Buyer's Guide: High End System - May 2004
by Wesley Fink on May 26, 2004 11:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Video
Recommendation: 256MB Radeon X800 ProPrice: $425 shipped
While the dust hasn't settled in this round of the video wars, we do know that the new generation of video cards from nVidia and ATI are twice as fast as the previous generation in many benchmarks. Knowing that, you simply can't ignore the new cards when building a high-end system. The only one of the new cards that we could actually find for sale right now is the ATI Radeon X800 Pro. The X800 Pro will eventually settle into the price range around $400, which is a good deal, cheaper than the $500 that you will pay for the X800 XT or nVidia GeForce 6800 Ultra when they are finally available in the marketplace. Consider this round a victory for ATI for availability, but the war (or the best choice) is far from settled.
You will never have to apologize to anyone for choosing the X800 Pro for your new high end system, since it is an excellent performer that can hold its own - especially considering it is one slot, one molex connector, and can be used with most any quality power supply. For more information on the relative performance of the new generation of video cards, check out the AnandTech review of the X800.
Alternative: 128MB Saphire Radeon 9800 PRO 256-bit, DVI, TV-out
Price: $192 shipped
There really isn't very much difference in the performance of the 128MB 9800 PRO and 256MB 9800 XT, so we certainly would not recommend spending the $370 it would cost for a 9800 XT, when you can buy a Radeon 9800 PRO 256-bit (not the more limited 128-bit LE) for $192. What a bargain, if price matters somewhat on your high-end system. On the other hand, the X800 Pro is so much better than the 9800 XT that we would recommend spending the extra $50 if you had thought of the 9800 XT, and get a X800 Pro instead.
With the introduction of the new generation of video cards, there are clearly some real bargains available at what was the old high-end. You can also find an nVidia GeForce 5900XT for about the same price as the 9800 PRO, but the 9800 PRO is generally regarded as the better performer in a comparison of these two cards. Like the 9800 XT, the comparable 5950 Ultra is selling in the $370 range, another case where the difference in performance hardly justifies double the price.
We recommend that you stay away from the 9800SE video cards. With the 9800 PRO so reasonable these days, there is absolutely no reason to settle for a 9800SE that, at best, performs on par with or often even slower than a 9600 Pro in 3D games. Don't be fooled - - a 9800SE performs nothing like a full-blown 8-pipe, 256 bit memory interface 9800 Pro.
Listed below is part of our RealTime pricing engine, which lists the lowest prices available on ATI video cards from many different reputable vendors:
If you cannot find the lowest prices on the products that we've recommended on this page, it's because we don't list some of them in our RealTime pricing engine. Until we do, we suggest that you do an independent search online at the various vendors' web sites. Just pick and choose where you want to buy your products by looking for a vendor located under the "Vendor" heading.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
59 Comments
View All Comments
Pumpkinierre - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
At first, I was shocked at your choice of FX53 as a cpu because this is the last of the Sckt940 FX and upgradeability to later FXs would not be possible. Upgrade ability is not one of your criteria but it certainly is mine as I expect an expensive mobo to span two generations of cpus, video cards and even memory. But really Skt940 is more trustworthy (and possibly cheaper) than even 939 as other posts point out because it is the server cpu-opteron. So the mobo might handle the dual core opterons next year. After this revelation I thought the FX51 might cut a few dollars but your price list has it $20 MORE than its bigger brother! AMD go figure?!The FX is still a rip-off and the new Skt 939 3800+ looks like its got a lot of grunt, according to the french article below, but runs hot (104Watts, 50-60C) and this is 130nm- Prescott anyone?:
http://www.x86-secret.com/popups/articleswindow.ph...
They only found 0-5% increase with dual channel for same speed cpu and it had problems with four dimms- dropped to 2T timing or to DDR333 with DS modules. And the price may be expensive with AMDs habit of selective release from the high end like previous a64s:
http://www.overclockers.com/tips00588/
With the Skt478 P4 you're limited as an upgrade to P4EEs coming down in price unless 3.6 N'wood or Prescott skt478 appears (which is hardly worth while anyway)- neither of which is likely.
So the Sckt940 is not a bad option. If only those FXs would drop into the $500 range.
SHO235V8 - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
I agree that there seems to be a huge spread, but I also assume it will be adjusted in the next mid level guide. I too have been waiting for the 939 boards, but I may not wait much longer considering VagrantZero's points regarding new M/B technologies and DDR2 which will be commonplace by the time I upgrade in a year or two. Besides, there are sometimes issues with the first release version of new technologies. Anyone else know of a better reason to hold off for the new boards? Will dual channel memory be that much faster?Dismal - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
I was a little scared at first that the non-FX Athlon 64's would be completely forgotten about when opening the guide. But I was glad to see some mentioning in there. Hopefully they will still stay in the guides. I want good performance but I just can't spend the kind of cash to buy an FX. Recommendations in the mid-range guide don't seem to fit the kind of performance I'm looking for either. (I agree with rdclark's post above about the gap between mid-range and high-end). I don't think I'm savvy enough to go with overclocking. The price of the Athlon 64 3400+ seemed to be a good match for me. Hopefully they'll still remain in the guides.JKing76 - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
Aluminum cases don't dissipate heat any faster than steel.Locutus4657 - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
Well I have to say, you did finally remove one of my biggest bet peives with these guides. I never could understand why Evan kept recommending 120GB drives for a high end system, Personally I'm considering getting 160GB for my system, and right now I just have an entry level computer ( AXP 2200+ ). One can never have enough hard drive space!GokieKS - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
Great choices, and it's nice to finally have a truly good case being recommend. But since there's still such a big part of the $5K budget remaining, why not something even more high-end, like the SilverStone SST-TJ03 Nimiz? ;)The 193P is an excellent monitor, no doubt, but as one of the 19" LCDs limited by a 1280x1024 resolution, the extra $150 or $200 of the Viewsonic VP201 is definitely worth it. And if you have two of them... ^^
Other than that, just about everything seems fine, even if I personally would go for the A64 3200/3400 instead of the FX53, and pair it up with a nForce3 250Gb mobo.
~KS
Da3dalus - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
Seems like good choices. The only thing I'd choose differently would be the case and the alternative 200GB HD, I'd choose the S-ATA version of that instead of the IDE version. The price difference is really tiny and S-ATA is just plain nicer (I hate those big IDE cables).rdclark - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
I'd like to see some performance benchmarking of these systems, especially as this high-end guide's system costs a cool thousand more than the previous high-end guide's. How much of a difference is there, or are you just buying expensive bragging rights?The new guide also leaves a fairly large gap between the mid-range and the high-end system; the mid-range is still suggesting an XP2800+, while this jumps right to the highest of the high-end. That removes a valuable basis for comparision (and decision-making) in the Athlon 64 3xxx space, which (IMO) seriously lowers the value of these guides.
cosmotic - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
Why not reccomend the DDW-082 instead of the DDW-081?VagrantZero - Wednesday, May 26, 2004 - link
I wouldn't rec you getting 2gb of ram. There's nothing [aka games] out there that uses it, not even D3 or HL2. I doubt 2gigs will really become a good thing until U3 [2006] and by then DDR2 should be coming into its own making your DDR obsolete. I'd say save $300 and get a 3400+/3700+. From x86's article [foreign website, here's the translated url http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F...] the 754 3400+ was outperforming the 939 3500+ in the majority of benchs. I'll wait and see how the 3700 handles the 3800, but if it wins I'm sticking with the old socket [I'd have to upgrade my mobo eventually anyways thanks to PCI-E, SATA300, and DDR2 so 939 isn't anymore future proof for me than 754]. Plus there was talk of 104W power requirments [THAT'S MORE THAN THE PRESCOTT!] and that the new socket chips ran almost as hot as intel offerings. It's just one article so take it with a grain of salt, but I have my suspicions.Also, if you don't plan to OC Corsair XMSPC3500s would be a great pick.