Buyer's Guide - Mid-Range, October 2004
by Jarred Walton on October 21, 2004 11:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Display Recommendations
Many users may already have a decent display and can simply stick with what they have. For those looking to add a monitor, we recommend at least a 19" CRT for this price range. LCDs are also an alternative, although they do tend to cost quite a bit more. Our recommendation is the same for whatever sort of work you plan on doing with your PC, but the alternative might be a nice upgrade for software developers or for office work. We do not recommend LCDs for content creation, as their colors are not as accurate as CRTs, but they could be used as a secondary display.
CRT Recommendation: NEC/Mitsubishi FE991SB-BK 19"
Price: $274 Shipped (Retail)
With a maximum resolution of 1792x1344@68 Hz and a more useful resolution of 1600x1200@75 Hz, the FE991 is a great monitor for just about any use. The screen is perfectly flat, colors are vivid, and text is crisp and clear. It may be more expensive than other 19" monitors, but we feel that it is worth the cost. The only major drawback is one that can be said of all CRTs: it is large and somewhat heavy, so transporting it to a LAN party would be difficult. If you're in the market for a monitor, checking out units at a local brick and mortar shop is always a good idea. Pictures on the web are a poor substitute for actually trying out a monitor in person.
LCD Alternative: ViewSonic VX715 17" LCD 25ms
Price: $369 Shipped (Retail)
There are quite a few 17" LCDs that cost only slightly more than our recommended 19" CRT, but we prefer to spend a little more for a model that includes a DVI input. The VX715 has a good picture, and while it might not be ideal for gaming, it works extremely well for office or programming use. LCDs are easier on the eyes if you spend all day staring at a monitor, which is also nice.
Due to their increased potential for dead pixels, we again suggest that you check out local stores and test out any LCD before you purchase it if possible. Most online resellers will only replace an LCD if there are a lot of dead pixels - eight or more, usually - and as anyone who has encountered a dead pixel on an LCD will tell you, they can be very annoying. Remember also that LCDs tend to look blurry when run at anything other than their standard resolution, and some people may feel that the default text size is too small. For example, 1280x1024 on a 17" LCD might be difficult for some people to use comfortably.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
54 Comments
View All Comments
Avalon - Friday, October 22, 2004 - link
For the s754 system, to clarify. Sorry. Wish these posts could be edited :)Avalon - Friday, October 22, 2004 - link
If you wanted to cut an additional ~$50, switch out that MSI K8N Neo Platinum and throw in an Epox 8KDA3J. It's only $73 on newegg, shipped, which is within a dollar or two of the Chaintech VNF-250, but has loads more features. After all, you guys gave the 8KDA3+ an editor's choice award, so why not recommend the "value" board in a mid range rig? It's an option to ponder over.dragonballgtz - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link
A $200 CPU would go better with a 9800Pro IMHO for gamers.JarredWalton - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link
ksherman, that's basically what I went with, but outside of gaming there is no real need for a fast graphics card. $200 for a graphics card that many people do not want/need is difficult to justify. Rather than create more confusion with talk of gaming alternatives, we are going to look at putting together a Gaming Guide in the near future.The Mid-Range PC is such a broad segment that it is virtually impossible to cover all options without writing a 20,000 word article. This one is already long enough, and that was after I removed the gaming options. Here's the basics, though:
If you want a moderate gaming card for AGP, about the only reasonable choice right now is a 9800 Pro. The 6800/6800GT are too expensive for most people, I think. PCI Express has the 6600GT which tends to be faster than the 9800 Pro by about 10 to 20%. As games are GPU limited in most cases, AMD fans will probably either want to wait for PCI Express motherboards and get a 6600GT, or else bite the bullet and spend $360+ on a 6800GT. Ouch. :)
Beenthere - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link
Nice guide. Lotta work !!!I think the biggest issue for most folks looking to build a new PC or even to upgrade within a budget, is prioritizing. As you can see from the comments above, gamers always want a top-of-the-line Video card even when this takes a big bite outta the budget. To do that you gotta cut cost some place else and that may compromise the total system performance.
Seems to me that an easy means to quantify and qualify the real options for an individual system would be by listing the hardware categories as you've done on a spreadsheet then plug in the hardware and prices accordingly. I think some folks would be surprised to see how their total system price climbs way beyond their original budget when you add $50. here and there to get the "best" of a particular component or to step up to the next level of component.
As you pointed out, sometimes like with memory, buying the lowest latency modules may cost more than moving up 200 MHz in CPU speed, so the CPU may be a better choice. Your guide and recommendations give PC builders a great head start on getting the most bang-for-their-buck.
Thanks for the effort!
ksherman - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link
also, I think that a good description for a mid range system should be a system with a good amount of power (hence the processor choice) with out the price premium. I like mid-ranges because they offer the power i need with the versitility to do anything I will need to do for a while down the road.ksherman - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link
It is kinda weird that you recommend such a low-end card for a mid-range system... to me (as everyone else has stated) the 6600 and 9800's should be in the midrange systems. 9600 and similar should be put into low-end systems... in regards to the x300, you state that it is good for those not into gaming so much as other "basic computing tasks", I think that something like that belongs in the low-end systems category.JarredWalton - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link
I have made a few minor corrections, and I also added a $1000 AMD 754 system to the summary page, for those that might feel $1250 is too much. :)#3: Corrected, thanks. MB, GB... sometimes my fingers have a mind of their own.
#7: RAID 1 hardware controllers should not incur any noticeable performance penalty, as they simply tell both hard drives to write the same data. Better RAID 1 controllers will actually have improved read performance, as they can pull data from two sources. I have not done any extensive testing of this, however, and would guess that most integrated RAID controllers lack that feature. If anyone knows for sure, speak up.
#12: I didn't put much of an emphasis on gaming, as I hope to cover that more in an upcoming Gaming Guide. We'll see if that gets a green light - it's been a while since we covered that topic in depth, I think, although the Doom 3 craze touched on it.
#15: Stay tuned. That's all I will say for now. The Pioneer is still a good choice, though.
#16: Is that typo corrected now? If not, which page are you seeing that on, since I checked both the Display and Summary pages for the error.
Thanks!
Desslok - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link
That monitor costs as much as the whole system would?NEC/Mitsubishi FE991SB-BK 19" 1274?????
deathwalker - Thursday, October 21, 2004 - link
Great article...I am a little surprised at the Optical Drive choice of the NEC 3500A @ $73, reason being is that you just reviewed the Pioneer 108 and called it the best drive reviewed to date and its only $78.