube.

On the heels of Intel’s Broadwell-E launch, Digital Storm announced it would be offering the flagship i7-6950X in its all-in-one (AIO) gaming PC, the Aura. In addition to the powerful CPU option, the Aura can also feature up to an Nvidia GeForce GTX 1080 graphics card.

The Aura is a 34-inch AIO system that supports mini-ITX motherboards, including X99 platforms (specifically, ASRock’s X99E-ITX/ac). A simple BIOS update provides the aging motherboard with renewed relevance, offering Broadwell-E compatibility. Digital Storm specializes in custom gaming PCs with premium components, so while putting a 10-core i7-6950X alongside a GTX 1080 in the Aura may seem over the top, it probably shouldn't come as a big surprise.

The Aura sports other premium features, including a curved 34-inch WQHD (3440 x 1440) 60 Hz display, support for up to 32 GB of DDR4 memory and CPU liquid cooling. The rear of the chassis grants easy access to the components, allowing users to upgrade on their own and giving the device a degree of longevity. The Aura supports one M.2 SSD (up to a 512 GB Samsung 950 Pro) and two 2.5-inch drive bays (with up to a 2 TB Samsung 850 Pro or EVO SSD, or 1 TB HDD).

Digital Storm’s Aura 34-inch AIO gaming PC is available now at the company’s website, with Z170 variants starting at $1,999. There’s no word yet on the entry-level pricing for the X99 platform, or what the beastly Core i7-6950X will add to the cost.

Derek Forrest is an Associate Contributing Writer for Tom’s Hardware and Tom’s IT Pro. Follow Derek Forrest on Twitter. Follow us on Facebook, Google+, RSS, Twitter and YouTube.

Digital Storm announced that it will be launching the second generation of HydroLux PRO water cooling systems. The company's flagship systems will be offered with HydroLux PRO cooling and each one will include a custom cable management system to round out the look of these unique systems. 

Digital Storm said that the hard acrylic and copper tubing options offer long term durability and a sleek look. The company said the new HydroLux PRO high-performance cooling system features hard acrylic or copper tubing and includes 45-degree and 90-degree angled fittings to avoid bending the tubing, which Digital Storm said can make them fragile. The company said these flagship systems also include quick disconnect fittings for easy hardware replacement.

Digital Storm PC's with the new improved HydroLux PRO water cooling will be available on January 27. Pricing will vary depending on the hardware configuration.

Follow Kevin Carbotte @pumcypuhoy. Follow us on Facebook, Google+, RSS, Twitter and YouTube.

At CES earlier this year, Digital Storm showed off a new build that Seth Colaner, our News Director, described as "a thing of beauty" and a "spaceship:" the Aventum 3. At the time, we were told that it would come out sometime in the spring, and the starting price would be around the $3,000 mark. Now, on its September 22 release date, the Aventum 3 is ready for consumers at a slightly higher starting price tag of $4,930.

At the heart of the Aventum 3 is its custom-built water cooling system. Potential owners can easily locate the inlet and outlet ports of the loop on the motherboard, which makes both installation and removal of additional hardware easy, without having to dismantle the entire cooling system altogether.

The model shown at Las Vegas in January used BitsPower water blocks, pumps, fittings and radiators, but some of those parts might have changed brands in the past nine months. One change for certain was the water block, with Digital Storm creating the design, and final production by EKWB.

In keeping with its ease of use design is a new power system for multiple GPUs. A series of connectors — four eight-pin PCIe connectors and four six-pin PCIe connectors — are located above the motherboard, another way of making the process of adding or disconnecting GPUs an easy swap for the user.

Based on the video provided by Digital Storm, the motherboard used for the Aventum 3 is Asus' X99-E WS/USB 3.1 model. The company has yet to unveil the full options and specs for the build, but chances are this behemoth of a beautiful spaceship is out of most consumers' price range, leaving many to wonder how many units of the Digital Storm's latest creation will actually find a home.

Follow Rexly Peñaflorida II @Heirdeux. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

Introduction

Nvidia's G-Sync variable refresh technology was introduced almost two years ago. AMD wasted no time letting us know it had an equivalent capability planned. Many months later, we got our first taste of what came to be known as FreeSync. And now enthusiasts are asking whether to put their money behind AMD or Nvidia. Rather than answering that largely subjective question in our own unilateral way, we took it to the community by setting up a blind taste test of sorts. The experiment was a great success, and we're ready to share our results.

It probably wouldn’t surprise you to learn that reviewing PC hardware is a fairly solitary occupation. Sure, you sit in on Skype calls and answer a seemingly endless stream of emails. But it becomes easy to forget that there are millions of enthusiasts around the world looking for guidance. They don’t want every new technology to receive a soft recommendation delicately worded to avoid hurting anyone’s feelings. Rather, they pledge allegiance to hard info and rely on technically-minded writers able to distill hundreds of data points into a conclusion: buy this or skip it.

Sometimes that’s an easy call to make. More often it’s not, even with benchmarks illuminating the path. But when a technology can’t be easily put through a suite of quantitative metrics... well, then you’re making a purchasing decision based on our good word. And no doubt that makes both of us just a little bit uncomfortable.

When Nvidia introduced its G-Sync technology, we published G-Sync Technology Preview: Quite Literally A Game Changer. In that piece, we covered technical details, features, configuration and early subjective impressions. But we were off the hook, in a way. Our sample was pre-production. Compatible monitors still weren’t selling yet. And we had the word preview right in our title. Still, we knew Nvidia was onto something, even if we couldn't predict G-Sync's uptake.

The market is so much different today. Not only is G-Sync all over the place — available in 24-, 27- and 28-inch form factors, using TN or IPS panels — but screens with AMD’s FreeSync technology are starting to become more popular, too. We count seven compatible models on Newegg as of this writing, and Filippo, who co-authored the G-Sync launch with me, is working on his deep dive into FreeSync. Really, it’s time to take a stand.

Despite Nvidia’s staunch defense of its proprietary approach and AMD’s evangelizing of a standardized tack, both require a commitment to one company’s hardware or the other. There is no mix and match. AMD can't support G-Sync, and Nvidia won't capitulate on FreeSync. So which deserves your investment, G-Sync or FreeSync?

There is no easy way to benchmark the differences between them, making it perplexingly difficult to drench you in data. And we’ve been doing this long enough to know that any proclamation based on one individual’s experience will become a punching bag for the comments section. Clearly, this needed to become a group project.

The Setup

Two years ago, I put together a quick little event in Bakersfield, CA to evaluate the effectiveness of AMD’s frame pacing driver (Radeon HD 7990 Vs. GeForce GTX 690: The Crowd Picks A Winner) from an experiential standpoint. We gleaned some interesting information, talked technology and drank some beer at a local brewery. It was an all-around great time. As AMD’s FreeSync introduction came and went, we collectively decided that something similar, but on a larger scale, would be the best way to compare both variable refresh capabilities.

Editor-in-Chief Fritz Nelson covered the highlights of this most recent get-together in Tom's Hardware Readers Pit G-Sync Vs FreeSync In Weekend Battle, but a lot more went into the planning than our highlight reel shows. Even if this was being called an event — you know, for the purposes of everyone getting to enjoy themselves — it would be handled like a proper laboratory experiment.

The first step, taken months ago, was letting AMD and Nvidia know our intentions and securing their support. Both companies were quick to climb on board, putting the onus on us to create a comparison both sides would consider fair. The hardware had to be decided on first, of course. By the time we were ready to commit, AMD's 300 series had launched. So, Nvidia proposed using GeForce GTX 970 and pitting it against Radeon R9 390X. The GM204-based board could be overclocked to match Grenada XT’s performance, the company assured us. In retrospect, we should have countered that the R9 390 would be a more fitting match. But given the advantage it was being handed, AMD readily accepted that pairing.

MORE: Best Graphics Cards For The Money
MORE: All Graphics Content
MORE: Graphics Cards in the Forum

Picking the monitors that both GPUs would drive proved to be more contentious. I wanted a comparison between FreeSync and G-Sync at 2560x1440, which meant eliminating the LCD as a variable. Right away, our options were narrowed to two: Acer’s XB270HU (G-Sync) vs. Asus’ MG279Q (FreeSync) or Asus’ PG278Q (G-Sync) vs. BenQ’s XL2730Z (FreeSync). The former would give us two IPS-based screens, while the latter shifted to TN. We’ve long dreamed of the day when fast-refresh IPS monitors were readily available at QHD resolutions, so that became our first choice. There was just one wrinkle: Asus’ MG279Q has a variable refresh range of 35 to 90Hz, whereas the BenQ can do 40 to 144Hz. So, while the Asus is perhaps a superior example of a gaming monitor, it’s not necessarily the best representation of FreeSync if your graphics subsystem regularly pushes above 90 FPS. Nevertheless, both AMD and Nvidia signed off on our preference for IPS.

MORE: Best Computer Monitors
MORE: All Monitor Content
MORE: Displays in the Forums

Next, we needed to build platforms around these graphics subsystems. Whereas my Bakersfield frame pacing event involved two PCs — one powered by AMD and the other by Nvidia — this experiment was to be grander. We envisioned eight total machines and two spares, which transcended our capacity for sourcing components and building our own boxes during off hours. So, we approached Digital Storm, a long-time supporter of the site, to gauge its interest in what we were doing. It too signed on right off the bat, offering 10 of its Vanquish 3 systems in Level 4 trim, keyboards, mice and headsets. The company even upgraded them to Core i7s, understanding our desire to factor out any potential platform bottleneck from a gaming comparison.

Digital Storm Vanquish 3 (Level 4 Trim)

With a hardware foundation in place, it was time to formulate a plan for testing. Eight machines meant we could parallelize the process. And, depending on the venue, we could run for five or six hours if necessary, cycling groups through at regular intervals. While we originally hoped to get each volunteer through four games on both technologies, the math just didn’t add up. Eight unique test points per participant times, say, five minutes per experience would add up to an hour after switching seats, games and settings. Instead, we’d give two groups of four a chance to play two games in front of G-Sync and the same for FreeSync.

Naturally, game selection was its own issue, and it quickly became clear that both AMD and Nvidia knew where their respective strengths and weaknesses would materialize. I’ll spare you the politicking, but we eventually settled on a pair of titles commonly associated with AMD (Battlefield 4 and Crysis 3), and two others in Nvidia’s camp (Borderlands: The Pre Sequel and The Witcher 3). Battlefield and Borderlands were deemed our “faster-paced” selections, while Crysis and The Witcher were on the slower side. At the end of the day, though, as a PC gamer, I wanted each title to run at the lushest playable detail settings possible. That’d prove to be another topic for zero-day debate between the two companies. Admittedly, any preference toward quality or performance is going to be subjective. We conceded that both schools of thought are valid, and one gamer's preference may even change depending on genre.

Meet The Players

The logistics of this scaled-up undertaking were formidable, and I have to give props to the Tom’s Hardware crew for putting everything together. I came up with the concept for a comparative experiment, but many other minds executed it.

To begin, there was AMD and Nvidia. Both companies were given the playbook in as much detail as possible each step of the way. In return, they weighed in with feedback, blessed the methodologies and, to our delight, sent representatives to attend. This proved much more valuable than I could have imaged. During setup, the two companies were able to properly configure their respective workstations, overclock to the appropriate levels (in Nvidia’s case) and watch over each others’ shoulders to confirm no foul play. They also came bearing gifts—at the end of our festivities we were able to give away several graphics cards, jerseys, water bottles and even a gaming console.

As mentioned, Digital Storm contributed in a huge way by getting our systems built and shipped out. The company wasn’t able to be there, but its foresight in sending spare machines saved us from shipping damage and one overworked power supply. It was a shame that preserving the experiment’s integrity meant hiding the boxes from view. They really were clean builds. We just couldn’t risk someone peeking inside or catching a glimpse of a rear I/O panel.

We needed a venue large enough to host more attendees, more sponsors and a lot more hardware. Newegg stepped up and let us use its Hybrid Center in City of Industry. Additionally, several Newegg employees showed up bright and early on a Saturday morning to help us set up and to support us throughout the day. They were the first to arrive and the last to leave; we couldn’t have done it without them. On a tangent, if you live in Southern California and shop at Newegg, having the Hybrid Center hold your order for will-call gives you a great excuse to get hands-on with a lot of the technology out on display. It’s really a cool destination tucked away amongst the huge warehouses that typify the area.

The day was destined to be a long one, so we considered it imperative to have activities on-hand to keep our readers entertained. MSI and Zalman both showed up in force with gaming laptops, peripherals, motherboards and the manpower to field questions all day long. Both companies occupied tents outside, flanked by plenty of food and drink (again, provided by Newegg), as each group of eight attendees cycled through the “lab” we built in the Hybrid Center’s lobby. Inside, AMD showcased its prototype of Quantum, with two Fiji GPUs inside, powering Oculus Rift and Crytek's Back to Dinosaur Island 2 demo. Everyone who expressed interest was ushered to a back room, introduced to Quantum and allowed some time to experience a bit of gameplay that few others have seen. A special thanks to AMD for giving our readers the chance to go hands-on with such an exclusive treat.

Of course, I also have to thank the Tom’s Hardware staffers who spent time installing games onto the test platforms, building covers to hide the monitor bezels and stands, registering members of the Tom’s Hardware community online so we knew who to expect, checking everyone in on-site and proctoring the electronic questionnaire that collected data after each group finished the experiment.

Welcome To The Big Show

The event’s energy actually kicked into high gear the night before everyone was to show up. Both AMD and Nvidia arrived a day early to help dial everything in to their mutual satisfaction. Along the way, we discovered a couple of configuration points that needed to be discussed.

First was the decision to turn v-sync on or off outside of FreeSync’s effective range (again, on the Asus MG279Q, this is 35 to 90Hz). One company argued it should be left on, while the other countered it should be off. The decision mattered, of course. With v-sync on, dropping below the variable refresh range has a particularly adverse effect on frame rate, while turning it off causes quite a bit of tearing at frame rates above the VRR.

In the end, we settled this by taking it to the community on Facebook, Twitter and our own forums. I counted more than 180 responses on Facebook before siding with the majority and making the call that we’d leave v-sync off, which incidentally coincides with AMD’s default driver behavior. I fired off my decision, set my alarm for 4:30AM and went to bed. The Facebook thread later went on for 560+ responses at last count.

The next morning, I pulled up to Newegg’s facility just after 7:00AM, followed shortly by the crew that’d run the event. As Tom’s Hardware, AMD and Nvidia began fine-tuning game settings on our systems, it became clear that we had different ideas of what constituted the “best” experience.

Borderlands was easy. Even with its most taxing options enabled, this game runs in excess of 140 FPS on both cards. Given a practical ceiling of 90Hz for FreeSync, we’d be outside of the technology’s range indefinitely. Would gamers be able to tell? That’s what we’d be looking for in the data. Crysis and The Witcher were set to serve up good-looking graphics. We used a Very High system spec in the former, with 2x SMAA and High texture resolution keeping the average frame rate in the 50s. The latter was cranked up to its Ultra detail preset, High post-processing effects and HairWorks set to Off. Frame rates on both cards were in the 40s.

Originally, I planned to set Battlefield to its Ultra preset at 2560x1440, exactly the way I play and benchmark the game. This would have kept both boards under 90 FPS through our test sequence. Nvidia wanted to dial quality back to High and turn down MSAA, though, nudging frame rates into the 100s. After watching company representatives demonstrate Battlefield at that level, I can say it’s noticeably smoother. However, we also didn’t want to deliberately hobble AMD, particularly with Borderlands already pushing above the Asus monitor's variable refresh range. So, we ended up making a compromise: one set of systems would run AMD and Nvidia at the Ultra preset I originally intended, while another set pitted AMD at its Ultra preset and Nvidia at High. We’d note the workstation numbers and compare responses after the event to see if the pairs scored differently. The two companies agreed to this, and we wrapped up prep just minutes before the event was scheduled to begin.

After a brief welcome speech, the first group of eight sat down at their assigned PCs and fired up their games. They weren't told what to look for; they only knew they were there to experience G-Sync and FreeSync.

From that point on, the day would consist of wave after wave being escorted in, playing for several minutes, switching machines to play the same game on the competing technology, firing up a second game, playing and then switching back. At the end of each round, everyone got up and walked over to four notebooks we had set up with a SurveyGizmo questionnaire. Participants were asked to refrain from discussing their experience.

There was a short break in the middle there where we all hit up the taco truck and shotgunned a Monster, but it was pretty much non-stop action until the end. When the last of the 48 participants submitted his survey, Zalman kicked off our raffle, which continued with thousands of dollars’ worth of swag from MSI, AMD and Nvidia. We concluded with a big reveal, giving away the identities of the PCs they used. The day was exhausting without question, but we all agreed that it was a success.

Our community members in attendance now know what they were playing on. However, they don’t know whether G-Sync or FreeSync won the audience’s favor. Let’s get into the results. [Editor's note: Just to clarify, based on some early comments, the community members only know what they were playing on at the very end of the day, after all participants had played and all surveys had been filled out.]

Test Results: FreeSync or G-Sync?

We begin with the overall result, and then drill down from there. Resist the temptation to take this first chart and use it exclusively as the basis for your next purchasing decision. After all, there were a couple of different factors in play that need to be discussed in greater depth, and this outcome cannot capture their subtleties.

Twenty-nine (or 60%) of our participants chose G-Sync based on their experience in our experiment. Ten (or ~21%) of the attendees picked FreeSync. And nine (or almost 19%) considered both solutions of equal quality. Given the price premium on G-Sync, you can almost count an undecided vote for AMD, since smart money often goes to the cheaper hardware if it delivers a comparable experience.

We expected Nvidia to secure the majority in our overall tally for a couple of reasons. First, Borderlands, which half of our respondents played, ran outside of the FreeSync-equipped Asus monitor’s variable refresh range. So we need to assess how many surveys cited this title as their reason for choosing G-Sync. Second, we created a side experiment on two computers using Battlefield 4, which allowed FreeSync to remain under 90 FPS (in its variable refresh range) while Nvidia’s hardware pushed higher frame rates through dialed-back quality options. One-quarter of our attendees would have unknowingly participated in this one, and we’ll separately compare their responses to the folks who played at the Ultra preset on both technologies.

To be clear, the MG279Q’s variable range of 35 to 90Hz is not a limitation of FreeSync, but rather a consequence of the scaler Asus chose to outfit its monitor with. We wanted to compare similar-looking panels and had to make some compromises to minimize the variables in play. There was an alternate combination that could have stepped us back to TN technology with a range of 40 to 144Hz, but we do not regret running our tests using IPS. Universally, the audience commented on how gorgeous the screens looked, and we suspect that most of the gamers with Asus’ MG279Q on their list have it there because it offers a native QHD resolution, that AU Optronics AHVA panel and refresh rates up to 144Hz. Regardless of whether you enable FreeSync or not, that’s one heck of a gaming product for $600, or $150 less than the G-Sync-equipped equivalent, as priced on Newegg at the time of this writing. [Editor's note: At publishing time, the price of the Acer monitor increased $50. This is reflected in the pricing buttons that link to NewEgg. See page 2. Thus, the price difference grew. Those pricing buttons are dynamic and pull directly from NewEgg, so they also could change over time.]

Asus further shared its plans to launch a TN-based FreeSync-capable screen in early September with a 1ms response time and VRR between 40 and 144Hz. The company will also introduce its G-Sync-equipped IPS line in September, including a 4K/60Hz screen and a QHD/144Hz model.

Eight respondents said there was no single game that stood out to them, and of those, five answered that the two technologies were of equal quality. One respondent made comments, but didn’t cite a specific game that affected him and gave both technologies equal marks.

Crysis was most often cited as the game where a difference was observed, which is difficult to explain technically because it should have been running in a variable refresh range on both competing technologies. Four of those who mentioned Crysis preferred their experience on AMD’s hardware, eight chose Nvidia’s and one said the two technologies were of equal quality, though his Nvidia-based platform did stutter during an intense sequence.

Next was Borderlands, which 11 participants said showed the most difference. Nine of those picked G-Sync as their preference, one chose FreeSync, noting the 390X-equipped machine felt smoother in both Borderlands and The Witcher, and one said they were of equal quality after noticing the tearing on FreeSync, but mentioned a different experience in The Witcher. While we hadn't anticipated it during our planning phase, Borderlands turned out to be a gimmie for Nvidia since the AMD setups were destined to either tear (if we left v-sync off) or stutter/lag (if we switched v-sync on). What we confirmed was that a majority of our respondents could see the difference. It's a good data point to have.

Battlefield demonstrated the most variance for eight attendees. Six folks favored what they saw from G-Sync, one picked FreeSync and the last noted that he experienced smoother performance in this game (perhaps compared to Crysis?), but said the two systems were of equal quality.

The Witcher seemed least-influential—seven participants saw the biggest difference in it. Three of those thought the 390X delivered better responsiveness, while four favored the GTX 970 and G-Sync. As with Crysis, both G-Sync and FreeSync should have been running within their respective variable refresh ranges based on the settings we chose. So, it’s hard to say with certainty what other factors would be affecting game play.

How about that mini-experiment we did with Battlefield 4, running two workstations in the same sub-90 FPS range and two at different settings, keeping FreeSync at its target performance level with higher quality as Nvidia dropped to the High preset for faster frame rates?

Well, of the folks who played on the machines set to Battlefield's Ultra quality preset, three chose the AMD-equipped system, eight went with Nvidia’s hardware and one put them on equal footing. Notably, even when a respondent picked one technology over the other, it was mentioned that they were quite similar and free from tearing. Other in-game differences like perceived frame rates seemed to affect the choices.

Right next to them, we had another AMD machine at Ultra settings and an Nvidia box dialed down to the High preset. Again, three respondents picked AMD’s hardware. Seven went with Nvidia, while two said they were of equal quality. Three participants specifically called out smoothness in Battlefield 4 as something they noticed, and nobody reported lower visual quality, despite the dialed-back quality preset and lack of anti-aliasing on the GeForce-equipped machine. Overall, we'd call those results comparable.

Thirty-four of our 48 participants said that yes, they would pay a premium for the experience they preferred over the other configuration. Thirteen wouldn’t, and one answer wasn’t clear enough to categorize.

Interestingly, nine of those who said they’d spend more on the better experience ended up picking the Radeon R9 390X/Asus MG279Q combination. Twenty-three picked the G-Sync-capable hardware. So, 79% of our respondents who preferred the G-Sync experience would be willing to pay extra for it. How much, though?

We asked our participants to quantify the degree to which they favored one solution over the other, if indeed they had a preference. Not all of the answers we received were usable, but of those that were, 16 said they’d be willing to spend up to $100 more for the better experience. Nine capped the premium around $200. And three felt strongly enough to budget significantly more—one gamer committed to up to twice the spend, one said an extra $200-$300 per year and a third would budget up to $500 more for a high-end gaming PC.

A Little About Our Participants

In addition to the base experiment we wanted to run, we also sought to collect some information from the folks in attendance. We know they’re hardware enthusiasts—they’re reading Tom’s Hardware, after all. But how much time do they spend gaming? Were they confident enough in their answer to identify the machine with AMD’s technology inside? How about Nvidia’s? What are the specs of their current gaming PC? Did they have any self-acknowledged biases to one company or the other, and if so, why?

Right off the bat, we found it interesting that 10 of 48 respondents believed they knew which system was which. Of those 10, nine were correct, though for a variety of reasons. One respondent guessed the 390X-equipped PC based on the heat it was putting out, and indeed, AMD’s representative increased fan speed in Catalyst Control Center to help with stability under the tables we were using. Others cited smoothness issues, though in the games mentioned, both FreeSync and G-Sync would have been within their target ranges, so perceived fluidity could be affected by the game, driver optimizations or slight differences in performance (despite our best efforts to equalize frame rates through clock rate tuning). For what it’s worth, both Nvidia and AMD were on the receiving ends of these judgement calls; it wasn't just one or the other that benefited.

We didn’t qualify readers for our event based on any specific criteria aside from availability. Still, we wanted to know how much time the folks passing on their thoughts spent playing their favorite titles during an average week. You could argue that a seasoned gamer would have a heightened sensitivity to tearing or input lag. Or, there’s the counter-argument that a newbie might be less likely to draw conclusions based on preconceived notions.

That distinction didn’t end up mattering. Thirty-one respondents reported playing for more than 10 hours a week. Sixteen were between five and 10 hours a week. Just one claimed zero to four.

It’s a little more difficult to represent each respondent’s system specs visually, and I’m not even sure there’s a concrete correlation between someone’s primary gaming PC and their preference between the two technologies being compared in our experiment. Nevertheless, I was surprised at how many gamers are running high-end setups.

Although we took great pains to keep the hardware we were testing covered, ensuring personal biases didn’t affect our survey results, we still wanted to gauge the general predilections of our audience. Twenty-five respondents identified as agnostic, four claimed to be AMD fans and 19 were Nvidia fans.

As you might imagine, the reasons readers leaned one direction or the other varied greatly. Regardless of the answer, though, many of the folks who wrote in an explanation did mention favoring whichever solution yielded the best experience. Three of the four AMD fans specifically called out pricing. And the Nvidia fans overwhelmingly cited driver stability as their primary motivator, though efficiency came up several times as well.

Summing The Analysis

We started down the path of comparing AMD’s FreeSync technology to Nvidia’s G-Sync in the hopes that a community-based, hands-on approach would provide additional insight or perhaps lead us to some unexpected conclusion. In some ways it has. But we naturally had some hypotheses going into our event, and those largely proved true, too.

Let’s get the big question out of the way: what’s better, G-Sync or FreeSync? As both technologies stand right now, the G-Sync ecosystem is more mature. From compatible graphics cards to G-Sync-capable displays and variable refresh ranges, Nvidia has the leg up. It also has an advantage when you drop below the variable refresh range. Our experiment never took us to that point, fortunately, so it didn't become an issue we needed to address in the analysis.

Then again, you’ll also pay $150 more for the G-Sync monitor we tested today—a premium that exceeds what most of our respondents claimed they’d be willing to spend for the experience they ultimately preferred, and some of those folks even picked AMD’s less expensive hardware combination as their favorite. [Editor's note: As previously noted, the pricing difference between monitors has increased since we published this article. As always, even that is subject to further change.]

Given the technical similarities of what FreeSync and G-Sync set out to achieve, so long as they’re both in their variable refresh range, all of our sources suggest you should get fundamentally identical results from them. On paper, that is. Differences do crop up outside of those upper and lower bounds, where FreeSync and G-Sync ask you to pick between v-sync on or off, and G-Sync is able to double (or more) screen refreshes when they drop below 30 FPS. We chose to leave v-sync off on the FreeSync-capable machines after surveying our readers’ habits and acknowledging AMD’s default driver behavior. However, it would have been interesting to compare results with v-sync on, particularly in Borderlands.

What about that Asus monitor we chose to represent FreeSync? While we can’t claim to know why the company chose a scaler limited to 90Hz on its 144Hz MG279Q, we’ve heard that it’s selling really well. Our event participants certainly loved it (along with Acer’s XB270HU). A $600 price point certainly isn’t cheap. However, when you’re talking about a 144Hz IPS display, gamers are bound to find a little more room in their budgets. In addition to the enthusiasts buying this screen for its FreeSync support, we suspect that those with high-end graphics subsystems from both GPU vendors are simply running it at 144Hz for fast-paced action on a beautiful-looking panel.

The Bottom Line

AMD is at a disadvantage because it doesn’t have the variable refresh range coverage currently enjoyed by Nvidia. If you spring for the QHD/FreeSync/IPS display we tested with and run a game like Borderlands on a 390X, it’s going to fall outside of 35-90Hz almost exclusively, even if you dial in the most taxing settings possible. Conversely, the QHD/FreeSync/TN screen we could have chosen instead would have likely run into issues with the quality settings we used in The Witcher, which averaged in the 40s, but also dipped lower.

Theoretical similarities between G-Sync and FreeSync aside, we also cannot ignore the fact that a number of our event participants chose the Nvidia solution in games where both FreeSync and G-Sync should have been inside their respective ranges at all times. This happened at a rate of 2:1 in Crysis, and almost 3:1 in Battlefield 4. Those are discrepancies we’d have a tough time attributing to variable refresh. Something else is going on there—a situation made stranger by the fact that both games were picked for their AMD Gaming Evolved affiliations.

Of course, FreeSync is relatively young compared to G-Sync, and we understand that there are hardware and software improvements planned that’ll address some of the technology’s current weaknesses. Technical individuals within AMD and Nvidia acknowledge that, inside the variable refresh range, FreeSync and G-Sync should be equally enjoyable. While our experimental data actually gives Nvidia an edge where one wasn’t expected, paying an extra $150 or more for it may sway certain enthusiasts the other way.

As for us, we’re just glad both technologies exist. Nvidia should be commended for its innovation, which set us on this path almost two years ago. AMD is taking a different approach, and it’s progressing much more slowly. But viable—nay, successful partner products are available, as evidenced by the MG279Q. No doubt FreeSync's lower barrier to entry will be appreciated by more gamers as the line-up of compatible components grows. Might the same sort of experiment held a year in the future yield different results? It’s hard to say. But based on the enthusiasm we saw at Newegg’s Hybrid Center, we’re confident we have the crew for whatever testing is needed.

Post Mortem

There's no such thing as a perfect experiment. We put a ton of time into planning our event, were as transparent as possible with both AMD and Nvidia ahead of it and still ran into zero-day issues that had to be dealt with. As part of our analysis, we thought it important to follow-up with both companies and get their feedback. Specifically, we wanted suggestions on ways to make future events better. Part of this involved facing perceived shortcomings. Some of these came from AMD and Nvidia, and others were noted by our own team.

Let's start with Nvidia's commentary, provided by Tom Petersen, director of technical marketing and one of our attendees.

The side by side blind testing technique is a great way to get some direct feedback from gamers about new technologies. Unfortunately, it is also the case that whenever someone knows what we are testing for they are biased to some extent which could inadvertently impact their testing and feedback.

There are a few techniques that can help mitigate this inherent expectation bias:

1. Double blind studies – the test administrator and the testers should not know what is being tested.

    a. Don’t tell the gamers the purpose of the evaluation – knowledge of this being a G-Sync vs. FreeSync could impact results.

    b. Use volunteers to run the test flow to eliminate the risk of administrators passing along test information

2. Include a control group with nothing new. In this case I would have used one of the monitors in “fixed refresh rate mode.”

3. Increase the sample size. This may be very difficult in practice, but more data is definitely better when science is involved.

Overall I enjoyed the opportunity to engage with THG’s community. I look forward to seeing the results.

We especially like Tom's suggestion to use a control group in a fixed refresh mode for comparison. Given a longer day and perhaps more activities to keep other folks busy, we would like to see gamers on three systems, one of them being a control of some sort.

A larger sample size was on our wish list all along, but there's only so much you can do with eight machines and one Saturday afternoon. This event was already several times as large as our last one, and we'll definitely shoot for something even larger next time.

The idea to keep the purpose of the experiment under wraps is also intriguing, though I'm not sure we'd have as much luck getting volunteers to sign up without some sort of teaser ahead of time. This and volunteer-run testing might be ideal, but they present us with some practical challenges we'll have to think about.

Now for AMD's feedback, which comes to us by way of Antal Tungler, public relations manager, who helped us coordinate the company's participation (including AMD attendees).

AMD is always happy to see this sort of testing become available to end users and community members and people who are just interested in tech and PC gaming. We applaud Tom’s for this initiative regardless of the outcome. AMD FreeSync technology has now been on the market for almost six months and we’ve seen terrific adoption from display vendors: there are now 20 FreeSync-enabled monitors on the market with more on the way.

A couple of thoughts regarding this test:

-Because AMD FreeSync technology enables such a wide variety of display tech and refresh rates for vendors to productize, we believe a true Pepsi-style challenge for DRR displays should aim to keep the frame rates in the DRR zone all the time. It’s also important that all parties run at nearly identical frame rates, which greatly benefits a true Pepsi-style challenge. We’d love to see more emphasis on this in the future.

-Choosing games and settings carefully is paramount to make sure that the scenarios gamers look at are reproducible, consistent and glitch-free. Maybe there’s some room for improvement there.

-One could consider including a DRR specific benchmark, like the AMD Windmill application. While it certainly shouldn’t be the only method of testing, it would be interesting to add to the overall results.

We believe that some last minute changes made before the event (that didn’t necessarily guide the experiment in a true apples-to-apples comparison’s direction) make it difficult to call it a true Pepsi challenge. Regardless, we’re really happy to see Tom’s Hardware putting this much effort into pulling together this event, and are grateful for the opportunity to have participated in it. We’re sure with some of the above changes implemented, there are many more events like this coming in the future that benefit end users and the industry as a whole. Thank you!

The changes AMD is referring to are the zero-hour decision to leave v-sync off outside of its variable refresh range and the side experiment we put together in Battlefield 4. On the first point, I really wish we would have thought to specify v-sync behavior one way or the other back when we were disclosing everything to both companies. But given the majority vote of our readers and AMD's default  behavior, I'm comfortable with where we ended up for the event.

Allowing Nvidia to set one of its systems up with different settings in Battlefield is a fair protest on AMD's part, even if we generated useful data from it. Done over, I would be more adamant that the settings selected before the event needed to be universal, and if we wanted to do a separate experiment, do it during lunch or with stragglers after the official proceedings.

I do, however, disagree that games and settings should be chosen to keep both solutions in their variable refresh range. G-Sync and FreeSync have dissimilar VRRs right now, and that has to factor into any buying decision. Forcing the technologies into their bands, however wide or narrow they might be, overlooks that the bands aren't equal.

My own feedback is more pointed than that of either AMD or Nvidia (both organizations were polite and professional each step of the way). I'd be more tempted, in retrospect, to use TN-based screens, giving AMD a more generous VRR of 40 to 144Hz, if only to see how the Borderlands results would change. This is disappointing because I've maintained for two years that I want three high-refresh IPS panels on my desk for gaming. Stepping back to TN for the broader VRR wouldn't interest me, personally. But that's a reflection of where we're at right now with FreeSync. Hopefully the initiative continues gaining momentum and we see its growing pains remedied.

Still, had we gone with the BenQ screen instead, a lot of the other issues we had on game day might not have arisen. Or maybe we would have figured out something else to argue about. This was a battle between two graphics giants, after all.

MORE: Best Graphics Cards For The Money
MORE: All Graphics Content
MORE: Graphics Cards in the Forum

MORE: Best Computer Monitors
MORE: All Monitor Content
MORE: Displays in the Forums

Chris Angelini is a Technical Editor at Tom's Hardware. Follow him on Twitter and Google+.

Follow Tom's Hardware on Twitter, Facebook and Google+.

Internally, some of us at Tom's Hardware have taken to calling custom PC gaming builds "sportscars." They're these beautiful things meant to be ogled, and you just can't build them yourself, but sometimes a certain system is so over-the-top that we give it a different classification -- that of a spaceship.

The Digital Storm Aventum 3 is a spaceship.

Although you can configure an Aventum 3 for around $3,000, the beastly model we saw at CES will actually run you closer to $6,000. We gave it one of our Tom's Hardware CES Top Picks awards.

The first thing that strikes you when you see the Aventum 3 is the luminescent blue lighting and the white-colored hard tubing, with shiny chrome-colored fittings. The glass reservoir is also (of course) filled with white coolant, and even the cabling is white, which adds to the whole visceral effect.

The Digital Storm guys bent all their own tubing, and they used BitsPower water blocks, fittings, pumps and radiators.

If you look around back, you'll see that there are actually fittings back there and more hard tubing, connecting the whole loop through the back panel. Further, note that instead of just wrapping cables all over the place, Digital Storm put fan controller units and power cable mounts on the back. This eliminates a great deal of the cable clutter by keeping so much of it around the back of the motherboard while also making it exceptionally easy to swap out cables from the modular PSU without messing anything up.

The back is so pretty that Digital Storm built a window into that side panel.

You can also opt for a version of the Aventum 3 with soft and quick disconnects. Digital Storm had just such a rig to show off in its CES suite (tricked out with Canary yellow coolant). A product rep demonstrated how well the fittings worked by casually popping one off. A few drops of coolant, which had worked their way into the fitting, was all the leakage there was.

There are three -- three -- radiators on board this version of the Aventum 3. There's a massive 560 mm radiator on the right side with four 140 mm fans all nicely lit, as well as a 280 mm radiator on the left side (2 x 140 mm fans) and a 420 mm radiator on the top (3 x 140 mm fans). To round things out, Digital Storm slapped four 140 mm fans on the front of the case and a couple of 120 mm fans behind the motherboard tray.

The 28.5-inch tall case offers eight HDD bays and eight expansion slots. This particular build had two Nvidia cards in SLI (with that nice-looking hard SLI bridge), but Digital Storm told us that you can have up to four. You'd have to redo all that hard tubing yourself to get four cards in there, which probably isn't advisable, but even with two cards, you get more than enough video out options.

There's a slim ODD (a full 5.25-inch drive wouldn't look as pretty), and the case offers two USB 3.0 ports, an SD card slot, micro SD card slot, and headphone and mic jacks. The motherboard's I/O panel also offers another 10 USB 3.0 slots, two USB 2.0 ports (one that offers USB BIOS Flashback), dual LAN ports, five audio jacks, S/PDIF out, and more.

Inside the main part of the case, above the radiator, you can get custom cutouts in the metal. Digital Storm had "Aventum 3" on this unit, but you can put whatever you want.

Finally, although the blue lights and white accents are beautiful, you can also switch the lighting to white, red and/or green, using the little remote that Digital Storm made. In addition to the colors, you can set the lights to flicker, pulse and more. (Just in case you need to draw a little more attention to the rig.)

Digital Storm told us that the company actually does sell a number of these tricked-out beasts, despite the price tag, and you'll be able to get one of your own sometime this spring.

Follow Seth Colaner@SethColaner. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

If we didn't know any better, we'd say that Digital Storm has launched its own unofficial Steam Machine called the Eclipse. This small form factor PC looks console-like in appearance and packs plenty of power that should make the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 shed a tear. However, the cost isn't quite so console friendly, with a starting price of $699.

Digital Storm offers the new Eclipse gaming PC in four configurations. The $699 Level 1 model consists of an H97 chipset motherboard, an AMD Radeon R7 260X graphics card with 2 GB of video memory, an unlocked Intel Pentium CPU, 8 GB of 1600 MHz memory, and a 1 TB 7200 RPM hard drive. The $899 Level 2 model upgrades the Eclipse with an AMD Radeon R9 270X graphics card with 2 GB of video RAM and an Intel Core i3-4350 CPU. An optical drive is optional.

For the $999 Level 3 model, Digital Storm has thrown in the Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 graphics card with 2 GB of video RAM and Intel's Core i5-4590 CPU.

However, for the $1,299 Level 4 model, Digital Storm has built an entirely new setup that uses a Z97 chipset motherboard. This model consists of a Nvidia GeForce GTX 970 graphics card with 4 GB of video RAM, an Intel Core i5-4690K CPU, 8 GB of RAM, a 120 Samsung EVO SSD, a 1 TB 7200 RPM HDD, and a DVD writer. Good stuff.

The product shots show that the Windows 8.1-powered Eclipse provides four USB 3.0 ports, two Ethernet ports, two HDMI ports, two USB 2.0 ports, a DVI connector, audio output jacks and more, on the back. On the front, users will find two USB 3.0 ports and jacks for headphones and a microphone. All four models include integrated sound and a 400 watt Digital Storm certified power supply. The Eclipse measures just 15 inches (L) x 4 inches (W) x 14 inches (H).

"ECLIPSE fills a gap in the PC gaming market," said Harjit Chana, Chief Brand Officer Digital Storm. "There are multiple high-end SFF systems like our own BOLT II, but fewer mainstream options focused on an affordable HD gaming experience."

To configure and order an Eclipse PC now, head here and scroll down to the bottom of the page.

Follow Kevin Parrish @exfileme. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

As a new Intel processor launch goes (our full review here), so goes a new chipset and motherboards, and thus we end up with new custom gaming rigs sporting the new hardware. Several such systems are landing today from most of the usual suspects, including Alienware, CyberPowerPC, Digital Storm, Maingear, Origin PC and Velocity Micro.

Alienware’s latest is a new Alienware Area 51, and its design is a departure from the norm. It has a triangular chassis that features a modular cabling system; room for up to three double-wide, full-length graphics cards; support for up to five SSDs or HDDs; nine programmable lighting zones; and liquid cooling.  

There are convenient carrying handles at each point in the triangle. In addition to the caché of a unique look, the triangular design is intended to offer better airflow (because the slanted sides will never be stuck up against a 90-degree wall) and easier access to front- and rear I/O ports.  

The forty-five-pound Area 51 comes with an overclocked 6- or 8-core Haswell-E chip, Killer gigabit Ethernet and 802.11ac 2x2 WiFi. Alienware did not share pricing information.

Digital Storm isn’t going as whole-hog as CyberPowerPC, but the company is now outfitting all of its Level 3 and Level 4 systems (i.e., the higher-end half of its product line) with Haswell-E CPUs and X99 motherboards, and DDR4 memory. Digital Storm’s chip of choice is the Intel Core i7-5960X, which the company says produced 150 percent better performance than the previous-gen Intel Core i7-4960X when both were overclocked to 4.6GHz.

Like CyberPowerPC, Maingear is adding X99 motherboard options to all of its desktop systems, dropping the new 8-core Intel Core i7-5960X Extreme Edition, which boasts up to 45 percent better performance when compared to the previous 4-core systems.

The company has also updated the FORCE, a high-performance desktop in Maingear’s EPIC family. This machine uses the new SUPERSTOCK cooling system, which includes parallel cooling loops, new chrome fittings, premium cooling blocks for all components, and unbreakable PETG hard tubing.

Unlike Maingear, Origin PC isn’t dishing out the new Intel goods to every PC in its hardware portfolio. Instead, the company has chosen the Millennium and Genesis desktops as recipients.

Finally we have Velocity Micro, who announced that its line of Raptor gaming PCs and select ProMagix workstation PCs now sport the new Intel Core “Haswell-E” option. The systems will also provide X99 chipset motherboards and DDR4 RAM options.

The three new CPUs in these two systems are the Core i7-5960X (8 cores, 16 threads, 20MB of L3 cache) clocked at 3.0/3.3 GHz, the Core i7-5930K (6 cores, 12 threads, 15 MB of L3 cache) clocked at 3.5/3.9 GHz, and the Core i7-5820K (6-cores, 12 threads, 15 MB of L3 cache) clocked at 3.3/3.6 GHz.

You can read our full Haswell-E review here.

UPDATE: AVADirect announced on Friday that it's now offering custom gaming systems equipped with Intel's three new Haswell-E processors.

Follow Kevin Parrish @exfileme. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

Digital Storm introduced on Tuesday the Bolt II Battle Box Titan Z Special Edition, an ultra-thin small form factor desktop featuring Nvidia's GeForce GTX Titan Z 12 GB graphics card and Digital Storm's new Hardline Cooling System. The regular price for this gaming beast is $6,658, but the company is selling it for a cheaper price of $4,997. Ka-pow!

"Nvidia launched the GTX Battle Box Program to allow gamers to play AAA, combat-focused games at max settings and super high resolutions," said Harjit Chana, Chief Brand Officer. "But gaming in 4K requires much more than simply upgrading components. Our Hardline Cooling System allows gamers to unlock the Bolt II's full potential and experience games in ways they never thought possible."

The Hardline Cooling System consists of a 240 mm radiator, a pump and yellow coolant running through acrylic tubing like alien veins, cooling Intel's overclocked Core i7-4790K processor (4.0 GHz, 4.4 GHz). The base specs also show a thermal management control board, an internal lighting system and two 120 mm Corsair Series SP120 fans.

This new Battle Box also features the Asus Maximus VI Impact motherboard, 16 GB of DDR3 1600 MHz memory, a 250 GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD and a 1 TB Seagate hard drive. There are also two gigabit Ethernet ports, four USB 3.0 ports, a slot-loading Blu-Ray player optical drive, integrated audio and Windows 8.1. All of this is powered by a custom 700 watt power supply.

Customers can also customize the machine if the components aren't up to snuff. On the CPU front, customers can grab the dual-core Intel Pentium G3258 for a $355 deduction from the final price (if you think pairing a Titan Z with a Pentium chip is a good idea, that is). Don't like the motherboard? Gigabyte's H97N-WIFI will take $120 off the original price. Want a bigger SSD? Try the 512 GB Samsung 840 PRO for $370 extra.

There are plenty of meaty components packed into the Bolt II chassis, as the price tag reflects. The custom steel micro tower chassis itself measures just 14.1 (L) x 4.4 (W) x 16.4 (H) inches and provides two PCI expansion slots, one slot-loading side optical drive, enough drive bays for one hard drive and two SSDs (or 4 SSDs or 2 HDDs), a front I/O panel and more. There's also a "Copperhead" version of this chassis, but it's currently on back-order.

Digital Storm's "Battle Box" joins "Battlebox" entrants from competitors including Falcon Northwest, Maingear, and Origin PC.

Follow Kevin Parrish @exfileme. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

Digital Storm announced the Velox custom gaming PC, a system built with two main design criteria in mind -- airflow and showing off the high-end components inside -- and on those counts, it looks like the company nailed it.

The Velox PCs will be available in four starting configurations, ranging in price from $2018 to $3750. The "Good" Level One system comes with an Intel Core i5-4690K processor, 8 GB of DDR3-1600 MHz memory, an Nvidia GTX 770, a 120 GB Samsung 840 Evo SSD, a 1 TB hard drive, an Asus Z97 motherboard, and a 750 W Corsair CX series power supply. Added up, that's a very adequate mid-range gaming system.

If you have the means, you will be able to configure the systems to carry up to an Intel Core i7-4960X Extreme Edition processor, 128 GB of DDR3 memory, more storage than you might ever need (how does two 6TB Seagate drives strike you?), and up to four GTX Titan Blacks or two GTX Titan Z graphics cards. 

Of course, the highlight of the Velox lineup is the custom-designed case. The motherboard is mounted on the left side panel instead of the usual right. We're not sure why Digital Storm opted for this, but a simple possibility is aesthetics -- it does have a certain appeal, and you'll be able to place the system on the left side of your desk and still look into the window and see all your precious components.

Another possibility is for cooling purposes, as the hottest components are mounted at the top of the enclosure. We’re not sure how big a difference it makes, but it might just help a little bit. If you choose to liquid cool your graphics cards, this will result in a gorgeous system as you’ll see the pretty side of the water blocks from above.

If you choose to leave your cards air-cooled, though, the “GEFORCE GTX” lettering on reference cards will be upside-down, and you’ll be more likely to run into problems with dust. Given this knowledge, it's apparent that Digital Storm wants you to liquid cool your components with a custom loop. The custom loops are made with EKWB and XSPC components, so you can rest assured that you’re getting quality hardware.

For airflow in the case, by default the systems come with “Standard Factory Chassis Fans”. No specifications are available, which is probably for a good reason -- you can upgrade these to Corsair AF-series fans, although that will cost you $99 for all six fans. You can also opt for LED-lit Cooler Master R4 series fans, which will cost you $59 as an upgrade. All things considered though, you can be certain that this system will be adequately cooled, so that doesn’t need to be one of your concerns.

You can build a system similar to one of these Velox rigs yourself, but to make one as beautiful will cost you some time and not an insignificant bit of skill. But could you do it for less money?

The systems are available to configure and order from Digital Storm today. 

UPDATE: Digital Storm has confirmed that the upside-down system layout is for cooling purposes, as it brings the graphics cards to an area with greater airflow.

Follow Niels Broekhuijsen @NBroekhuijsen. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

On Thursday, Digital Storm revealed four new laptops packed with Nvidia's new GTX 800M series of GPUs. To celebrate the launch, the company has decided to give away a "Krypton" laptop worth $1,478 USD. To enter, contestants must upload a picture of their "broke-down, dilapidated, decrepit" laptop to this address. Digital Storm will choose the best of the worst and announce a winner on May 1, 2014.

As for the new laptops, the company launched the 15.6-inch Javelin and Lance, and the 17.3-inch Krypton and Behemoth. All four arrive in four configurable models: Good, Better, Best and Ultimate. Starting prices begin at $1,196 (Javelin "Good") and extend up to $3,984 (Behemoth "Ultimate").

According to the specs, every model features an Nvidia GTX 800M series GPU. For example, the Javelin $1,196 "Good" model starts with a 15.6-inch display with a 1920 x 1080 resolution, an Intel Core i7-4700MQ CPU, Nvidia's GTX 860M (2 GB), 8 GB of 1600 MHz memory, a 750 GB 7200 RPM hard drive, a DVD drive and Wireless N. The $1,630 "Ultimate" model builds on that setup but swaps out the CPU for a Core i7-4810MQ, 16 GB of 1600 MHz memory, an additional 256 GB SSD, a Blu-ray player and Wireless AC connectivity.

Feeling frisky? The company's Behemoth "Good" configuration starts at $2,289 and features a 17.3-inch display with a 1920 x 1080 resolution and the Nvidia GeForce GTX 880M GPU (8 GB). Also included is the Intel Core i7-4810MQ CPU, 16 GB of 1600 MHz memory, a 128 GB SSD, a 750 GB 7200 RPM hard drive, a DVD drive and wireless N connectivity. The $3,984 "Ultimate" version packs an Intel Core i7-4930MX CPU, a larger 256 GB SSD and Wireless AC connectivity.

"We've wanted to refresh our notebook line for a while and the Nvidia GTX 800M series launch provided the perfect timing," said Rajeev Kuruppu, Digital Storm's Director of Product Development.  "The cards' ability to deliver gaming performance comparable to a desktop system allow our notebooks to dominate anywhere."

Early in December, boutique PC maker Digital Storm revealed that its first Steam Machine would dual boot SteamOS and Windows. Today, the company finally officially unveiled its Bolt II Steam Machine.

The Bolt II is the first liquid cooled Steam Machine that will have the option for Nvidia's GeForce GTX Titan and up to a 700W PSU. Digital Storm hasn't mentioned much else about the specs, but we'll try to find out more when we see them at the show.

The tower measures 4.4 inches wide, 14.1 inches deep, and stands at 16.4 inches tall. In December, Digital Storm told us we could expect the machine to start at $1469, which is almost triple the $499 starting price of competitor iBuyPower's Steam Machine. Now, Digital Storm is saying the Bolt will start at $1899. Yikes. Digital Storm said today that it's not trying to compete with consoles when it comes to price.

"We [Digital Storm] are not looking to compete with console pricing," said Rajeev Kuruppu, Digital Storm's Director of Product Development. "We're taking aim at the high end of the market, targeting consumers that demand the best possible gaming experience and who are looking for a PC capable of playing any title on their new 4K display."

Still, when you consider Lenovo just announced a 4K monitor for $800, a price that starts at $1900 seems excessive. Sit tight for hands-on photos from the show!

Check out all of our CES 2014 coverage!

Follow Jane McEntegart @JaneMcEntegart. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

Boutique PC maker Digital Storm today revealed plans for its first Steam Machine, which it plans to officially launch at CES in January. With a starting price of $1469, it won't be console-priced, but Digital Storm is pitching this as far more than just a games machine. With options for an Nvidia GeForce GTX Titan, up to a 700W power supply, advanced airflow thermal management, and liquid cooling on the CPU, this Steam Machine offering will have the ability to dual-boot SteamOS and Windows.

Those familiar with other Digital Storm systems may recognize that this Steam Machine bears a resemblance to the Bolt PC. We made this observation to Digital Storm and learned what sets the Steam Machine apart. Where the Bolt is 3.6 inches wide, the Steam Machine will be slightly larger at 4.4 inches wide, 14.1 inches deep, and 16.4 inches tall. The Steam Machine will also have improved cooling with an integrated 240 mm radiator and more airflow vents.

Expect plenty more details at CES. The only other Steam Machine we know about so far is from iBuyPower, which is targeting a starting price of $500.

Follow Marcus Yam @MarcusYam. Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

The Making Of Digital Storm's Aventum II PC

Three or four times now, you've seen us shine a spotlight on systems built by boutique shops with qualities that our editorial team found interesting. The latest example in this series comes from Digital Storm.

I had a meeting with the company at CES 2013, in the Trump International Hotel. It had two products out on display: the Bolt and its then-upcoming Aventum II. Back then, the Bolt had a couple of issues that kept me from getting more excited about it. But the Aventum II, despite its early status, was a beautiful beast of a PC that I found truly stunning. It featured a lot of hardware that you can't just pull off a shelf and pop into your own machine. And so I believed it'd be a work that even our do-it-yourself crowd could appreciate.

The team at Digital Storm was kind enough to share some of the Aventum II's back story with us. What follows is a recounting of how the big, beefy (and potentially very expensive) Aventum II came to be, complete with nickel-plated copper tubing. Take it away, guys.

Chris Angelini

It Starts With Dreaming Big

Aspiring to be an innovative system integrator can be tough when you use the same components as everyone else. A custom chassis and other cooling technologies help differentiate our brand. In the beginning, projects like the Aventum II were more of a “wouldn’t this be nice to do” conversation. But as time went on, the possibility of and justification for a custom chassis and cooling system became much more prevalent. It was really the intensive system demands and complex configurations that our customers came up with that helped convince us to launch our custom project. This sent us down the path toward what would ultimately become the Aventum.

If You Want Something Done Right...

Our initial concept was to take an existing chassis and extensively modify portions of it to make our own. We acquired several cases and spent a few weeks re-creating them and mocking up designs in CAD.It wasn’t long before we abandoned this idea. It became overly complicated and still didn’t give us the flexibility we wanted. It was also a complete nightmare to get everything designed in a way that it didn’t look like two different cases ghetto-stitched together. This is when we started seriously entertaining the idea of building a chassis and cooling system from the ground up.

Step One: Creating A Prototype

Our focus was on maximizing the enclosure's cooling potential and making sure there was enough room for all of the hardware we wanted to house internally. The framework, so to speak, for Aventum was based on the size and number of liquid cooling radiators. We wanted a system that looked aggressive, but was still clean and professional. Of course, this turned out to be far easier said than done. We spent weeks drafting hundreds of design ideas, styles, and color patterns. We spent even more time building low-res prototypes in CAD so we could inspect the concepts from multiple viewpoints. It’s amazing how much time you can sink into agonizing over the shape of a single venting pattern or side-panel window. After countless concepts and alterations, we finally settled on a final configuration for our prototype.

Learning Lessons The Hard Way

The next step was building a functional PC into the prototype. This phase was the most informative, but also the most frustrating. A lot of design elements that made sense in CAD, and then turned into practical nightmares. For example, we could get the radiators and fans inside. However, due to some screw locations, the install process was maddeningly difficult. We also ran into issues where the pass-throughs for cables and tubing were either too small or placed in the wrong areas. What resulted was ugly wiring and restrictive airflow. Building the first prototype was invaluable, though, because it exposed all of our case's issues.

Making Things Right

With the lessons learned from our prototype, we went back to the drawing board. Initially, we were going to make major modifications to fix some of the things that were wrong with the first effort. After lengthy discussion, though, we decided we could build a far better system by taking our knowledge and starting over fresh.

Our first change was rotating the mainboard so that it sat off the back of the system. We liked how the top-mounted board looked, but it caused too many issues with tubes and cables running across or near the video cards. Second, we enclosed the bottom radiators and crafted an isolated exhaust chamber around them. This increased airflow and fixed the unsightly mesh vent that separated the radiators and platform in our prototype.

Coming Up With The Final Design

After the first batch of revised prototypes was completed, we made a few more minor tweaks for our large production run. It’s always stressful to build a project like this and then take it to market. We did a ton of research and spent a great deal of time consulting experts in the field, so we were confident that the Aventum was a great system. Still, it's nerve wracking to introduce an original design for the first time. Our fears were put to rest when we started receiving orders after the launch.

Personally, the best affirmation of the Aventum's appeal came from the public's reaction when we took the system to trade shows. People would walk past our booth, catch a glimpse of Aventum, and be instantly drawn in.

Evolving The Second-Gen Aventum

For Aventum II, the largest upgrades were to the hard drive cage, fans, and bottom feet. The first-gen Aventum had room for five hard drives, but there was some wasted space. We completely redesigned the cage and ended up with room for eight slide-out hard drive bays. Those bays looked so good that we ended up adding a second side panel window just to show them off.

We doubled up on front fans to improve airflow and added a bespoke fan for the exhaust chamber, which helps funnel warm air out the back more efficiently. We also moved the optical drive to the side and redesigned the pump and radiator mounts. Even though they're similar-looking, by the time we were finished, the Aventum and Aventum II shared almost no identical parts.

Nickel-Plated Copper Tubing Stands Out Most

The process was long and at times arduous, but our Aventum II is the realization of what we envisioned several years ago. It was really the point where everything from fitment and materials quality to features and design came together in one complete system.

With the chassis finished, there was one finishing touch we made to Aventum II: hand-crafted nickel-plated copper tubing. We wanted to offer something special to our customers that, like the rest of Aventum, wasn’t available elsewhere (Ed.: incidentally, the tubing was what caught my attention at CES). It took weeks of practice working with the copper for us to become proficient with making clean bends that didn’t kink or suffer from warping. The result of our labor is a custom aesthetic unique to the Aventum II.

Now That's A Clean-Looking PC

From initial thoughts to finalized product, we went through a lot to get Aventum II ready. In the end, all of the blood, sweat, and swear words were well worth the satisfaction of completing our project. Truly, the Aventum II is what we had hoped to do when the idea surfaced several years ago. It's a unique, performance-oriented gaming tower that features custom and advanced cooling, which is like nothing else on the market. To say we are proud of Aventum is an understatement, and we hope you enjoyed retracing its history.

Digital Storm has introduced a new enthusiast-level cooling and control solution for its custom desktops called HydroLux. It's aimed at enthusiasts who want the look and performance of liquid cooling, but don't have the know-how to install a system on their own. HydroLux combines liquid and airflow cooling technologies with fully customizable control software, and is now made available exclusively on all Digital Storm desktops.

"With an array of temperature probes feeding HydroLux’s control board in real-time, HydroLux can create the perfect balance between thermals and noise," the company states. "Choose from silent or extreme airflow modes, or let HydroLux automatically monitor and optimize airflow based on temperatures."

Chassis LED lighting can serve as a visual monitoring system for temperature levels inside the PC, even while inside a full-screen game or during an intensive rendering task. As the chassis and fluid temperatures rise and fall, the LED lighting will slowly fade from a cool blue to a warm red. Chassis lighting will automatically switch to red every time a maximum temperature recording is exceeded.

The company says the components can be easily serviced and upgraded without having to dismantle the entire cooling system thanks to quick disconnect valves at key junctions. HydroLux also employs large high-flow pumps to move as much as 300 gallons of cooling fluid per hour, increasing heat dissipation and improving overall system stability.

The new HydroLux system is managed by the company's Control Center software that provides real-time temperature graphs. Users can choose from three sets of airflow optimization (auto, quiet and extreme), turn on the LED Thermal Mode, and create custom chassis lighting. Specific aspects of real-time thermal tracking can be toggled on and off including fluid, CPU area, GPU area, HDD area and exhaust.

"We work hard to differentiate the Digital Storm brand by engineering powerful systems that meet our customer’s high-performance demands," says Rajeev Kuruppu, Digital Storm’s Director of Product Development. "HydroLux delivers on that promise by providing an industry leading cooling solution that can be fully customized to meet each user’s unique needs."

The new HydroLux system is now available as an option when configuring Digital Storm desktops including Vanquish, Bolt, Virtue, Enix and even the Aventum II. 

Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

Digital Storm unveiled a new gaming laptop called the VELOCE on Wednesday, packing a 13.3 inch Full HD LED-lit screen, an Intel Core i7 4800MQ processor, a Nvidia GeForce GTX 765M GPU and more in a slim, portable design. Pricing starts at $1,535, and the portable gaming rig will be made available on July 17 directly from Digital Storm.

Currently the laptop portion of Digital Storm's website is closed off with a countdown timer and a message stating: "We're working on a new line of 'awesome' gaming laptops. Featuring completely new models with new custom finish options! It'll be worth the wait!"

That said, there won't be a link to the new laptop for another six days. Meanwhile, Digital Storm's email states that the upcoming laptop will weigh a mere 4.6 pounds (including battery) and measure only 1.26 inches thick. It's "aggressive" esthetic matches its powerful configuration, the company said, with Digital Storm’s signature finish featuring a blood red logo slicing across the notebook’s black top cover.  A cold silver and grey interior surrounds the backlit keyboard.

According to the list of specs, the laptop will pack the Core i7-4800MQ quad-core processor (up to 3.7 GHz and 6 MB of Cache), 8 GB of DDR3 RAM @ 1600 MHz (2x 4 GB sticks), an 8x DVD writer optical drive, and a hybrid storage configuration spanning a 750 GB 7200 RPM HDD and an 8 GB SSD. Networking will be handled by a Killer Wireless-N 1202 Wireless module.

"Other key features include room for two storage drives (mSATA & 2.5 inch) with RAID capability, a dedicated internal network port, SuperSpeed USB 3.0 ports, HDMI 1.4, VGA video out ports and Bluetooth connectivity," the company said. Windows 8 64-bit Edition will be the platform of choice.

Given the laptop has a starting price, customers will likely be provided with a basket of option to choose from. For more information about the new VELOCE laptop, keep your eyes peeled here.

Digital Storm has announced the new lineup of Virtue prebuilt gaming PCs, all of which currently feature Intel Haswell CPUs. The units are designed to be a bit smaller than the other ultra-tower offerings from Digital Storm, as well as competitors, yet still pack a good punch. It looks like the case Digital Storm has chosen to use for the Virtue PCs is the Corsair 350D -- a high-performance Micro-ATX enclosure. As such, the enclosures have room for up to five fans as well as a 240 mm radiator and are still quite stylish. They can also house up to two graphics cards, two hard drives and four SSDs.

The entry level model will feature an Intel Core i5-4570 CPU, 8 GB of memory, a GTX 660 graphics card, Corsair H60 CPU water cooling, a 120 GB Corsair SSD and a 1 TB hard drive. It will cost $1,448. The highest model, before any customization, will cost $3,128. This one will pack an Intel Core i7-4770K CPU, a GTX Titan graphics card, 16 GB of DDR3 memory, Corsair H100i liquid cooling, a 1 TB hard drive and a 240 GB Corsair SSD, as well as a Blu-ray drive.

The units are already available on Digital Storm's online webshop.

Digital Storm aims to end the debate between building a PC by yourself, or just buying a pre-assembled system. What Digital Storm did was to configure a machine, and then compare their price to that of exactly the same components from Newegg. In the end, the smallest difference in price was just $23; the biggest difference was $58. They mention that at this amount of difference, the decision is a no-brainer. This lineup of machines will be known as the VANQUISH systems.

The VANQUISH systems will always be pre-tested for at least 72 hours. Digital Storm will always keep an inventory of completed systems ready to ship out right after an order is placed so that you don't have to wait for the system to be built and tested.

"When we decided to take on the DIYers we knew we had to offer impressively built systems that could compete in terms of performance as well as price. For just $23-$58 more [we] were giving customers a fully optimized system featuring the latest chipset platform and next gen-graphics. This allows them to focus on demolishing the competition instead of worrying about the reliability of their PC," said Rajeev Kuruppu, Digital Storm's Director of Product Development.

Digital Storm has released its new Hailstorm II gaming PC. This customizable PC can be equipped and cooled to some extremely high levels with a price tag to match.

To begin with, the Hailstorm II has room for up to four radiators ranging in size from 140 mm to 480 mm, along with the ability to house two CPUs and up to four graphics cards. 

The system's enclosure, the Corsair 900D, is also very flexible, offering room for up to nine 3.5" / 2.5" drives, four optical drives, two power supplies, and 10 expansion slots.

"When we [Digital Storm] set out to redesign Hailstorm we knew it would be challenging to improve on a system capable of handling nearly any high-end configuration an enthusiast could dream up. This meant the search was on for the biggest and baddest chassis available. When we saw the Corsair 900D at CES we knew we had the enclosure we needed to make the original Hailstorm look like a small mid-tower system and not the bad ass high performance system it really was," said Rajeev Kuruppu, Digital Storm's director of product development.

The base model has an Intel Core i7 3770K CPU and a GTX 680 for $2,762, whereas the Ultimate model comes with an Intel Core i7 3970X CPU and three GTX Titans in SLI. This model will cost you a staggering $8,085. There are two other models in between, but buyers can customize all four models to their taste. After being customized, the systems will be stress tested for at least 72 hours to ensure that the cooling and build quality is on par with what you paid for it.

The Hailstorm II is already for sale on Digital Storm's online webshop.

_{Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback}

Digital Storm launched on Tuesday a new desktop PC featuring Nvidia's latest GTX Titan graphics card. Called the Bolt Titan Edition, this PC is also promoted as the thinnest gaming rig in the world, measuring just 3.6-inches wide. But the price won't be quite so "thin" in the wallet, costing gamers a hefty starting price of $2,499 USD.

"The Bolt’s unique ventilation system differentiates it from all other small form factor PCs, making it one of the only systems in its class able to handle the powerful GTX Titan," the company said. "The custom designed chassis features vents near each critical component, large top and rear vents to eliminate any stagnant air inside of the system, and a dedicated air channel created by a slotted side vent to cool the power supply.  The design delivers industry leading thermals and ultra-quiet operation."

Currently the product page lists this rig as "coming soon", but a provided spec sheet shows the Titan Edition to feature an unlocked Intel Core i7-3770K quad-core CPU clocked at 3.50 GHz, mounted on an Asus P8Z77-I Deluxe mini-ITX motherboard. The system is powered by a 500W Digital Storm-certified gold-rated Bolt Edition power supply.

In addition to Nvidia's new GeForce GTX Titan 6 GB card, the gaming rig comes packed with a 120 GB Corsair Neutron GTX SSD, a 1 TB 7200 RPM hard drive and 16 GB of DDR3 1600 MHz memory. There's also a DVD/CD 8x combo drive, a high-performance cooler with five heat pipes, high speed Ethernet and wireless connectivity, and a 64-bit edition of Windows 7 Home Premium.

"The Titan powered Bolt performed exceptionally when running Steam Big Picture, Valve’s popular games distribution platform optimized for big screen TV’s," the company said. "The Bolt’s unmatched balance of explosive power and size, just 3.6-inch wide, make it an ideal console replacement and destined to make the move from the home office or bedroom into the living room."

To customize this blazing hot gaming PC, head here. As previously stated, the site says to check back in a few days, listing this Titan Edition as "coming soon". A brief look shows that customers can customize the case, storage, connectivity, GPU and software options.

_{Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback}

Portable Gaming On A 17.3" Screen

While the contest between mobility and performance rages on, most enthusiasts will probably be fairly satisfied with some of the mid-size solutions out there. A combination of Intel's Ivy Bridge and Nvidia's Kepler architectures first took us by surprise in Eurocom Racer 2.0 Review: Intel's Ivy Bridge Meets Nvidia's Kepler, where those two worlds collided to give us stunning performance and reasonable portability.

But what would happen if a company combined the moderate thickness and weight of a mid-sized notebook with the larger screen of a desktop-replacement? And how might buyers respond to such a configuration, packed with high-end 3D graphics, at mid-market pricing? Digital Storm thinks it found a winner in Clevo’s P170EM.

Part of the value in Digital Storm’s custom-built x17 notebook comes from its reliance on AMD’s high-end Radeon HD 7970M graphics, a part that exhibited fairly strong performance in Xotic PC NP9150: Striking Back At Kepler With Radeon HD 7970M. But some folks rightly mentioned in the comments section that the graphics module's performance in a few games appeared weak, purportedly an issue with the company's Enduro technology.

We approached AMD about the issue and got the full story: its drivers were afflicted by a bug that bottlenecked the GPU, keeping it from being fully-utilized, particularly in situations where high frame rates were expected. The company promised a hotfix, but shied away from putting a date on it.

The company sort of fulfilled its promise by rolling the hotfix into its Catalyst 12.11 Beta release (now up to version 8)...on the desktop. We still haven't seen an official update on the notebook side, though, so part of today's story is going to require Digital Storm proving that AMD's Radeon HD 7970M was the right GPU to put in its x17 as the Pitcairn ASIC goes up against Nvidia's GK107 and GF114 parts. The company is off to a good start with a less expensive Ivy Bridge-based processor, but will AMD pull its weight in this competition, too?

Digital Storm’s x17 is available in four basic configurations, and each can be further customized based on your needs. We received the $1777 configuration, which is a step up from the baseline build, with no further customization.

In addition to the flexibility Digital Storm allows on its parts list, the company also offers three warranty levels. An extra $126 gets you four years of labor and two years of parts protection, while a $247 premium secures five years of labor and three years of hardware coverage. The firm’s labor plan also honors manufacturer-backed component warranties above and beyond the plan you purchase.

Getting To Know The x17

A total weight of 11 pounds, including the adapter and power cord, sounds pretty heavy. But that's actually a fairly big achievement for a 17.3” gaming notebook, which often weigh anywhere from 12 to 18 pounds. Part of that slim-down can be credited to Clevo’s chassis design, but a big chunk of the x17’s weight savings come from more efficient CPUs and GPUs. This newer notebook model gets by with a smaller power brick and lighter heat sinks than many of the gaming notebooks we've reviewed in the past.

Clevo supplies the lightweight LED-backlit screen that helps to keep the notebook itself under nine pounds.

A clean front edge make it easy to work with the x17 on your lap, though we suspect it wouldn't be comfortable to game like that for very long.

The x17’s left edge includes gigabit Ethernet connectivity, three USB 3.0 ports, and a flash media interface slot. As you can see, the third USB port integrates eSATA support, too. Meanwhile, the media slot supports most SD, MMC, and MS formats.

The x17’s right edge adds digital audio output and analog input to the familiar headphone output and microphone input, along with a single USB 2.0 port. If you so desire, Digital Storm will upgrade stock 8x DVD burner to a 6x Blu-Ray burner for $89.

DisplayPort connectivity updates a rear panel that also includes HDMI and DVI outputs. In theory, the platform should support three simultaneous outputs (the panel, plus two external screens). One of those would need to be hooked up via DisplayPort.

Though you can use one if you have it, the outdated DVI-to-VGA adapters is not part of Digital Storm's bundle.

The support kit does include an OEM-packaged Windows CD, driver disk, and CyberLink Media Suite 8, along with the power brick, AC cord, and a low-cost notebook bag.

Inside Digital Storm's x17

On the previous page, we suggested that heat might limit the amount of time you'd want to spend gaming with the x17 on your lap, and fan location is the primary reason for that. With intake vents almost perfectly aligned to your legs, starving the cooling subsystem of airflow seems like it'd be easy to do on accident.

Once we pull off the bottom covers, we see the hard drive and half of the notebook's memory. Those parts can be removed without unscrewing anything else.

A second 2.5” drive bay is exposed by sliding out the optical drive (right). CPU and GPU fans are mounted directly to the chassis, and can be left in place if you need to pull off their corresponding heat sinks.

Four #1 Phillips screws secure the CPU heat pipe, and are easily removed. The GPU and graphics memory sinks are held in place by smaller #0 screws. The CPU socket latch and GPU module stand-offs are slotted for a thin flat-head screwdriver.

The x17's baseline 750 GB hard drive saves $80 compared to the 120 GB Intel SSD 520 found on Xotic PC's NP9150. The hard drive also adds a bunch of storage capacity, though it's naturally quite a bit slower.

Also shown in the above photo are the secondary drive tray and the optical drive that covers it. If you want both capacity and speed, add an SSD to one of the system's two bays.

Hardware And Test Setup

Even though the x17 is larger, it relies on the same P150HM battery as the competing mid-sized models in today’s review. Its 220 W power brick is carried over from larger-sized predecessors.

Benchmark Results: DiRT 3 And F1 2012 Problems

DiRT 3 has a history of being more easily bottlenecked on platforms backed by AMD graphics solutions. That's why we thought nothing of it when we saw low performance numbers from this title in Xotic PC NP9150: Striking Back At Kepler With Radeon HD 7970M. It turned out, however, that DiRT 3 was suffering from AMD's Enduro graphics bug.

We installed AMD's Catalyst 12.11 Beta 3 build and immediately saw significantly higher average frame rates, giving us a good indication of just how driver-limited the original driver from Clevo really was.

When we really tax the graphics subsystem with DiRT's Ultra quality preset and 8x MSAA, the Radeon HD 7970M stomps Nvidia's GeForce GTX 675M.

But then we stumble across another problem. We're in the process of updating our testing suite from an old set of games, which included DiRT, to a new set, which includes F1 2012. For some reason, Enduro doesn't work with Digital Storm's configuration and F1 2012 using the original Clevo driver, Catalyst 12.11 Beta 3, or even Beta 4. We know it worked on a different notebook using the same driver from Clevo, so the problem appears specific to this platform. In essence, when we configure the game to run on AMD's graphics module, the game tries to launch, is visible as a running process consuming resources, but never shows up.

For now, the solution in F1 2012 is to run the game from Intel's HD Graphics 4000 engine. That's good enough to get us through 1280x720 using the High quality preset. But of course, anything more demanding is simply unplayable.

Also, you'll notice that we mentioned the Beta 4 build of AMD's Catalyst 12.11 driver, but tested using Beta 3. The newer version was unstable on this hardware, and became increasingly unstable over time. Fortunately, the latest Beta 8 release gets us back to Beta 3 performance levels without the stability issues of Beta 4.

Benchmark Results: Battlefield 3 And Metro 2033

AMD's Radeon HD 7970M already established its dominance in Battlefield 3 using Clevo's bundled driver, so we were surprised to find that this title was also affected by the Enduro bug. Catalyst 12.11 Beta 3 uncorks what initially appeared to be a platform bottleneck, but turned out to be a lack of data making its way to the Pitcairn GPU. Low-resolution performance enjoys the largest speed-up, though there's even a quantifiable gain at 1920x1080 all the way up through Ultra quality detail.

New drivers help the Radeon HD 7970M at our lower Metro 2033 settings, but slow the game slightly at our more taxing profile.

Benchmark Results: Skyrim And StarCraft II

Though the performance improvements in Skyrim appear small (since this title is actually platform-limited), AMD's new drivers with fixed Enduro functionality still propel Core i7-3610QM-equipped Digital Storm x17 past the Core i7-3820QM-enhanced Xotic PC NP9150.

Nvidia's GeForce GTX 675M appears rather weak, making it pretty obvious that we still haven't had a notebook with the company's GeForce GTX 680M come through the lab yet.

New drivers accelerate Digital Storm's x17 through StarCraft II at all settings.

Benchmark Results: Audio and Video Encoding

A faster processor helps both Core i7-3820QM builds beat Digital Storm's Core i7-3810QM. No play-by-play analysis is needed here. If these workloads are important to you, buy a faster host processor, plain and simple.

Benchmark Results: Productivity

Again, we see the Core i7-3820QM's higher clock rate serve up an advantage compared to Digital Storm's baseline x17. Will the cost of a pricier CPU play out in the efficiency charts? That's what we'll figure out on the next page...

Power Consumption, Battery Life, And Efficiency

The x17's idle power consumption is slightly lower than the rest of the field, and yet its full-load draw is nearly identical to what we measure from the NP9150. That also means Digital Storm's machine gets about the same gaming battery life, which is a respectable 45 minutes (give or take a few).

Battery Eater Pro concurs with our battery-backed gaming tests, showing the x17 and NP9150 with nearly identical battery life at medium load.

Efficiency compares energy to work, so we use average performance to begin its calculation. Xotic PC's NP9150 was first notebook in our lab with AMD's Radeon HD 7970M inside, so it sets the basis for comparing Digital Storm's competing model.

Remembering that the x17 is less expensive and armed with a larger screen (something we certainly consider valuable), a modest 7% performance shortfall sets it up for great overall value rating. But before we get to that, let’s see how its performance compares to its power consumption.

The original graphics drivers were optimized for Clevo's Radeon HD 7970M module, so we’re not surprised to see it take a small lead in overall efficiency. We’d ignore the performance average, though, and go straight to gaming performance when is comes to choosing the right driver for a gaming notebook. Efficiency goes down a bit, we're sure, because AMD's GPU is no longer starved for data, leaving it underutilized. By fixing Enduro, the Pitcairn chip uses more power, but serves up better performance in return.

Does A Fixed Radeon HD 7970M Help Digital Storm?

Digital Storm surprised us by taking on its competition's expensive CPU and SSD with lower-cost parts in an attempt to improve value.

The cheaper CPU offsets the difference in system price, while the conventional hard drive gives Digital Storm an extra $80 to spend on a chassis with a larger screen. The company ends up with a 6% overall value lead before we even begin to consider how much more its 17.3” display is worth (actually a little comparison shopping on Digital Storm's site tells us that the display is worth $54).

A few more configuration changes allow us to create the same system on Digital Storm's page that we received from Xotic PC, and we end up with roughly the same price, within a few dollars. Digital Storm isn’t what we'd consider a low-cost builder, but the company knew how to pick the parts that'd make its setup appear as price-optimized as possible. Bravo!

Getting back to the primary purpose of these notebooks, we wanted to see how each one compared in terms of gaming performance-per-dollar.

Most of our games are not CPU-bound (particularly when they're backed by a 3 GHz+ Core i7). So, processor performance isn't a major factor in the frame rates observed for our gaming value chart. Digital Storm's original x17 configuration comes within 1% of Xotic PC’s average performance at 1920x1080, and the processor’s lower price boosts the system's overall value significantly. When you arm it with a Core i7-3610QM, the x17 has 13% more gaming value than Xotic PC's smaller notebook with the faster CPU.

The big number is where AMD's Radeon HD 7970M rides in on a white horse. Performance enhancements to a somewhat-better driver (remember, we're still seeing problems in F1 2012, even with Catalyst 12.11 Beta 8) combine with Digital Storm's good processor choice to give it a commanding 29% lead. We can only hope that a final version of AMD’s Enduro-patched driver is released soon, and that a Clevo-specific version is able to fix the issues that remain.

Digital Storm is currently promoting what it considers to be the world's thinnest, most powerful and future-proof gaming PC. It's simply called Bolt, standing 14-inches tall (front) and measuring 3.6-inches wide. The company says it's been engineered from scratch to effectively dissipate heat, allowing it to house the latest and fastest components on the market in a small form factor.

"When conceptualizing the Bolt, Digital Storm engineers found no chassis on the market that met their design criteria, so they designed their own brand new chassis from the ground up. Every aspect of the Bolt from: cooling, performance, and upgradability were ingeniously designed to the highest possible standards," the company said on Tuesday.

So what makes it future-proof? Digital Storm says it's the power supply coupled with plenty of room for large video cards and additional storage despite its small footprint. As seen in the base specs below, Bolt arrives in four customizable flavors ranging from $999 to $1949 starting prices:

LEVEL 1
Designed for gamers on a tight budget looking for both performance and value
Starting price: $999
CPU: Intel Core i3 2100
RAM: 8 GB DDR3 1333 MHz
GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 650 Ti 2 GB
Storage: 1 TB 7200RPM
Motherboard: Asus P8H77-1
Optical Drive: Slim 8X DVD-RW
Power Supply: 500W
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium

LEVEL 2
Designed for gamers on a medium budget looking for both performance and value
Starting price: $1,249
CPU: Intel Core i5 3570K
RAM: 8 GB DDR3 1600 MHz
GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 2 GB
Storage: 1 TB 7200RPM
Motherboard: Asus P8H77-1
Optical Drive: Slim 8X DVD-RW
Power Supply: 500W
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium

LEVEL 3
Designed for gamers with a significant budget looking for cutting-edge performance
Starting price: $1,599
CPU: Intel Core i5 3570K
RAM: 8 GB DDR3 1600 MHz
GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 660 Ti 2 GB
Storage: 60 GB SSD, 1 TB 7200RPM HDD
Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-Z77N-WIFI
Optical Drive: Slim 8X DVD-RW
Power Supply: 500W
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium

LEVEL 4
Designed for gamers looking for the ultimate high performance machine
Starting price: $1,949
CPU: Intel Core i7 3770K
RAM: 16 GB DDR3 1600 MHz
GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2 GB
Storage: 120 GB SSD, 1 TB 7200RPM HDD
Motherboard: Asus P8Z77-I Deluxe
Optical Drive: Slim 8X DVD-RW
Power Supply: 500W
OS: Windows 7 Home Premium

Product images show that the Bolt PC measures 13.3-inches at the back, 14-inches at the front, and 13.4-inches deep. While most of the connections reside on the back, the front panel appears to play host to the optical drive and an illuminated Bolt logo while audio jacks and several USB 2.0 / 3.0 ports are tucked away along the front panel's side.

"No other thin form factor tower houses as much power as Bolt because no other system can handle the type of bleeding edge hardware and overclocking that Bolt does," the company said. "Bolt's high performance CPU cooling solution, with five copper heat pipes, unlocks even more gaming performance with processor overclocks of up to 4.6 GHz with Intel’s i7 3770K CPU. Bolt also supports up to 3 hard drives: 2 SSDs and 1 mechanical for incredible storage flexibility."

For more information about the Bolt gaming desktop, head here.

_{Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback}           

California-based Digital Storm is claiming "world's fastest" with the introduction of its new 17-inch gaming laptop, the X17E. Currently its flagship 17-inch laptop, the X17E features either Nvidia's GeForce GTX 680M GPU, or AMD's Radeon 7970M GPU, depending on what team you like to play on. Both models will be available for purchase at the end of September starting at $1,753.

"Whichever GPU gamers select, X17E delivers rich, detailed graphics on the system’s 17-inch display at 1080P HD resolution (1920 x 1080)," the company said on Wednesday. "Digital Storm’s technicians can stably overclock Intel’s latest i7-3920XM CPU to an impressive 4.5 GHz, that when combined with Nvidia’s or AMD’s next-gen GPUs, create an unrivaled gaming experience."

The upcoming portable gaming rig will support up to 32 GB of RAM. It will also come packed with loads of connection options including USB 3.0 ports, eSATA, a 9-in-1 card reader, a Blu-ray optical drive and more. The laptop's keyboard will even sport different lighting zones and up to seven color options. Who needs a Christmas tree this year, right?

"For enthusiasts looking to have the most exclusive gaming system, Digital Storm will be offering a select number of Signature Edition X17Es. The Signature Edition will feature a custom paint job, distinctive branding and special packaging," the company said, adding that pricing for the Signature Edition has not been set at this time.

Digital Storm's current 17-inch gaming laptop starts at $1,495 USD, extending across four models: Good, Better, Best and Ultimate. The Ultimate version starts at $2,698 USD and features base specs consisting of an Intel Core i7 3820QM CPU, 16 GB of 1600 MHz RAM, a 120 GB SSD, a 500 GB HDD, Nvidia's GTX 680M GPU, a 1080p resolution LCD screen, and more.

_{Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback}

Custom PC maker Digital Storm today unveiled its latest high-end offering, the Aventum. Digital Storm says that this system was designed by its own engineers, inside and out, and uses its new Cryo-TEC cooling system that cools liquid to below zero degrees centigrade.

Digital Storm boasts that Aventum's chassis features a proprietary thermal exhaust chamber, intelligent five thermal zone regulation and exclusive software that controls 13 customizable fans. The Cryo-TEC liquid cooling system utilizes direct contact heat dissipation to remove heat from the CPU and then processes that liquid through 3 massive 420mm heat exchange radiators.

The engineers appear to be particularly proud of the air flow design of the thermal exhaust chamber, as it is a product of months of R&D using thermal imaging cameras. We've put in a request to Digital Storm for access to its thermal images, and we'll report back once we have them.

Read more from @MarcusYam on Twitter.

Intel's latest processor caters very well to these manufacturers, sparking memories of times of super-expensive PCs that could cost more than $30,000.

If you want to order a Sandy Bridge-E PC today, and you don't intend to build such a PC yourself, your options are still very limited. You will have to go to boutique PC vendors such as Digital Storm, Origin PC or Maingear.

Basic systems with Intel's i7 3930K processor start at around $2600, while 3960X systems command a premium of at least $500 and can be ordered as overclocked versions with clock speeds of between 4.5 GHz and 5.2 GHz. A typical overclocked 3960X system with vendor-recommended options appears to be running in the $6000 to $8000 range. However, the option lists are long and a Sandy Bridge-E system can be pimped out with plenty of features to reach more than $12,000 at Digital Storm and more than $13,000 at Origin. Maingear goes well beyond that with custom paint jobs, optional dual 46-inch displays or Samsung's 23-inch 6-panel display, you would be looking at close to $22,000 for your new PC.

Read more about the new Sandy Bridge-E in our full review.

Tuesday Digital Storm revealed the Sub-Zero Liquid Chilled System, a PC cooling solution that can supposedly unlock overclocks of Intel's i7-980X CPU up to 4.6 GHz while keeping the processor temp surprisingly chilled below 0ºC.

As the name states, the liquid cooling system pumps freezing liquid to the CPU, "smothering" any signs of heat. According to the company, the core cooling component is a series of TEC peltier coolers that work in conjunction with other high-end liquid cooling components.

"Previously, enthusiasts were relegated to bulky phase change systems to achieve radically low temperatures to maximize performance," Digital Storm said. "Now enthusiasts can achieve unmatched overclocking potential with increased reliability since the core of Digital Storm's Sub-Zero Liquid Chilled System has no moving parts."

Digital Storm's first gaming rig to feature the new Sub-Zero Liquid Chilled System is the Black|Ops Hailstorm. The base Level 1 configuration doesn't come cheap--a starting price of $3,928-- and features an Intel core i7 950 CPU, 6 GB of DDR3 1600 MHz memory and a Nvidia GeForce GTX 460 GPU. The “Level 3” model starts at $6,304 and features an Intel Core i7 980X CPU, 6 GB or DDR3 1600 MHz memory and Nvidia GeForce GTX 580 graphics.

Introduction

I’ve been doing this (and by this, I mean writing about technology) for almost 12 years now. When I started, having FedEx drop off a sound card sample to my dorm at UCLA was a big enough deal to make my week. Remember the Rage Fury MAXX? I couldn’t sleep for two days when that showed up in the mail (the review went up on SharkyExtreme back in ’99).

The passing of time makes the latest and greatest seem more commonplace, though. It’s not a bad thing—I still love technology. It’s just harder to get my blood pumping—though that might just be from a decade of Red Bull and Rockstar screwing up my metabolism.

With that said, unboxing a trio of Acer GD235HZ 120 Hz displays got me stoked—in a way that’d probably worry The Onion’s Juliana McKannis. And that feeling escalated when an Nvidia rep pulled up to my office with a sexy new Digital Storm machine based on an overclocked Core i7-960, two GeForce GTX 480s, and SilverStone’s Raven RV02 chassis. The purpose of the in-person drop-off: 3D Vision Surround. This was going to be good.

Truth be told, the last time I got this excited about hardware was a short three months ago, when AMD stopped by with no fewer than six monitors and a pair of Radeon HD 5870 Eyefinity 6 Edition cards. Although it was super-freaking-cool to see one PC driving 5760x2160 worth of resolution and gaming smoothly at that setting, my techo-lust was quelled by that fat, ugly bezel in the middle of all my favorite games. Those monitors have since been relegated to a corner of the Tom’s Hardware lab, and I'm still waiting for the thin-bezel Samsung screens that were first demoed nearly a year ago.

Almost without question, three displays is the way to go for gaming across multiple monitors. And if you’re bothered by the sheer wideness of a trio of 1920x1080 displays, you can always rotate your screens and put them into portrait mode, yielding 3240x1920. For the purposes of this piece, however, it’s all about 5760x1080…

…or less. Why would you drop the resolution below each screen’s native setting? Because we finally have a technology able to burn pixels in such an opulent manner that even a pair of GeForce GTX 480s in SLI struggles to keep up sometimes. Meet 3D Vision Surround—the feature Nvidia introduced alongside its GF100-based cards, but held off on releasing. It simply wasn’t ready yet, the company says. But it is now.

A Good Way To Blow Cash

Eyefinity 6 is AMD’s technology for the folks who shop the duPont Registry and dine at Club 33. A pair of $500 video cards and a sextet of monitors are no small investment.

Similarly, Nvidia’s 3D Vision Surround is going to look good if you aren’t worried about disposable income. Acer’s GD235HZs are among the cheapest 24”, 120 Hz displays, and they run $400 each. Although cards as lowly as the GeForce GTX 260 support this tech, you’re really not going to want to jump feet-first into it without a couple of $500 GeForce GTX 480s. And then there’s the 3D Vision kit, which sells for $199 (each set of glasses you add runs an additional $149).

So, let’s proceed under the assumption that you’re ready to drop $2,500-ish on video cards, monitors, and glasses, and that you’re already rocking a PC able to propel this configuration forward at full speed. Or, I’ll just assume you like reading about the technology that might very well affect your next hardware purchase—it’s just that cool.

3D Vision Surround In Depth

The concept of “surround” anything is new to Nvidia. In the past, SLI was limited to a single display, so you could have as many as four GPUs in a single PC, but only one monitor served as the output device for all of that horsepower.

Then AMD launched its Radeon HD 5800-series, and by all accounts caught Nvidia flat-footed. For the desktop productivity types, Eyefinity represented a way to expand desktop real estate to three displays from one graphics card. Fans of widescreen 3D gaming saw Eyefinity as an answer to years of wishing. A reference Radeon HD 5870 could viably game across three screens—a situation that improved drastically once AMD enabled CrossFire in Eyefinity mode.

Nvidia’s GF100 GPU employs two display pipelines, so it’s limited to a pair of monitor outputs right out of the gate. Thus, the company makes it possible to support triple-monitor setups through the use of two graphics cards in SLI, giving you a total of four outputs with which to work.

Now, you can use three conventional 60 Hz LCDs like the Dell U2410s on my desk right now, facilitating Surround 2D mode. Or, you can use 120 Hz 3D Vision-compatible displays and projectors to enable 3D Vision Surround—the evolutionary follow-up to 3D Vision, which we reviewed more than a year ago.

How Two Cards Render To Three Displays

Nvidia employs Alternate Frame Rendering (AFR), whether its cards are rendering to one display or three.

In single-display mode, GPU 1 renders the odd-numbered frames, while GPU 2 renders the even-numbered frames. The PCI Express bus and SLI link connector are responsible for getting the result from GPU 2 back to the board where the lone display is connected, yielding a single output.

The inner-workings are similar in Surround 2D mode: GPU 1 renders odd-numbered frames, while GPU 2 renders even-numbered frames. The difference, of course, is that a single frame across three LCDs is much larger—5760x1080, for instance, instead of 1920x1080. Nvidia remains fairly elusive when asked how the engine then outputs to displays attached to two cards, but again, it relates to PCI Express-based transfers and the SLI connector.

Of course, enabling stereoscopic output literally doubles the workload, since each frame now has to be rendered twice (once for each eye). In this case, the first GPU renders odd-numbered frames for the right and left eye, while GPU 2 renders the even-numbered frames for the right and left eye. According to Nvidia, in this way, each GPU is fully saturated at all times.

3D Vision Surround also overrides your v-sync settings, shooting for a constant 120 Hz so that each eye gets 60 frames per second. As a result, the highest frame rate you’ll get in 3D mode is 60 FPS. There is some overhead associated with Nvidia’s AFR technique, and you’ll see evidence of that in our benchmark results that hover around 52 FPS. That’s still plenty playable, though.

Building It: 3D Vision Surround And Surround 2D

Putting The Pieces Together: Displays

There are a handful of requirements you’ll need to satisfy prior to using any 3D Vision Surround configuration, the first of which is getting your hands on compatible displays. Because there are only eight desktop displays on Nvidia’s list (five 1920x1080 LCDs and three 1680x1050 models), it’s probable that you don’t have one, much less three of these things.

Beyond the handful of LCDs imbued with Nvidia’s patented technology, 120 Hz 3D Vision-capable projectors also do the trick here (and can even be used in portrait mode, unlike the polarized LCDs). There are twice as many projectors on the approved list, 11 of them from ViewSonic. If you have lots of room to play and hate the idea of bezels, a projector-based setup might be the way to go.

DLP HDTVs, which worked with the original 3D Vision launch, are synched from the display, and cannot be used in multi-monitor configurations. That’s fine, though. Who wants a trio of DLPs stacked side-by-side, anyway?

GPUs And Physical Connections

With its first 3D Vision Surround-enabled driver release, Nvidia is supporting GeForce GTX 400-series (480, 470, and 465) and 200-series (295, 285, 280, 275, and 260) cards. The specific configurations and connectors supported get to be a little complex though, so you’ll need to pay close attention when you’re mixing and matching GPUs to displays.

Two-way SLI is perhaps the most straightforward (and luckily, the most common). You can use any two 400- or 200-series cards to turn on Surround or 3D Vision Surround. For Surround mode, use any three matching digital or analog connectors. In 3D Vision Surround mode, you have to use a trio of dual-link DVI connectors—no HDMI allowed.

If you’d like to go 3-way (and who wouldn’t?), you’re limited to the 400-series cards. GeForce GTX 200s aren’t enabled in this driver release. The display requirements are similar. Use any three matching digital/analog connectors for Surround, and three dual-link DVI outputs for 3D Vision Surround.

The GeForce GTX 295 is a special case. There exists two versions of the board—one with 2 DVI and an HDMI connector, and one with just two DVI connectors.

If you have the DVI/HDMI version, you can use a single 295 or a pair in Quad-SLI mode to enable Surround (2D) mode. From one card, you can even do 3D Vision Surround, so long as you’re using projectors (LCDs aren’t supported). Using two, you can task three DVI outputs between the two cards with 3D Vision Surround, too.

The version of the GTX 295 with DVI ports obviously can’t do Surround or 3D Vision Surround. It simply doesn’t have the requisite outputs. Using two in Quad-SLI, however, you have the ability to game in Surround or 3D Vision Surround.

As far as motherboards go, obviously you need an SLI-capable platform to do any of this.

Going 2D

There’s a hefty premium on those 120 Hz displays, and the addition of a $200 3D Vision kit (plus $149 for each additional set of shades) makes 3D Vision Surround a pricey proposition. If you’re still onboard with widescreen gaming, but would prefer to stick with glasses-free 2D mode, Nvidia’s Surround capability enables that.

In Surround mode, gone is the 120 Hz requirement. You can use any three similar screens, right up to a trio of 30” 2560x1600 LCDs. The feature isn’t as flexible as Eyefinity—it still requires two cards with a cumulative four outputs. But when you’re talking about high-res widescreen gaming, you’ll probably want an SLI- or CrossFire-based configuration anyway.

Surround does support a wider array of output options. While you’re locked in to three LCDs in landscape mode by 3D Vision Surround, vanilla Surround allows for a trio in landscape, three in a portrait orientation, or four monitors—the fourth connected to the last available DVI port, separate from the primary display group.

A Stand: The Worthwhile Accessory

Having set up several multi-monitor machines, it’s worth noting that a stand goes a long way toward a clean installation. Three 24” displays take up a lot of room placed side-by-side, and if you’re short on desk space, you might find one monitor teetering on the edge. As part of this hardware package, Nvidia sent over an Ergotech Triple LCD desk stand, which I was able to configure in about 15 minutes.

If you have the money to spend on displays, graphics cards, and glasses, it’s absolutely worth considering the stand that de-clutters your desktop.

Using 3D Vision Surround: The Lynchpin

Subjective reviews are challenging, because what I think is cool might not be as exciting for you. Don’t get me wrong. Performance is a big part of this story, and I’ll get into that shortly. But more than anything, 3D Vision Surround has to be evaluated on the experience it enables.

Fortunately, I’ve laid a little groundwork there by testing a number of games for the launch of 3D Vision last year. Today’s compatibility landscape is better in that there are more titles considered 3D Vision-ready. But others—even new games—simply don’t work well.

Generally Speaking

I enjoyed most of the games I played in 3D. You do lose a lot of light through the wireless active shutter glasses (as seen below), and this is particularly noticeable in already-dark titles like S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and Left 4 Dead. Games showcasing more vibrant colors stand out. Far Cry 2 and Just Cause 2 both looked great, for instance.

The glasses themselves were comfortable enough to wear for extended periods before, and my thoughts there haven’t changed. Naturally, kids with smaller heads won’t find them as snug, and that’s an issue my buddy’s son ran into. But the grown-ups who played around on my 3D Vision Surround system never complained about the form variable in this equation.

It must be said that the Acer displays aren’t my favorite. Their 2D clarity is merely OK, and you have to be looking at them from a very specific angle to get the best 3D picture possible—it’s not even in the middle of the screen. Rather, you almost have to have your eyes aligned with the top bezel. Purportedly, some of the other displays look a lot sharper. Alienware’s 23” OptX AW2310, for instance, has received praise, and only costs $50 more than the Acer screens.

Battlefield: Bad Company 2

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 looks phenomenal. It is indeed one of those 3D Vision-ready titles, and it translates well to Surround. My benchmark sequence consists of the opening scene from World War II. In 3D, the waves splashing over the dinghy’s hull are probably the first thing you’ll notice. And with Surround, you get the wide field of view from both sides of the boat. The good news here is that it’s possible to enjoy this game with all of its effects enabled, giving you the best of DirectX 11 and 3D Vision Surround.

DiRT 2

Another popular title we’ve had in our suite for a while now, DiRT 2 actually doesn’t work with 3D Vision. I didn’t bother benchmarking this one as a result, but I did fire it up to see why Nvidia is recommending against playing it in 3D. Holy puke-fest, Batman. The company’s observations that shadows aren’t rendered correctly and lights aren’t projected correctly are right-on. There are issues with the dust and smoke that play havoc with depth. And after about three minutes, you really want to hurl. Nvidia is straightforward enough to tell you ahead of time though—this one doesn’t work.

Far Cry 2

Far Cry 2 launched before 3D Vision did. And yet, this one gets an Excellent label by Nvidia. That belies some of the compromises you need to make for an optimal experience, though. Setting Post FX to low means turning off DirectX 10 and dipping back to DirectX 9. Set shaders to Medium and turn off Bloom—those probably don’t have as adverse an effect. And when you’re viewing the game in 3D—a completely different experience anyway—it’s hardly noticeable. The fact that this game is so vibrant makes it easy to forget you’re losing light through the glasses and really enjoy the new perspective on gaming that 3D Vision Surround presents.

Crysis

Call it too old to matter, but Crysis remains a tested title in our suite. Unfortunately, the tool we use to measure performance with doesn’t do widescreen gaming resolutions, so we’re skipping the benchmarks here as well. And it’s just as well, because Nvidia tags Crysis with a Good rating, citing a number of quality compromises that need to be made, along with a couple of unavoidable artifacts that’ll likely have you playing Crysis in Surround 2D mode instead of 3D Vision Surround.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

Despite its relative newness, CoD gets a Good rating too, due to some objects rendering at the wrong depth. Moreover, you need to use the Widescreen Fixer tool with this game. Otherwise, the field of view is stretched/distorted (this applies to AMD's Eyefinity technology as well, in all fairness). The only real change to make in Call of Duty is turning off the game’s Depth of Field option—everything else looks sharp.

Just Cause 2

Another 3D Vision-ready title, Just Cause 2 can be summed up in one word: sick. This was the game I showed to visitors who wanted to see what 3D Vision Surround was all about. It’s bright enough to diminish the effects of losing light to the shutter glasses, and the effects had my guests bobbing and ducking as if they were in danger of bonking their heads on a palm tree. “This is what I want for Christmas,” one friend quipped to his wife. “How much?” she asked. I patted him on the back. “Wishful thinking, man.”

Aliens Vs. Predator

Nvidia seems to struggle in the games it wasn’t able to affect prior to launch. Aliens vs. Predator isn’t exactly new anymore, yet it’s unrated by the latest driver and wholly unplayable. The fault here is leveled at this one being a game worked on by AMD. I was able to generate benchmark scores using the demo—and the playback actually looked great in 3D Vision Surround mode. Once I hopped into the actual game, though, the hand and gun appearing in front of your face is rendered incorrectly, making it nearly impossible to play.

Benchmarking 3D Vision Surround

You’re going to see fewer benchmarks here than you otherwise might in a GPU-based review. Much of this is a direct effect of 3D Vision Surround’s compatibility. 3D Mark Vantage, Crysis, Aliens vs. Predator, and DiRT 2 are all titles we’d normally include. But because they don’t render properly, you’re realistically not going to run them in 3D. It’s a small consolation that you’ll at least be able to play in Surround 2D.

To show off what 3D Vision Surround can do (and to demonstrate how quietly a pair of GeForce GTX 480s can really run in SLI—a claim that I corroborated in my GeForce GTX 480 Update), Nvidia brought over a beautiful machine built by Digital Storm. The Core i7-960-based processor was overclocked to 3.8 GHz, opening up plenty of headroom for graphics performance. The Raven RV02-based enclosure (complemented by a few custom touches by Digital Storm) is well-suited to a high-end graphics configuration, since it exhausts hot air out the top.

Bear in mind that the benchmark results with Eyefinity 6 listed don’t refer to a six-display array, but rather a pair of Radeon HD 5870 2GB boards driving the same three displays as Nvidia’s Surround (2D) arrangement, so it is, in fact, an apples-to-apples comparison.

Benchmark Results: Far Cry 2 And S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Call Of Pripyat

As we know, 3D Vision Surround represents a doubling of the workload seen in Surround (2D). That’s fairly apparent in Far Cry 2, where we see a near-2:1 correlation between the two configurations at 4800x900 and 5760x1080—both playable in 3D mode. The only concession here is that you need to run in DirectX 9 to satisfy Nvidia’s recommended settings.

Of course, AMD’s Eyefinity technology is incapable of stereoscopic game play, so our only point of comparison is a pair of 2GB Eyefinity 6 cards in CrossFire running in 2D at those same settings. They’re a bit slower than Nvidia’s Surround mode—a result that we’d expect given the GTX 480’s superior performance.

Normally, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is a graphics beast, taking the most powerful GPUs to their knees. However, when you enable static lighting, sidestepping the DirectX 11 and 10.1 code path, the GPU demand drops drastically. Remember that we’ll never exceed 60 frames per second with 3D Vision Surround turned on. So, the fact that Surround (2D) is more than three times faster suggests there’s a lot of overhead here, since we’re also not hitting that 60 FPS performance ceiling. Nevertheless, having played the game at 5760x1080, it’s fair to say that it’s both playable and attractive at that higher resolution, despite having to disable much of its eye candy.

Benchmark Results: Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 And Battlefield: Bad Company 2

Here again we see performance banging up against the upper bounds of the 3D Vision Surround technology. But that doesn’t matter a bit—in fact, it’s good news because it means we can play at 5760x1080. And while we’re not testing with anti-aliasing enabled here, there’s enough muscle available to run with 2xAA turned on (Nvidia doesn’t recommend running at anything above 2xAA, in fact).

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 is much more demanding than Call of Duty, which is why Nvidia recommends running it at 4800x900 instead of 5760x1080. Given our performance results, we’d have to concur. With that said, the fact that this game is 3D Vision-ready means you can enjoy it without compromising any visual details.

Two Eyefinity 6 boards, driving a trio of monitors, trail the pair of GTX 480s in SLI at the same maxed-out settings, just as we’d expect them to.

Benchmark Results: Just Cause 2

Just like Battlefield, Just Cause 2 is 3D Vision-ready, meaning you can play it sans compromise. Because this is another demanding DirectX 11-class title, that probably means downshifting from a native 5760x1080 to 4800x900 in order to maintain acceptable frame rates. The lower res is worthwhile, though. Rather that turning certain features off, Just Cause runs with everything on—just as it would in 2D mode—but with the benefit of 3D. If ever there comes a time where all games could look like this in 3D, you’ll see this tech get its own Editor’s Choice award.

Benchmark Results: Surround 2D

Though certainly less high-profile than 3D Vision Surround, Nvidia’s 2D Surround technology is a good alternative when games misbehave in 3D mode. In S.T.A.L.K.E.R., we don’t have to use static lighting. We can instead crank up the DirectX 11-class lightning model and enable SSAO for the best possible picture quality in 2D mode. And of course, we can do the same using AMD’s Radeon HD 5870 2GB Eyefinity 6 Edition cards, too.

The performance picture is surprisingly close, but the SLI’ed GeForce cards do take the victory at 4800x900 and 5760x1080.

In 3D Vision Surround mode, Nvidia recommends running Far Cry 2 with a handful of settings that detract from the game’s highest possible quality, which I think is a bummer. Running in 2D mode lets us turn those features up higher (Bloom is enabled, Post FX are set to High, and we can use the DirectX 10 code path).

Here again, the SLI’ed configuration outperforms AMD’s boards in CrossFire. Both setups deliver impressive performance, though.

DiRT2 wasn’t even an option for us in 3D, so Surround mode is the only way we’re going to get to play this one on a trio of displays using a pair of GeForce GTX 480s. Performance is solid compared to AMD’s Radeon HD 5870 2GBs in CrossFire with settings cranked up.

There were minimal changes that needed to be made in order to get Call of Duty running smoothly in 3D. In 2D mode, however, we’re able to turn Depth of Field back on, along with enabling 4xAA. The result is close performance between the Nvidia and AMD boards. However, Nvidia ekes by with the win here.

Conclusion

Let’s start with what 3D Vision Surround does well. In games that are “3D Vision-ready,” the experience is as profound as going from a 2D VGA card to a 3D graphics accelerator. I BS you not. If this technology didn’t have such a steep barrier to entry in its cost, I can guarantee you’d be all over it. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and Just Cause 2 are perhaps the two poster children of what 3D Vision Surround can do. They’re simply stunning. Trying to describe going from 3D gaming on a 2D screen to a three-dimensional experience is really an exercise in futility. You have to experience it. And if you have your doubts, find someone with the setup and try it yourself.

And while I might sound like a flowery fan boy after that paragraph, the technology is of course not without its faults—the most grievous of which is the fact that not all games are as well-optimized as Battlefield and Just Cause. In fact, there are six playable games listed as 3D Vision-ready on Nvidia’s site (others are either demos or not yet available). The rest have varying degrees of issues that require addressing. Sometimes that means turning off quality-oriented features. Sometimes that means putting up with an anomaly that can’t be worked around.

Factor in the fact that 3D Vision Surround is an expensive proposition, indeed. Three monitors, some number of glasses, a pair of GeForce GTX 480s, if you’re doing this right, and maybe even a stand. That’s $2,500+ before you even start in on the rest of your machine (which had better also be beefy, by the way). No doubt that’ll be one the most significant inhibitors. Though again, this is Nvidia’s big “look at me” technology, similar to AMD’s Eyefinity 6 Edition card.

For those of you who don’t mind throwing down big bucks, 3D Vision Surround is a sight to behold in a handful of games. In others, you’ll want to run in Surround (2D) mode. As we’ve already seen from AMD’s Eyefinity capability, that’s cool technology too. It's just a shame that AMD doesn’t have anything to compete with in the realm of stereoscopic gaming. We were told to expect results back when single-screen 3D Vision launched, and have since conceded that this is a one-horse race.

At the end of the day, the conclusion I reached back in January of 2009 about 3D Vision is still eerily applicable:

GeForce 3D Vision reminds us a lot of 64-bit processing, multi-core CPUs, and hardware-accelerated transform and lighting (T&L). It’s a product based on technology with the potential to completely change the way you do something—in this case, game. However, the caveats shouldn’t be ignored. The cost of entry is high, enabling the functionality often means turning off other quality-enhancing features, and you’ll need a fairly potent graphics subsystem in order to really enjoy it. This next line is going to be flame bait, but the ace up Nvidia’s sleeve has to be its The Way It's Meant To Be Played (TWIMTBP) program. TWIMTBP might just give the hardware vendor enough sway on the software side to not only make sure upcoming titles are wholly compatible with GeForce 3D Vision, but that they also include additional features, such as content able to pop up through the latest 120 Hz screens. GeForce 3D Vision cannot truly succeed without some sort of embrace from game developers, and that's what we imagine Nvidia is working on right now. Until that happens, we’d be inclined to let the prices on those brand-new monitors and glasses come down a bit. The technology is remarkably novel—there’s just so much else you can do with $600 right now.

Hopefully Nvidia is still cranking hard on the developer support it needs to engorge that list of 3D Vision-ready titles. Those are the ones that’ll sell 3D Vision Surround. Once you sit down in front of a properly-optimized game, it’s truly hard to get back up.

CyberPower was first out the gate with an announcement. CyberPower's Black Pearl, Black Mamba Fang Series and Gamer Xtreme 3D lines will all carry options for Fermi. Coupled with Intel's six core Core i7 CPUs, it makes for a hefty machine.

CyberPower

Not too long after CyberPower's announcement hit the Web, similar announcements from other companies began to do the rounds. Origin PC announced options for a GTX 470 or GTX 480 on the Genesis desktop late on Friday. Similar to CyberPower, there's also an option for Intel's Core i7-980X.

Origin PC

Maingear is getting in on the action too, and wants us to "party like it's 2099" with its SHIFT desktop boasting an option for a triple configuration that carries a price tag of more than $6,000. Party indeed, Maingear.

MainGear

Digital Storm is spicing up its Black|OPS gaming machine with Fermi too. According to the release, the Enthusiast model packs Intel's Core i7-930 and a GTX 480, and starts at $2,891. The Extreme model boasts an i7-980X and dual SLI GTX 480s; this starts at just over $5,000.

Digital Storm

Don't forget to check out our Fermi review!

_{*Press releases via Hot Hardware}

PC gamers not in the mood to piece together a hot gaming rig can take the easy way out and purchase the Black|OPS PC from Digital Storm. Announced yesterday, this new addition to Digital Storm's lineup comes pre-loaded with Windows 7 and offers a choice of Intel's Core i5/i7 processors, or AMD's Phenom II X4 CPUs. Other tasty options includes the ATI Radeon HD 5870 graphics card, the company's proprietary Sub-Zero Liquid Cooling System, and a default 4 GB of RAM.

Thanks to the company's TwisterBoost Overclocking process, the Black|OPS PC can be overclocked and tested right out of the box--the process is even backed by Digital Storm's 3 year parts and labor warranty. Digital Storm also implemented its Noise Suppression Package into the design, consisting of noise dampening material, tweaking fan speeds, adjusting chassis air-flow, and analyzing the rig's noise structure.

"With Black|OPS, our engineers designed, integrated and optimized our gaming PCs from the ground up; the result is nothing less than astounding," commented Rajeev Kuruppu, Digital Storm’s Director of Product Development. "Unlike other gaming PC integrators, who simply cram the latest hardware into chassis, Digital Storm’s engineers select the highest quality components and ensure that every piece works in perfect unison with each other. We truly believe that our Black|OPS systems will redefine the standards that gamers hold their systems to."

The base price for the "Performance" rig starts at $1,709. PC gamers wanting a bit more meat can purchase the "Extreme" version that offers a base price of $3,102. This model includes the Intel i7 960 @ 3.2 GHz, 6 GB of DDR3 RAM (1600 MHz) the ATI Radeon HD 5870 (1 GB), and more. Customize your Black|OPS PC by heading here.

Hand-Assembled, But Not Custom-Built?

Many people love the craftsmanship that goes into a custom-built performance PC, but not everyone can justify the expense. Buyers unwilling to pay exorbitant build fees and unable to assemble their own machines have often been forced to rely upon on tech-savvy relatives, neighbors, or friends to make recommendations and assist with building and testing. Unpredictable quality and an almost total lack of support are the typical results of these cost-savings efforts (Ed.: raise your hands if you've been that "nice guy," who offered to help build a friend's machine, only to become the 24-hour tech support line when they had an issue with it).

But what if you had a truly skilled friend who, for a few hundred dollars, would build your system, overclock it for maximum performance, provide lifetime technical support, replace anything that breaks for the first three years, and was even willing to buy it back for the first 30 days if you found a serious problem? Digital Storm recently told us that it could be that friend, and we wanted to put the company to the test.

Long-time custom builder with an eight-year reputation (supported by its A+ Better Business Bureau rating), Digital Storm now sells several pre-packaged configurations at steeply discounted prices compared to their traditional build-to-order service. And unlike those large faceless corporations who try to offer similar options, every component Digital Storm uses is a high-end off-the-shelf part, making upgrades easy and relatively pain-free.

We priced out every component in the Gaming Dominator at our favorite discount vendors and found a $300 difference before-shipping. That’s $200 post-shipping, since Digital Storm currently offers a $100 instant rebate to cover total shipping value on this product.

Gaming Dominator Details

Rather than add expensive bells and whistles to its $2,233 gaming machine, Digital Storm chose a few of the best parts it could fit within the system’s budget.

That means there isn’t any Blu-ray capability, as a single 20x DVD burner occupies one of the Cooler Master 932’s six front bays.

The minimalist theme with a mind to performance continues to the inside, where a single XFX GeForce GTX 295 graphics card uses its dual graphics processors with slightly better performance scaling than one might expect from expensive 3-way and quad-GPU configurations.

For us, the poorly-concealed ribbon cable is the only distraction in an otherwise cleanly-assembled system. We have no clue why any company would use Ultra ATA rather than SATA, when prices are nearly identical. Choosing Ultra ATA doesn’t just make cables messier, it also forces users to leave the motherboard’s third-party controller enabled when they might otherwise deem it unneeded.

Asetek’s LCLC (low-cost liquid-cooling) single 120 mm radiator cooler reduces leverage against the CPU socket area compared to tall cooper coolers, while also leaving extra room around the CPU socket for easier access to cables and RAM. Though Asetek-brand components aren’t normally available to retail customers, Corsair now sells the single-radiator design as its H50 model.

RAID and SSD’s are out of the question when value focuses on gaming performance. Digital Storm uses a single Western Digital Black Edition 1 TB hard drive.

With five expansion slots, three memory slots, five external bays, and four internal bays empty, the Gaming Dominator is ready to fill the future expansion needs of most buyers.

A file folder contains a certificate of ownership, Windows Vista Home Premium booklet, Windows 7 upgrade code, warranty and service information, setup instructions, the original Windows OEM DVD, motherboard and graphics card driver/support disks, and a three-DVD set of restore DVDs.

An accessory box provides the cables and hardware originally included with the motherboard, graphics card, case, and power supply.

Test Settings

We compared Digital Storm’s 3.8 GHz build to the closest-matching custom machine we’ve tested, Maingear’s Ephex. A 73% price difference should make it easy for the Gaming Dominator to prove its value, but we can still see how much performance is really sacrificed.

Sharp-eyed readers will notice the difference in graphics driver, which couldn’t be avoided since the Ephex had been tested a couple of months ago. The system’s current $3,869 price remains relatively high due to its SSD drive and 3-way SLI graphics configuration.

A few of our Maingear Ephex benchmarks are also a little outdated, but we retained these for today’s comparison.

Benchmark Results: 3D Games

With such a large difference between the graphics configurations of these $3,869 and $2,233 systems, the point of game tests is to prove the Digital Storm Gaming Dominator’s ability to at least reach an average of 40 FPS across as many test resolutions and settings as possible.

Most users won’t need the power of Maingear’s 3-way SLI configuration in Call of Duty: World at War, since the Gaming Dominator’s single GeForce GTX 295 gets twice the required average frame rate at 2560x1600, extra textures, 4x AA, and max AF.

Crysis remains playable on the cheaper system up to 2560x1600 at High detail levels, but changing to Very High and adding AA drops both systems out of our highest resolution.

Far Cry 2 plays at incredible speed on both systems, at high quality and no AA. Ultra-High quality settings provide a good excuse to drop the Gaming Dominator to 4x AA or 1920x1200, but neither of those had been tested on the Maingear Ephex. The Ephex pulls through the highest settings smoothly.

The cheaper Gaming Dominator makes easy work of World in Conflict at all settings.

Benchmark Results: Encoding

Both systems have similar overclock levels, with Digital Storm’s slightly higher CPU speed battling Maingear’s higher base clock. We expected similar scores across most applications, though we did find a few minor surprises.

The Gaming Dominator’s slightly higher CPU clock helped it edge out the Ephex in both of our audio encoding tests.

Maingear’s higher memory speed is the most likely reason behind its win in TMPGEnc. We’ve noticed the video transcoding software’s tendency to favor better memory performance several times in the past.

MainConcept prefers the Gaming Dominator’s slightly higher clock speed.

Benchmark Results: Productivity

3ds Max shows identical performance between the Digital Storm Gaming Dominator and Maingear Ephex, in spite of the Dominator’s slightly higher CPU clock. Possible reasons include a small gain for the Ephex’ higher memory speed, or that the clock speed difference is simply too small to show up in a 20-second benchmark.

Digital Storm leads the AVG anti-virus test, in spite of its far slower hard drive. It appears that virus scans are limited more by the CPU’s ability to interpret data than by the speed at which it can retrieve data.

Maingear’s expensive system wins both file compression tests in spite of its slower clock speed. This could be due to its faster hard drive or faster RAM.

Benchmark Results: Synthetic

3DMark shows the significant performance difference between three GeForce GTX 285s and a single GeForce GTX 295.

An ultra-fast SSD drive is only reason Maingear’s system should take big gains in PCMark. Looking at the results, we’re surprised that the drive has so much effect on the benchmark’s Productivity suite.

A quick look at Sandra’s Arithmetic and Multimedia scores shows exactly how close the two systems really are in CPU clock.

We didn’t need Sandra Memory Bandwidth to know that DDR3-1600 is faster than DDR3-1333, however.

Power Consumption And Value

Digital Storm’s single GeForce GTX 295 uses the equivalent of two GTX 275 graphics processors, while the Maingear Ephex relies on three GeForce GTX 285 cards. But power reductions don’t end there, as Digital Storm was also able to get its CPU overclock and memory speed using default settings, while Maingear increased voltage for both. How much difference will these changes make in peek GPU and CPU power draw?

A 76 W total power savings under full CPU load is significant, yet an increase in GPU idle power is part of that equation. More significant is the GPU load test, where the lower-performance Gaming Dominator’s less-elaborate graphics configuration is the leading reason for its 43% power savings.

A 10% overall performance difference paired with a 20% minimum power consumption difference gives the Gaming Dominator a significant efficiency lead.

Value always favors less-expensive systems, yet going “too small” results in a system that can’t keep up with high-end tasks. Fortunately, the Gaming Dominator survived most of our graphics tests with smooth frame rates up to a 2560x1600 graphic resolution, so most high-end buyers should be pleased with its combination of adequate performance and greater value.

Conclusion

The real point of today’s review was to test the adequacy of Digital Storm’s Gaming Dominator for high-end gaming, and it did well in most tests. Comparing an “extreme performance” configuration to a more widely-accepted “high-end” build is never fair to the more expensive system, but at least it showed that the Gaming Dominator is indeed adequate. And with all due respect to Maingear, we also had good things to say about its Ephex in the conclusion of our review of that platform, which was upgraded after our story went live to indicate a three-year standard warranty at no extra cost.

Now that the Gaming Dominator has proven its gaming competence, we need only consider its value. Including shipping, Digital Storm’s build cost around $300 more than its parts would cost without shipping. Digital Storm claims its shipping voucher is worth $100, and even if it cost a home builder only $50 to ship all the separate components the cost of Digital Storm’s service drops to $250, at most.

Who else do you know who would be willing to build a system, overclock it, handle warranty replacements for any failed component for three years, and provide lifetime technical support, every day (potentially), for $250? How long would the commitment from your geeky friend or neighbor last if you regularly hammered them with questions in the middle of their workday?

With Digital Storm’s instant rebates on pre-selected configurations, buyers get the craftsmanship of a hand-built PC with the level of support expected from a high-end shop, at a price we feel is completely reasonable.