Part 2: Building A Balanced Gaming PC

Benchmark Results: World In Conflict

World in Conflict

We use the game’s built-in benchmark for testing World in Conflict. While you'll often hear that an RTS is playable at 25-30 FPS, we set our average target at 35 FPS to better cope with the minimum frame rates experienced in the game.

The Radeon HD 4850 does fine at 1280x1024, but enabling 4x AA exceeds its limits. As in Part 1, the GeForce cards are more limited by the processors in this game. While the GeForce GTX 260/Phenom II X2 550 BE combination reaches the target, it’s hard to ignore the added performance gained by stepping up to the Radeon HD 4890. Nvidia's GeForce GTX 285 is able to match the HD 4890 when paired with the Phenom II X4 955 BE, but doesn’t get anywhere near the 57 FPS it reached with the Core i7-920.

Besides seeing the bottom three GPUs slide down a bit, not a whole lot changes at 1680x1050, and the GeForce GTX 260/Phenom II X2 550 BE remains our cheapest AM3 platform to reach the target.

Again, at this resolution, World in Conflict paints an interesting look at platform balance. While graphics cards like Nvidia's GeForce GTX 260 and GTX 285 surely benefit from pairing with additional processing cores, CPUs like the Phenom II X2 550 BE and X3 720 BE also benefit significantly from stepping up to a Radeon HD 4870 X2. At this resolution, we clearly see both CPU and GPU limitations coming into play.

At 1920x1200, the GeForce GTX 260 falls a bit and, just as in Part 1, requires a quad-core CPU to remain above target. The Radeon HD 4890 is the sweet spot for a balanced and least-expensive minimum recommendation. 

Deciding where to spend extra money for World in Conflict gaming isn’t easy based on the average FPS. Sure, a quad-core processor helps, but look how well the Phenom II X2 550 BE performs when paired with AMD's Radeon HD 4870 X2. Even divulging the minimum fps reported by the built-in benchmark adds very little to this picture.

At 2560x1600, the picture becomes clearer. Only the dual-GPU solutions remain playable. The Phenom II X2 550 BE is sufficient, but more processor provides added performance. Plotting Core i7-920 results to this chart, the Radeon HD 4870 X2 only manages one additional FPS, while the GeForce GTX 295 manages an additional five FPS. The Socket AM3 platform would, of course, come in at a significant savings, although it’s less apparent when you factor in the additional cost of buying a 30” LCD and a graphics card capable of pushing 2560x1600.

  • What effect does having a motherboard that unlocks the 4th core on the X2 and X3 have? In power consumption and overall performance? I'm not asking a redo of all the data, just asking for speculation by someone more knowledgeable, if I can get it.
    Reply
  • Readers, don't use this as your only source of info before buying a PC. The writer left out the Intel i5-750 (which has a price range around $189-209, and outperforms all of those CPUs EXCEPT the i7.) Not only that, but LGA1156 motherboards are typically cheaper than the LGA1336 mother boards. Sure, the i7 has hyper threading, and triple channel memory support, but you're gaming here, not running high end video and 3D programs that would actually make great use of hyper threading. The only benefit I can see, is if you have the extra cash to throw around and you plan on running the applications. I guess a second benefit would be expandability, since you won't be able to upgrade the 1156 chips to Intel's next line of processors, the i9. The i5 can really over clock like a beast with the right motherboard, too.

    The writer also left out a great GPU: the Radeon 4870 1GB. Single GPU card, almost perfect for anybody considering running today's games at 22" 1650x1080. Of course, you'd want the 4890 for bigger than that, but still, most of these cards (especially the nVidia ones) are not quite price matched with the performance. A good 4870 can run you $170, and a great 4890 can run you $199. The nVidia "equivalents" (GTX 275, 285, and 260) all run about $260+.

    I'm not sure why these two great products were left out (i5 and 4870,) but if there is a good reason, disregard what I said, but honestly, I don't see the good this article is doing without at least including them.
    Reply
  • winner4455
    YAAAAAAAAAAAY part 2!
    Reply
  • dragonsprayer
    The secret to building a balanced gaming by pc, by WarpedSystems.

    First, i have been building overclocked only gaming pc's since 2003 with zero failures and 3 year cpu warranty.

    #1 cheap cpu - 3.0c northwood - research that far back! CPU = 920 or 750 clocked to 3.8ghz or up too 4.2ghz

    #1.5 cpu cooling: in 2004 we used thermalright xp-90, while we still use the thermal right true, we perfer the noctua - research and use the best coolers.

    rule 1 of air cooling: dual fans! seal the fans - see photos!

    #2 raid, we run dual raid with short stroking - we have been short storking since 2004. Your hard drive arm should move as little as possible a 4 x 1000TB set is 1000GB of raid0 for the c drive. the remaing 3TB is raid 10.

    ssd: we run raid5 on hard drive and single ssd as the c drive, the raid 5 is data drive/game drive. This could be a raid0 or raid10.

    Video card, you put all your money in the video card! A $2000 computer can have a GTX 295 use the i5 750. A $3000 air cooled system will have 2 video cards.

    Power supply = .6 x true max power. this is usually 500 watts to 600 watts of max power. A 750, 850 or 1000 is best. NEVER GO LESS THEN 40% OF AVERAGE! 60% rule allows for a video card upgrade.

    Case ...fans, fans and more fans. Anetec 1200 can not be beat for air cooling. All cases are copies of the antec 900. There are many good cases but you want 1 120mm in, 120mm out rear and 1 120 mm blowing on the video card. or 2 80's or bigger

    antec 1200 has 2 rear 120mm and 2 front - we pull one section on both the 900 and 1200 and hide wires in the lower cubbie. That means we move the bottom cage up 1 slot, we remove 1 3 slot cage.

    check THG links: http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&rlz=1T4GGIH_enUS236US236&um=1&q=warpedsystems+thg&sa=N&start=0&ndsp=18

    finally bios tuning - memory and bus speed are critical, too high is bad!!! Too high is bad! fsb 1600 or 400x4 has been the sweet spot for years. Whether your running a G0 6600 at 3.6GHz 1600fsb or QX9600 at 1l multiplier at 4.4ghz 1600fsb works! Above that you run into many many issues. At fsb 1600 ram timmigs are ddr2 = 2.0-2.1v 4-3-4-10, 4-4-4-12, etc with core 2 ddr3 at 1.91v you have 7-7-7 with the i7/i5 you run 1.64v at 8-8-8-20 or 8-7-8-20. you find true 100% stablity with the correct timings and fsb and you do not get odd phase bus speeds.

    yes, you can tweek the system to 1800mhz but do the tests and you find in most cases you spent more money to get little performance gains and lost stability -- 97-100% stablity. 100% = zero crashes - never!

    temps, video card temps are key. Manually set fan speeds to stay under 75c with 70c the best. Stock temps and high cards run 80-85c even with good systems. You can use really good cooling to reduce that with antec 1200 etc. A 120mm fan does not fit an i7 mobo - we use 92mm fans in the door and hot glue it.


    Conclusion, overclock your cpu, remember the difference between an i7 920 and 975 may only be factory setting and both run the same speed! Buy the best video card, use the best cooling case and cpu cooler. If your not using a SSD ....RAID RAID RAID! RUN RAID! IT IS EASY!

    good luck, you find you get alienware level performance just as i did in 2003 after a few weeks of bios tuning!
    Reply
  • 1898
    BlackDays:
    Please, if you want to criticise something make sure you've understood it (read in this case) thoroughly. Otherwise you'll look like an idiot.
    Anyway, this series is made out of win!
    Thank you.
    Reply
  • knightmike
    This article truly is revolutionary. I have been waiting for an article like this since I began building my own PCs ten years ago. This article coupled with your CPU and GPU hierarchy chart will go a long way towards eliminating CPU/GPU bottlenecks. This article truly is the first of its kind and I hope to see it at least twice a year if not four times a year. Thank you.
    Reply
  • ibnsina
    Great article, it's educational, looking forward to ATI’s 5000’ series comparisons.
    Reply
  • knightmike
    In your conclusion, you state that a $100 CPU does a far better job than a $100 GPU when it comes to maxing out a low resolution like 1280x1024. Can you elaborate?
    Reply
  • amnotanoobie
    Hooray! Now this is a good reference on the forums when people ask for bottlenecks
    Reply
  • scrumworks
    How can this take weeks to plan? Perhaps if one works 15mins a day.

    Good to see vanilla HD4890 puts up a serious fight for GTX 285. Not that it gets any credit for that.

    You should stop using Vista. It's dead already.
    Reply