System Builder Marathon, Sept. '09: $650 Gaming PC

3D Games: World in Conflict, Fallout 3, And Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X.

3D Games: World in Conflict, Fallout 3, and Tom Clancy’s H.A.W.X

Once again, results are CPU-limited in World in Conflict, but don’t ignore the impact the Radeon HD 4850s and Catalyst 9.9 drivers have on these results.

Unlike the $600 portable gaming machine from the last SBM, this month’s budget build does not need to be overclocked to play World in Conflict at maximum details.

The $650 machine leads again with all the eye candy enabled, offering playable performance up until the sharp drop at 2560x1600. Notice in our typical resolutions, while both machines seem to be CPU-limited at stock clocks speeds, overclocking brings out some scaling by resolution associated with GPU limitations. Apart from the poor showing once again by the stock $600 PC, all others maintain a decent level of playability up through 1920x1200. 

In this round we removed S.T.A.L.K.E.R. and added two new game benchmarks to the SBM test suite. The $650 PC breezes through all resolutions in Fallout 3, taunting us to enable some eye candy and to give it a challenge. 

Even with 4x AA and 15x anisotropic filtering (AF) enabled, the $650 PC put up stellar performance at the first three resolutions. The minimum frame rates didn’t drop below 44 frames per second (FPS) at 1920x1200 at stock speeds and 53 FPS once overclocked. 

The massive hit in average frame rates when enabling 4x AA at 2560x1600 also carried over to minimum frame rates. Without AA and AF enabled, minimum frame rates at 2560 x1600 were 45 FPS at stock and 52 FPS overclocked. But enabling eye candy dropped the minimum frame rates to 22 FPS and 25 FPS at stock and overclock speeds, respectively. Many gamers would then rather lower AA and maintain smoother 2560x1600 gameplay.   

While overclocking yielded about a 17% increase in average frame rates, the stock $650 machine is still playable through all resolutions. 

With the added graphics demands of enabling 4x AA, greater scaling is seen between resolutions. Our highest tested resolution was unplayable and full of hitching, while even the game’s menu navigation was noticeably slower.

  • dirtmountain
    A nicely done build, great work with overclocking on a stock cooler and an impeccable write up. Thanks for the great article Mr. Henningsen. AMD did a good job for a budget build, especially at stock clocks.
    Reply
  • one-shot
    Great article! It's crazy to see all of that packed into a case for only ~$650.
    Reply
  • I usually love reading these, but this time I just went directly to the comment section. There's no point in building or owning an amd box, they are too weak compared to modern Intel/Nvidia based systems.
    Reply
  • anamaniac
    Wonderful. =D

    What about the new $100 quad core athlon with no L3?
    I know I like extra cores. Wonderful choice regardless.

    I wonder what the quad core athlon with a 512MB 5850 (which would increase the budget though) will be like. Both cheap yet highend parts. =D

    Nice to see what only a pocketful of cash can get you.
    Reply
  • tacoslave
    i know it wasn't available at the time but what about that 100 dollar quad core the athlon II x4?
    Reply
  • rdawise
    Good article. I know you stated you were leaving the "unlocking" of the other cores to the winner of the contest, but were you guys able to unlock? If so, could you re-run those benchmarks? Again great article.
    Reply
  • stray_gator
    While "forcing" all AMD builds for a single marathon is a good idea, the timing is somewhat unfortunate.
    An article which explores the performance and value of a complete Lynnfield build is something I (and many others, i'd dare to guess) would like to see but haven't yet, and this month's SBM is a missed opportunity in that regard.
    Reply
  • jj463rd
    That's a bitchin budget gamer system especially looking at the gaming benchmarks.Just this month I was thinking about building a similar type of system with the Phenom II X2 550BE.I was going to go with gigabytes 785G type board (just one graphics card slot) though however I may reconsider that especially with what you presented here although I was shooting for a much cheaper budget build (about $180 less than what you have),Newegg did have a gigabyte 785G board with the Phenom II X2 and $20 off in a combo deal until the end of this month.
    I think that your choices were better than mine (more powerful).
    Reply
  • gkay09
    Another alternate mobo - 785G ...they are availbale in AM3/AM2+ flavours and have SB 710, which can allow core unlocking -http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128394
    But not sure about their o/c potential though...
    Reply
  • neiroatopelcc
    Nice to see a cheap system still using a quality motherboard.
    Reply