Weekly Buyer's Guide: Mid-Range System - July 2004
by Evan Lieb on July 16, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Networking
Recommendation: Onboard networkingPrice: $0
Nothing more than onboard networking is needed for a mid-range system like the one we're building today. However, a nice additional feature that the MSI K8N Neo Platinum and ASUS P4P800 Deluxe brings (in case you want to purchase our alternative), in terms of networking, is its onboard Gigabit controller, capable of 10/100/1000 transfer speeds. The K8N Neo Platinum's use of the nForce3 250Gb allows it to perform especially well in these GbE situations. GbE isn't going to change your experience on the Internet, but Gigabit is very useful for transferring large amounts of data to and from multiple networked computers in, for example, an office or within a family of computers. Some will find the addition of Gigabit very useful for this purpose, while most will just stick to utilizing just the 10/100 capability.
Storage
Recommendation: Seagate 120GB 7200RPM (8MB cache) ATAPrice: $85 shipped
Seagate's Barracuda series is renown for their quiet operation and silent seeking (that grinding sound coming from your case). We are finally recommending Seagate drives because we've seen continued requests for emphasis on silent operation from entry level, mid-range, etc. users over the last few months, and are now convinced that there is enough demand for this type of capability.
Anyway, the additional capacity that you get with a 120GB drive over the 80GB drive, which we recommended as our first choice, can be exceedingly useful if you're someone who stores endless emails in Outlook, plays lots of games, listens to lots of MP3's, or simply needs additional space for the next 12 or more months down the road. However, 120GB is mostly excessive if you're the only person using your computer. Though, this may not be the case if you have family or friends consistently storing information on this system.
Alternative: Western Digital Raptor 36.7GB 10,000RPM SATA
Price: $117 shipped
We're listing a WD Raptor as an alternative purely for speed purposes. Those looking for faster load times and a generally snappier experience will want to play with a powerful drive such as this one. Thankfully, the earlier speed flaws with the 36.7GB were fixed, and WD 36.7GB drives with identical performance to their older 74GB brothers have been shipping for some months now.
Optical Storage
Recommendation: Lite-On 52x32x52x16 Combo CD-RW/DVD-ROM drivePrice: $42 shipped
If you want to be able to watch DVDs, you can always opt for a combo drive. Its function essentially integrates CD burning and DVD watching into a single unit. The added benefit that you're getting is a better price for this type of combo versus purchasing an additional drive. However, the price difference isn't all that huge ($20 or so) if you were to buy a separate drive, plus that second drive would allow you to watch DVDs while you burn CDs, which isn't possible with the combo drive. This drive also comes with the nice added bonus of Lite-On's "Smart-Burn", which essentially protects for buffer under run. In the end, the decision is up to you as to how you want to configure your optical storage.
Alternative: NuTech DDW-082 8X DVD+/-RW
Price: $67 shipped
For a few months there, NEC's 2500A was a pretty hot buy for those who wanted a sort of cheap stopgap between today's 8X DVD+/-RW technology and tomorrow's 16X DVD+/-RW technology. No worries, simple, cheap. But the DDW-082 has sort of taken over that spot, especially at the tender price of just $67. So, today, we choose NuTech's DDW-082 8X DVD burner. We did an extensive roundup of 8X DVD burners just a couple months ago, and concluded that the DDW-082 was the best burner of the bunch. We suggest that you read up on this roundup to learn more about modern day DVD burners. Here's an excerpt regarding the DDW-082:
Incredibly, this drive went from one of our worst performers to our best performer with simple firmware upgrades. Another great feature of this drive is the supported 8X write strategies on 4X media. The fact that this drive is also the cheapest drive in our roundup makes NuTech's DDW-082 a true underdog champion. The DDW-082 deserves our editor's choice award for this roundup.
12X DVD-RW drives are just now starting to hit the market in quantity. However, the price and availability of 12X media is underwhelming at best, and therefore certainly not worth any recognition in our Buyer's Guides just yet.
We'd also suggest reading this article for more information on all of this technology.
Listed below is part of our RealTime pricing engine, which lists the lowest prices available on storage 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
26 Comments
View All Comments
qquizz - Saturday, July 24, 2004 - link
Can anyone verify this statementin the article? I am considering buying one of these."We're listing a WD Raptor as an alternative purely for speed purposes. Those looking for faster load times and a generally snappier experience will want to play with a powerful drive such as this one. Thankfully, the earlier speed flaws with the 36.7GB were fixed, and WD 36.7GB drives with identical performance to their older 74GB brothers have been shipping for some months now."
smithpd - Sunday, July 18, 2004 - link
I would like to see a different spread of costs on the Buyer's Guides. You have 500 for the entry level, 1000 for the mid-range, and now 3600 for the high end. I submit that many readers would be interested in something that is in the 2000 price category, which I would call midrange. So, how about 500 entry, 1000 budget, 2000 midrange, 3000 high end, and ?? for the god box.Your previous high ends were more reasonable and sensible, IMO.
gherald - Saturday, July 17, 2004 - link
Yeah benchmarking is a good idea, and it's been suggested before.I think AT is safe in going with reputable ram. Perhaps LL isn't required, but it should at least be the alternative choice. For the main recommendation, I would go with a single ~$100 stick of 512.
Dantzig - Saturday, July 17, 2004 - link
"I will continue to ask AT to assemble these systems and run some benchmarks on them."This is an excellent suggestion! It would be wonderful to have each system run the same basic benchmark suite and then graph the results together. This way, it would be easy for a user to determine if a given system will meet his/her specific needs.
Zebo - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
I also agree with the other posters about 1024MB of ram, in fact you could get 1024MB of Adata Cas 2.5 for almost the same price ($147) as your LL choice.Zebo - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
Why recommend $126 LL ram Evan?When you consider the price/performance it's an extremly poor value over ram such as Cas 2.5 Adata for $77 for two stick of 256MB PC3200.
Almost double the price, but does it offer anywhere near double the performance? I don't think so. I'm not sure what the performance difference is using LL expensive Corsair... maybe 3-5%?
I guess I'm too stuck the linear P/P relationships to like this choice.
TrogdorJW - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
I totally agree with the memory comments. These days, 256 MB DIMMs are a total dead-end purchase. Sure, you can run dual channel (which is really only important on the P4 platform right now), but then you would be limited to a total of 1 GB of RAM (4x256) for fastest performance and stability. 2x256 + 2x512 would likely be an iffy proposition at best.Besides, you could even recommend 1GB of decent quality OCZ for a moderate increase in price. You can get 2x512 OCZ performance RAM that runs 2-3-3-6 on Intel systems for $220, or 2-3-2-6 for $240. Or if you want to stick with Mushkin, you can get their 512 MB value DIMMs for $79 each (2.5-4-4 timings), or a 2x512 Level One pack for $239 (the same 2-3-2 timings as OCZ).
512 MB of RAM just isn't going to cut it for gaming or other high-end work, which as KnightOwl explained is the only good reason to upgrade from the budget system anyway. It's like recommending someone go out and purchase a moderate sports car... only get the 2.0L 4-cylinder engine! I mean, anyone looking for a sports car is really interested in going faster than a typical car, so they would want a bigger engine (and gas mileage be damned).
Similar to the RAM argument, there's a problem with the hard drive alternative recommendation. While the Raptor is going to please a bunch of the die-hard fanboys, don't your own tests show that a good 7200 RPM SATA drive is pretty much the same performance as the old Raptor while providing significantly more storage? If you have to have a fast hard drive (for whatever reason), then you really need to get the 74 GB Raptor, as it made quite a few improvements to the original. I suppose the Maxline III isn't yet available, but if you're looking for improved gaming or high-end performance, the Raptor I is only marginally better than 7200 RPM drives, and not even many of them in gaming: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=21...
But hey, thanks for finally adding a better alternative case recommendation and getting rid of the noisy WD JB hard drive! Silence (or at least less noise) is a wonderful thing.
BTW, just my opinion, but I think $1250 is a better target price for a "moderate" PC (and $750 for a budget PC). You're still forced to cut too many corners to meet the $1000 budget. A moderate PC really needs at least 9800 Pro graphics and 1 GB of RAM these days - even 1 GB of lower performance RAM. Like I said, though, just my opinion. :)
gherald - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
Evan,What I mean by 256mb being useless is in 2-3 years they will be like 128mb are modules today.
If and when the user upgrades to a dual channel system they can just buy a second 512mb stick. 1024mb oughta be more standard by then anyway, we all know Longhorn is going to be a resource hog, and Linux's will allways put it to good use with disk cache.
I happen to think dual channel is somewhat overrated; for an athlon XP it might be worthwhile but with the 64's integrated memory controller it's just not that big of a deal anymore. Don't AT reviews agree?
JackHawksmoor - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
I've also got to disagree with the RAM thing. It makes a lot more sense to go with higher latency RAM, and either save the money or get a better GPU, or CPU, or double the RAM. Tom's showed the Athlon 64 has at most roughly a 4% performance benefit with faster RAM, and you can get a MUCH bigger boost than that for the money. IMO low lateny RAM only makes sense for a "high-end" system.Also, where's the Asus K8N-E Deluxe review dangnabit!
Just nitpicking. I love these guides :)
chuwawa - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
I agree with everything that has been said about the memory.I consider myself a mid-range user and I thought the guide was very good except for the video card and memory suggestions.
Knightowl explained it perfectly. I think mid-range systems are mostly for people that game and do some sort of video editing but can't afford to dish out the money for the best hardware.
512mb for a gamer really is OK, but 1GB is preferred. However, when you buy 2 256mb modules, you somewhat screw yourself for the future because you will only be able to upgrade to 756mb (well more, but who will recommend buying a 1gb stick).
Anyway I think recommending a single 512mb stick as the first choice and 2 512mb sticks in dual channel as the 2nd choise would be best.
As far as the video card recommendations: just switch them. ;)