Final Word
Cheaper components usually offer more performance-per-dollar than high-end parts, simply because companies know that customers who can afford to pay a premium for performance can easily be pressured into paying a slightly higher premium. Yet today’s $800 build isn’t balanced for overall performance, instead using a relatively expensive CPU to assure adequate performance in a few professional apps. Shortfalls, such as the low memory capacity and mechanical hard drive, caused the less-expensive work system to under-perform the previous gaming machine in other work-oriented applications.
Even with the performance imbalance, the $800 work PC offered more performance-per-dollar than either of its predecessors. What’s more, the cheaper a machine is the more its value score is harmed by the price of non-performance expenses, such as the operating system.
Removing the operating system from build cost pushes the $800 even higher on the performance-per-dollar chart. This is closer to reality for me, since I’ve always been able to find a cheap way to get an OS license.
One of our former SBM participants asked about a value chart that didn’t include the case, rationalizing that the high-end builder shouldn’t be penalized into selecting a cheap case for an expensive system. I added secondary storage. The previous $1600 machines had secondary storage, the $800 build doesn’t, so that the previous builds are able to claw back part of their losses here.
The same former builder also wanted to answer questions about gaming-specific builds with a gaming-specific chart targeting the high-end. This is where a cheap CPU and expensive GPU pay off, and the $1600 gaming PC shines.
The $800 build scores better value in the overall performance charts, losing only in the game-specific chart, yet it’s not the machine I’d build for $800. To begin with, I already have a spare license laying around that cost me $20. I also have spare cases. I even have a spare case from a blown computer with a license key attached.
I’d put any money saved on the OS and case towards memory (16GB) and SSD (256GB) upgrades. I don’t’ need a terabyte drive, I have external storage for that, and I don’t even need a DVD drive since I have an external portable unit laying around. Then again, if I wasn't trying so hard to include Skylake, I could have saved $50 on the motherboard and another $10 on the CPU by going with the Core i7-4690K. That's exactly enough to pay for both upgrades, without all the finagling, yet I'd hardly expect this level of overclocking from the more-power-hungry CPU on a cheaper motherboard.
If you’re starting from scratch and don’t know how to find a cheap Windows license, the $800 PC isn’t a bad machine to use. Middling performance, moderate quietness and mind blowing efficiency are a great combination at this price.
MORE: Latest Systems NewsMORE: Systems in the Forums
Thomas Soderstrom is a Senior Staff Editor at Tom's Hardware, covering Cases, Cooling, Memory and Motherboards. Follow him on Twitter.
