Buyer's Guide - Entry Level, January 2005
by Jarred Walton on January 9, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
CPU and Motherboard: AMD
We have two options with AMD: socket A or socket 754. Socket 754 costs more, of course, but it generally has better performance and it will have some future processor updates. If you can spare the cash, we recommend going with socket 754. Those who want to save as much money as possible while still getting a decent system will be better served by socket A. This is particularly true if you want to look at motherboards with integrated graphics, as there really aren't many socket 754 boards that include graphics and the quality of the included graphics is almost universally poor. For the cost conscious, then, we'll go with socket A and integrated graphics, and we'll stick with socket 754 as a performance alternative. Socket 939 is yet another alternative, but we feel that the price is just too high now to reasonably fit into a budget system.  |
 |
| Click images to enlarge. | |
Socket A Motherboard: MSI K7N2GM2-LSR Nforce2 IGP
Price: $72 shipped
Socket A CPU: AMD Sempron 2400+ 256K 1.67 GHz 333 MHz bus
Price: $63 shipped (Retail)
Total: $135
In terms of cost, the Nforce2 IGP motherboards have quite a bit to offer. You get graphics that are roughly the equivalent of a $30 add-in card along with reasonable performance. Reliability of the MSI boards has been very good in our experience, and we also get a few extras. For example, we get SATA hard drive support, courtesy of the more recent MCP-S NVIDIA chip, and all Nforce2 IGP chips have dual-channel RAM support. Unfortunately, we also lose some features like the third DIMM socket and several PCI slots - this is a micro-ATX board instead of a full-size ATX. None of these losses are really that bad, however, and the board as a whole strikes a good balance between cost, features, and performance. MSI also includes their pseudo-rounded IDE and floppy cables, and although they're not as nice as a true rounded cable, they're better than flat IDE/floppy cables in our opinion.
There are several similar boards that make different trade-offs in this price range. For example, we can get a third DIMM socket but lose the SATA support with something like the Chaintech 7NIF2. If we look towards non-IGP solutions, there are even more possibilities, including full-size ATX boards, boards that use a different chipset, firewire support, etc. We don't particularly care for most of the cheaper boards, however, and the more expensive boards get us into the territory of socket 754, making them a rather poor choice where performance is concerned. If you choose a non-IGP Nforce2 motherboard, you should also pay attention to the specific model of the chipset used, as the SPP version does not have dual-channel RAM support.
The processor selection is about the same as it has been for several months on socket A, and we continue to stick with the Sempron 2400+ as the most reasonable choice. Running at 1.67 GHz, it does well in most tasks. We would prefer to get one of the old Barton Athlon XP chips instead, but prices on those have increased and have taken them out of the reach of the budget system. The Athlon XP-M 2500+ can still be had for about $90, and when combined with a moderate heatsink and some overclocking, it can reach decent performance levels, but again, that is moving into the mid-range sector and the domain of the Athlon 64. For overall value, we still like the platform, but performance is nothing special. If you want more performance from an AMD system, we feel that you're better off spending the extra money to shift to socket 754 and the Athlon 64.
 |
 |
| Click images to enlarge. | |
Socket 754 Motherboard: Chaintech VNF-250 Nforce3 250
Price: $73 shipped
Socket 754 CPU: AMD Athlon 64 2800+ 1.8 GHz
Price: $127 shipped (Retail)
Total: $200
Shifting to socket 754, we choose to go with a motherboard that doesn't include integrated graphics. There are boards that use the VIA K8M800 chipset with its S3 UniChrome Pro graphics, and there are also boards that include the SiS Mirage graphics. Performance and reliability of either one are questionable in our opinion. If you don't need decent 3D acceleration, we'd just as soon go out and purchase a cheap Radeon or GeForce card for $30 to $45 and be assured of driver reliability. For the motherboard, then, we end up going with a discrete graphics solution and the tried-and-true Nforce3 250 chipset. There are a few options in the budget sector competing for the lowest price, with the cheapest board coming in at $70 shipped.
At the bottom of the price scale, we're going to stick with the Chaintech VNF-250, due to better memory compatibility. There are some specific memory compatibility issues with the EPoX boards, but they do win out in terms of price and features, depending on the model that you select - the EP-8KDA3I is the base model and costs $70 while the EP-8KDA3J adds Gigabit Ethernet and the hardware firewall of the 250Gb chipset and costs only a few dollars more. The drawback of the EPoX boards is that while they work well with one DIMM, they do not officially support running two double-sided DIMMs in anything more than DDR333 speeds. If you can live with that limitation, the 8KDA3J is still a good board, but we feel that many people will end up running two DIMMs with such a system - perhaps not initially, but adding a second 512 MB DIMM down the road seems very reasonable. Those looking for additional features might want to look at the Biostar K8NHA Grand, as it includes GbE via the 250Gb chipset and adds IEEE1394a firewire support to the mix. We really hate to skimp on the motherboard in any system, as it can have a far-reaching impact on performance and reliability. If it were us buying a computer for ourselves or a friend, we would strongly suggest taking a look at the MSI K8N Neo Platinum for its features and proven track record, but it does cost $100.
For the processor, we looked at the cost of the Sempron parts for socket 754 and decided that they just don't offer enough value. Sure, they're a lot faster than their socket A counterparts, but when they all cost $120 or so and the Athlon 64 2800+ outperforms them and costs only $7 more, why bother? Slower clocked versions of the Sempron for socket 754 are due out in the next month or so, and hopefully, they'll be able to fill in the gap in price from the socket A parts. The questions on the upcoming, slower Semprons are how much cache they will have and how fast they will be clocked (1.6 GHz with 128K of cache is rumored, and without actual benchmarks, it is difficult to say what sort of value such a chip would really offer). For now, we'll stick with the Athlon 64, as the price/performance is still very good and you always have the possibility of increased performance with 64-bit applications in the future. The retail processors also include a better warranty and a certified heatsink, so going with a "cheaper" OEM version rarely ends up as a better deal once you purchase a separate HSF. If you can spend even more money, you could always look at the 3000+ to 3400+ processors. Performance doesn't scale quite as quickly as price, but it's a relatively flat curve at least.
Comparing the socket A CPU/motherboard to the socket 754 parts, we would estimate the socket 754 setup to be about 40% to 50% faster - particularly once you factor in a separate graphics card. It ends up costing 48% more (not counting graphics), so bang-for-the-buck is about equal and you get additional features and more longevity. We would strongly advise anyone looking for a budget computer to save up the extra $100 if at all possible, but the final decision is yours. As we mentioned earlier, socket 939 is also almost in reach of a moderate budget price - it will cost about $50 to $100 more than a similarly powered socket 754 system, and it will offer even more longevity. We continue to place that in the realm of the mid-range system, however, so we'll look more at that platform in an upcoming Guide.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
31 Comments
View All Comments
justly - Monday, January 10, 2005 - link
Jarred, Thanks for the responce, and I can certainly understand why you would dislike writing a budget guide.If what you say is true "In a single review with high-end components (which is how we generally handle reviews), a lot of motherboards work very well. When you start dropping down to cheaper RAM, however, it's amazing how frequently system instabilities seem to end up being caused by the motherboard choice." then maybe what is really bothering me is not so much your review but the way motherboard reviews are conducted.
One other thing (just thinking out loud here), how does VIA and SiS chipset affect memory compatibility on a A64 system when the memory controller is part of the CPU??? Do the motherboard manufactures pay more attention to the memory trace lines on Nforce based motherboards (even budget ones) than SiS or VIA based boards??? ... I really think I need an answer to these before I can fully believe you, no offence but I will remain skeptical about your comment to not use VIA or SiS (at least on a A64) untill these are answered.
Maybe you could make a recommendation on how motherboard reviews are conducted, that way Anandtech readers can be informed about these problems that are hidden from us by reviews that only use high-end components.
Thanks again for the reply.
JarredWalton - Monday, January 10, 2005 - link
Good point, PrinceGaz. Of course, my take is that the ability to run the "full" Aero Glass experience mode of Longhorn is essentially a requirement for most people. At the very least, a PC should be upgradeable to that level (with AGP/PCIe cards, not with PCI).18 - I don't actually recommend the FX 5200 as a card for any of the systems. I mentioned it only as the "fastest" PCI graphics card currently available. The 9550 might also be available in PCI version, in which case it would be something of a toss up, but I haven't heard of any ATI DX9 parts for PCI.
#17 - Of course you can get a cheaper system that what I listed. What you've specced out is pretty much the cheapest "modern" system that could be put together. I personally wouldn't recommend that sort of configuration to a friend (or anyone else) without some serious reservations. Basically, it would be a case of "you can get this if you want, but I will not be held responsible for any shortcomings." You basically hit the point of diminishing returns, where $5 to $10 saved ends up costing you 10% of your overall performance (i.e. going from a Sempron 2400+ to a Sempron 2200+), or else you lose certain features that I consider desirable (DVD+RW support).
It's a personal preference, really, so people can go either way. My feeling is that any *new* system should include at bare minimum the following:
512 MB of RAM
80GB Hard Drive w/8MB cache
Sempron 2400+/Celeron D 320
17" monitor
DVD+RW support
You certainly don't *need* any of those features for standard PC use, but I would definitely recommend spending the extra $50 or so to get them.
PrinceGaz - Monday, January 10, 2005 - link
Excellent article, I couldn't really fault any of the choices, and good explanations were given of why they were selected.One minor point worth mentioning maybe related to Longhorn's graphics requirements, specifically where you say that for the "next version of Windows (codenamed Longhorn), 3D graphics support will actually be required in order to run it properly. Specifically, the word is that Pixel Shader 2.0 support will be required".It will run fine on DX7 hardware in 'Classic' mode (similar to how Windows 2000 looks). Only the 'Aero' and 'Aero Glass' modes require DX9 hardware. Full details on the likely requirements for the three modes can be found here-
http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/display/graph...
delldell - Monday, January 10, 2005 - link
Good article; however, the radeon 9550 graphics card is faster than the nvidia FX 5200 while also being cheaper :) At only $60 the 9550 clearly represents the best bang in the the low end video card market. Check out the review from techreport.comhttp://techreport.com/etc/2005q1/bestof2004/index....
ChineseDemocracyGNR - Monday, January 10, 2005 - link
I have a different idea of what a budget computer is.AMD budget:
AMD Sempron 2200+ Retail $54
ASRock K7S41 $49
Corsair Value Select 256MB DDR400 $41
Seagate 40GB 7200RPM 2MB PATA $56
LG 52X32X52 CD-RW Drive $29
same floppy, Case & PSU, Display, Speakers, Keyboard and Mouse as your AMD Budget. $251
Total: $480
AMD Performance Budget:
AMD Sempron 2600+ Retail $86
ASRock K7Upgrade-880 $47
Corsair Value Select 2x256MB DDR400 $68
Gigabyte ATI Radeon 9550 128MB DDR 128-bit $71
Seagate 80 GB 7200 RPM 8MB SATA $69
LG 52X32X52 CD-RW Drive $29
same floppy, Case & PSU, Display, Speakers, Keyboard and Mouse as your AMD Budget. $251
total = $621
Intel Budget:
Intel Celeron D 315 (2.26GHz) Retail $69
ASUS P4S800-MX $60
Corsair Value Select 256MB DDR400 $41
Seagate 40GB 7200RPM 2MB PATA $56
LG 52X32X52 CD-RW Drive $29
same floppy, Case & PSU, Display, Speakers, Keyboard and Mouse as your AMD Budget. $251
Total: $506
Intel Performance Budget:
Intel Celeron D 325J (2.53GHz) Retail $89
ASRock 775V88 $58
Corsair Value Select 2x256MB DDR400 $68
Gigabyte ATI Radeon 9550 128MB DDR 128-bit $71
Seagate 80 GB 7200 RPM 8MB SATA $69
LG 52X32X52 CD-RW Drive $29
same floppy, Case & PSU, Display, Speakers, Keyboard and Mouse as your AMD Budget. $251
total = $635
qquizz - Sunday, January 9, 2005 - link
Just to clarify:Of course ddr400 memory can run at 333 speed. My point is that the memory must be run at 333 to be supported by the motherboard using onboard graphics. This is the case with all NF2 boards with onboard graphics that I've seen.
Jep4444 - Sunday, January 9, 2005 - link
its mainly old Via boards with issues(i mean original K8T800) and for the purpouse of this article an NF3 can be had cheaper than a K8T800pro on 754 so it is a justified move but to say Via chipsets have problems is just not rightWhen it comes to 939 boards, the K8T800Pros(specifically from Abit and Asus) have been the best boards out
erinlegault - Sunday, January 9, 2005 - link
The one thing I think was missing from the graphics section is overclocking options. Overclocking is a great way to gain extra performance from a product. Besides what ATI and others do to turn a Radeon 9600 into a Pro or XT is overclock it and provide adequate cooling and provide faster memory. Why should a user pay a company to overclock a product when they can do it themselves.I personally like Abit's options. They have a line of products based on the Radeon 9550, just an underclocked 9600. But, they have two products, the R9550-Guru and the R9550XTurbo-Guru, which supports their V-Guru overclocking utility. With adequate cooling these products could posibly be overclocked to the 600 MHz of the 9600XT. On the memory, side the Guru has 3.6ns memory that is comparable to the 3.3ns memory of Abit's 9600XT product and probably can't be overclocked much above the stock 400 MHz. But, the interesting part about the XTurbo-Guru is that the memory is 2.5ns and can be easily overclocked. And if you look at the product images, I think adequate cooling is already provided for overclocking.
qquizz - Sunday, January 9, 2005 - link
It should be noted that for the budget motherboard: http://www.msicomputer.com/product/p_spec.asp?mode..."Supports DDR266/333 with internal graphic core, DDR266/333/400 with external add-on card."
In other words, if you wanna use ddr400, it is only supported if you use a discrete video card. If you use the onboard video, only ddr266/333 is supported.
JarredWalton - Sunday, January 9, 2005 - link
Justly - The memory compatibility issues with Nforce3 250 are pretty much confined to the EPoX boards as far as I've heard. All other NF3250 boards will run two DS DIMMs at DDR400. VIA chipsets in general still have some issues. The motherboard is such a critical component that I really don't like to cut any corners, even in the budget sector.In a single review with high-end components (which is how we generally handle reviews), a lot of motherboards work very well. When you start dropping down to cheaper RAM, however, it's amazing how frequently system instabilities seem to end up being caused by the motherboard choice.
Honestly, I dislike writing the budget guide selections, just because there are so many questionable parts. I always try to push customers to spend an extra $30 or so on the motherboard if nothing else. Maybe I'm just superstitious, but I've had several "cheap" systems fail after a year or so due to the motherboard.