System Buyer’s Guide: $1700 Performance Midrange
by Mike Jones and Jarred Walton on May 12, 2010 4:52 AM ESTBase System Components
Here's a recap of the common system components.
| Common System Components | ||||
| Hardware | Component | Price |
Estimated Shipping |
Rebate |
| Cooling | COOLER MASTER Hyper 212 Plus | $27 | $3 | |
| Video | Gigabyte HD 5850 1GB (OC) | $310 | $8 | |
| Memory | G.Skill Ripjaws 4GB DDR3-1600 F3-12800CL9D-4GBRL | $110 | ||
| Hard Drive | Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB WD1001FALS | $100 | ||
| Optical Drive | LG BD/HD DVD 10X BD read/16x DVD read/write UH10LS20 - OEM | $105 | ||
| Case | Cooler Master Storm Scout SGC-2000-KKN1-GP Mid-Tower | $80 | $10 | |
| Power Supply | Corsair CMPSU-750TX 750w 80 PLUS Certified SLI/CrossFire Ready | $110 | ($20) | |
If you’re interested in overclocking—or if you’re a builder simply looking for a quieter cooling solution than the retail fan—the Cooler Master Hyper 212 Plus is tough to beat in the performance midrange segment. With its single 120mm PWM fan operating between 600-2000 RPM, the Hyper 212 offers nearly silent operation at light loads (down to 13dBA), and manages to move an impressive 76.8 CFM at a fairly quiet 32 dBA maximum. Its four heatpipes make direct contact with the processor, facilitating rapid transfer of thermal energy, and it includes clips for mounting a second fan should you desire even more airflow. At $30 including a fan, it’s a great buy, and it works with both 1156 and AM3.
Continuing the theme of high performance/high value, the G.Skill Ripjaws 4GB DDR3-1600 CAS 9 kit—featured February’s PCs for Under $1000 guide—remains a compelling a choice, with a high bang for the buck ratio. Running at a low 1.5v, and reportedly solid overclockers, you’ll be hard pressed to find a better DDR3 solution in this price range. They also come with a lifetime warranty. Dropping down to DDR3-1333 (not that it won't likely overclock to DDR3-1600 speeds anyway) will only save about $7, so it's really not worth your time in our opinion.
The video card of choice for this system is the aforementioned factory overclocked Gigabyte Radeon HD 5850 1GB. As noted in last fall’s 5850 article, this part is the value alternative to the potent 5870, delivering between 85% and 90% of the performance of the larger card (depending on resolution) for roughly 80% of the money. Moreover, as prices on the GTX285 have remained significantly higher—despite the superior performance of the DirectX 11 5850—and a $30 or more premium seems too much to ask for the 2%-8% performance gains offered by the GTX 470, NVIDIA does not at present threaten the 5850’s value position. In short, the 5850 occupies a sweet spot in the desktop graphics card market, and doesn’t appear to have a direct competitor. It offers a ton of performance and, though not cheap, it appears to be the card to beat in the performance value segment. This particular card—with its GPU overclocked a mild 40MHz from the factory—delivers slightly upgraded performance for the same price as a stock card, or less. If you don't care about gaming, obviously you can downgrade to a number of less expensive GPUs.
The Corsair 750TX—another carryover from last year’s performance midrange system—is still a strong bargain, with a final cost of $90 after rebate. It has an impressive feature set—including a single 60A 12V rail—is 80 PLUS Certified, and SLI and CrossFire ready. It continues to enjoy a sterling reputation as a stable, quiet power supply, and offers some headroom for future system upgrades down the line. While you could certainly build this system with a smaller power supply—many manufacturers recommend a 500W minimum for the 5850—the 750TX is such a strong value, and a solid power supply is such an essential component to system stability, that it remains an easy choice here.
Those looking to run a lower spec PSU with a single GPU will be fine with the little brother of our recommended PSU, the CORSAIR CMPSU-400CX 400W. Priced at $50 (with a $10 MIR), it should be more efficient when your system is idle while still providing enough juice for the 5850. If you are thinking about going the Clarkdale route and/or a less powerful GPU, then we'd definitely recommend the 400W PSU as a more sensible choice. Just don't try running SLI/CrossFire setups.
Though the time for suggesting the purchase of an SSD boot/OS disk in this segment appears to be drawing closer, prices just aren’t there yet for most of us. In the meantime, builders will certainly be satisfied with the tried-and-true Western Digital Caviar Black 1TB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s. It has earned a reputation as a reliable drive, and consistently outperforms other 1TB 7200RPM drives in benchmarking. There are less expensive alternatives, however, and, if you don’t mind a slight drop-off in drive performance—unnoticeable for most users—this is a good part to look for on the cheap. 1TB 7200RPM drives are available from all of the major manufacturers for $80 or less.
For those of you that prefer faster random access times (useful for loading multiple apps at once), SSDs start at around $100 for a 32GB model. It won't offer the raw performance of the top SSDs, but for random access it will still be an order of magnitude faster than a conventional HDD. Really it's a question of balancing priorities, and you can go many different routes with a budget of $1000+.
Though Blu-Ray burners continue to be too expensive to recommend for this segment, the capability to read them is a must have in the performance segment. The good news is that the prices of Blu-Ray/DVD combo drives have fallen to the point that $105 buys you an LG UH10LS20 with 10X BD read speeds and 16X DVD burns. If you require Blu-Ray burning capability, an LG WH1LS30 can be had for around $160. Naturally, if you have no interest in Blu-ray you can swap this drive out for pretty much any DVDRW and save $80...which as many have pointed out in the comments is enough to get you very close to adding a small OS+Apps SSD like the OCZ Onyx.
Rounding out the base system is the case. There was a lot to like about the Cooler Master Storm Scout when we recommended it for last year’s performance midrange system, as it brought a lot to the table for $100. Today? Checking in at $80, that same case is a serious bargain and, because it offers a lot without breaking the bank, it seems like a proper home for the performance midrange system. It offers quiet, effective cooling courtesy of 1 x 120mm and 2 x 140mm fans, screw-less design, a control panel for adjusting LEDs and fan speed, eSATA, USB and audio connectivity via a top-mounted I/O panel, and even a carrying handle should you require some mobility out of your desktop. It also offers plenty of room for your peripherals, offering five 5.25” and six 3.5” drive bays. The style might be a bit flashy for some—the handle, red LEDs and overall military-tech feel skew a bit toward the LAN party crowd—and more conservative builders might prefer a more buttoned-up option. For those users, we suggest looking at the Lancool PC-K56, a quiet and well-designed steel case by the highly regarded Lian Li, available for the same price.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
102 Comments
View All Comments
HotFoot - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link
I love my SSD, but I wouldn't give up graphics performance for it. It boils down to what you're building the machine to do.There just isn't a one-size-fits-all, especially at this price point. If we were talking sub-$500 machines, then basically you're already assuming mostly browsing, media, productivity and some very light gaming. However, $1700 means a serious investment.
Boiling things down even further, let's say we're talking about a gaming machine. Even then, it's hard to define the meaning of value for graphics cards. Basically, what I want is a card that will power though a certain library of my favourite games, plus what might come out over the next year or two - at the graphics settings I want, and at playable frame-rates or better. If saving 50% on the graphics card means a 20% drop in performance, that might be looked at as a good value savings. On the other hand, if that 20% drop in performance means I'm turning down graphics settings or dealing with poor frame rates, my gaming experience is annoyingly diminished. And, in the end, I've only saved about 8% of the total system cost and given up 20% performance.
I absolutely agree, though, that the blu-ray player doesn't make sense for the kind of computing/gaming these systems seem to be designed to do.
PreacherEddie - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link
I do not understand why some get so bent out of shape at you offering some suggestions to people on how to build a balanced system at a certain price range. What does it matter what label you call it, if you clearly explained the price point you are shooting for (which you did)?Also, you explained various options to up- or down-grade various components to improve performance or save money depending on some of the various circumstances that people may find themselves in when they are building for themselves. So why do some get so upset when it is not the perfect system for them?
And finally, if you know exactly what you want, why are you reading this article? This article is for those, like me, who do not know exactly what they want, and appreciate the guidance from those who have some experience with a lot of the various options out there.
My only complaint is that I would like to see these guides more often, but I can understand the hesitation of the staff at AT to do these since they get blasted every time they do one. Anyway, thanks to Mike and Jarred for doing this.
Phate-13 - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link
I'm nog saying that it is a bad guide. I'm just stating that it is very odd not to choose for an ssd. Especially because you can do so without increasing the price (by a lot). Look at the changes I suggested for example.It's not about getting upset because it's not the best system for me. It's just that I expect a buyer's guide to be as optimal as possible, and perhaps offer some alternative routes for special occasions. Now they take a special occasion (blu-ray), and advice a little bit on a better way.
The only reason I, and probably the others as well, are stating these things are that we want to improve this guide. Everybody's cricitcs try to make improvements without increasing the cost OR try to lower the cost of the system, how can you complain about such a thing?
I help out quite a lot of people that are building a system. That's why I care btw. I want them to buy a pc that's best for their needs.
jimhsu - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link
I think the main problem is that the system proposed is a midrange GAMING system, not a midrange WORKSTATION. Large difference there,GAMING systems do not benefit that much from a SSD (I have one, and I know that load times are not affected much, aside from exceptions such as MMORPGs). Games such as Crysis have almost a 0% boost in loading time on a SSD on most systems. Thus a gamer would probably opt for a more powerful graphics card instead of the cost of a SSD (or for that matter, the Bluray drive ... *sigh*).
There is no freaking way that a WORKSTATION needs a 5850, even if you do some fairly intense gaming on your off time. A 5770 or something is still an incredibly strong card and saves you 100. Or get a last gen card (4870/4890) and get even FASTER performance for cheaper. (You also wouldn't need the Bluray drive, and could save some $$$ on the power supply, and on your yearly electric bill). Case in point: I still have a 8800 GTS 512MB, and it's still decent on almost everything in 16x10, though for a new build I'd like something faster. That money would of course go into a SSD which results in a ridiculous boost in productivity.
Another vote for segregation of the two systems?
JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link
As mentioned, there are so many options that unless we put together half a dozen potential builds and explain each component in detail (which I've done in the past) you're going to gloss over things. From the intro:" Our recommendations today skew pretty heavily toward graphics performance, with the single most expensive part—the factory OCed Gigabyte Radeon HD 5850—comprising approximately 25% of the base system cost (or about 18% of the complete system). Though it may be a little over the top for some, one look at graphics card comparison charts will tell you that things drop off rather precipitously after the 5850, with the drops in performance not corresponding all that sensibly to the drops in price. While there are plenty of less expensive cards that will still deliver acceptable performance—for many, at any rate—none seem to offer as desirable a mix of price, performance and future proofing (DX11) as the 5870’s little brother. For our midrange builds today, it feels just about right. If you're not worried about gaming or graphics, feel free to downgrade to something else, but we'd recommend sticking with at least an HD 5670 to get all the latest and greatest video decoding and power management features, or grab an HD 5450 if you're willing to skip out on a few extras like vector adaptive deinterlacing. Or if you don't care about DX11 right now and think CUDA is more important, you might prefer the GT 240."
I could have added another paragraph just as long in the intro discussing the pros/cons of SSDs. Pro: fast. Con: small capacity and an order of magnitude more expensive per GB. Blu-ray was something Mike put in, and I have no reason to remove it, though obviously that's an easy thing to do. Of course, it's also easy to add an SSD down the road, clone your main HDD over to it (well, that might take a bit more effort), and go on your merry way. Ultimately, it's different strokes for different folks. I'll take the higher GPU over an SSD any day of the week on a desktop, because I still enjoy games.
GullLars - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link
IMHO, it could be summarized as easy as:*Hardcore gamer / upper mid-end gaming rigg: 5850OC.
*Casual/hobby gamer using the computer for other stuff a couple of hours a day: 5830 + x25-V (OS + core apps) in addition to the HDD (maybe downgrade HDD to Green to make back some cache when/if the IOPS requirements are off-loaded to the SSD.
*Productivity, using the computer mainly for workstation (and/or office) type things, with a couple of hours casual gaming now and then: 5770 + X25-M 80GB.
None of the above warrants a BD reader.
Possible reason for BD reader: high-end HTPC, or fileserver/workstation ripping BD videos. If neither of theese 2 are met, BD is a complete waste of money and you should go for DVD burner instead ($25).
jimhsu - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link
Right, no criticism intended at the article, but the above is a more reasonable approach towards designing system configurations that actually suits different groups of people. Like it or not, not all users are the same. Neither should the system design for the users be the same.It wouldn't even lengthen the article much to include a few alternatives. For instance, the core components (i7-750, motherboard, RAM (though some may object to 4GB, but whatever), case, fan, etc) are all solid, but obviously the rest of the system is amenable to tweaking. You obviously shown that you could give alternatives - i.e. discussion of motherboard choices, video card choice, etc. It wouldn't be that hard to put in a few more itemized tables as potential variants of the midrange system.
Voo - Thursday, May 13, 2010 - link
That's a rather black and white approach to the whole thing. Just because I work a lot on my PC I can't also want a good high end gaming PC? Does that mean that everyone who works isn't allowed to play anymore? ;)Most people will want to do more than just one thing on their PC: playing BRs (well I don't need that, but I'm sure there are people out there who do), playing and working. So one balanced build really isn't that bad, as long as you mention (or it's obvious) what you can leave away if you don't do XY.
The only thing is that a SSD is a great investment for most things you want to do with your PC (well at least if you consider spending more than 1k$ on one), so the extra added paragraph really is a good idea. We can still argue if you need one or not, but it surely warrants that discussion, so it can be a bit more prominently mentioned.
JarredWalton - Thursday, May 13, 2010 - link
(Note: Responding to the thread and not necessarily to the post right above mine. Heh)Ultimately, an SSD is about adding performance but it doesn't improve the features or capabilities of a system in any way. A Blu-ray reader does exactly one thing that a non-BR drive can't do. Surprisingly, that one thing is reading Blu-ray discs. If you want to watch Blu-ray movies (or rip them for storage on your 1TB HDD and later viewing over the network on your living room HTPC), that can be a very useful one thing.
An SSD will only improve certain usage patterns, and personally most of those usage patterns don't apply to me, particularly on my desktop. My system is generally on during the day, with email, office, internet, Photoshop, and Explorer windows open. They are usually open all the time, so I don't need to wait for the apps to load. With 4GB RAM, I also don't tend to run out of memory and have to go to the swap file. I turn on my system once in the morning and shut it down once at night. I can hit the power button, walk away, and come back 5 minutes later and never know that the HDD was thrashing during that time. Which is exactly what I do. (Technically I sleep the computer at night and wake it up in the morning, so it's more like 30-45 seconds of HDD thrashing.)
With everything I need available, the only time I really feel the HDD slowness is if I play games. Load a game, and an SSD might load it a fraction faster, but as someone else mentioned, getting into a round of L4D2 faster usually just means waiting an extra 5-10 seconds for the guy(s) with slow PCs to load the level. And shaving 5 seconds off a level load time when I'm then going to play that level for 10-20 minutes represents a very small amount of lost "productivity". Of course, we're talking about using a 32GB SSD as an OS+Apps drive, so I couldn't really fit more than a couple games on it anyway and more likely all my games would still come off the HDD.
Are there instances where SSDs truly make their presence known? Of course. Heavy multitasking, launching seven apps at once, start up and resume times, and situations where you access tons of small files randomly. I'm not sure how often I actually do any of those, hence my feeling that for 45X the cost per GB (roughly... a 1.5TB drive costs about as much as a 32GB SSD: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8... and http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8... those situations where the SSD is 50X as fast don't come into play all that often. In short, measuring a dramatic improvement in benchmarks that stress the storage subsystem isn't the same as delivering a huge real-world improvement in performance and usability.
DynacomDave - Wednesday, May 12, 2010 - link
Well said! Those are my sentiments exactly. I have enough knowledge to get myself in trouble and rely on the recommendations of AnandTech to avoid making big mistakes. I look forward to all of their guides and recommendations.