Pre-AM2 Mid-Range Buyers' Guide, May 2006
by Jarred Walton on May 9, 2006 6:30 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
System Summaries
Amazingly, we're actually under the $1500 budget with both systems this time. Some of you might argue that $1500 is still too much for a midrange system, but considering that you get everything other than the software and applications, we think that's a pretty reasonable cost. Drop the keyboard, mouse, display, and speakers and you're down to $1000, but of course you need to add in $90-$150 for Windows XP. All told, you may not get the same level of service that you get with a prebuilt OEM system, but the quality of components and performance offered will almost certainly be higher - much higher should you choose to go the overclocking route. Here are the system summaries, but if you're looking for additional options remember to check out the individual component pages where we have listed some alternatives.| AMD Mid-Range System | ||
| Hardware | Component | Price |
| Processor | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 2x512K 2.0GHz (939) - Retail | 297 |
| Motherboard | DFI nForce4 SLI Infinity | 115 |
| Memory | Patriot PC-3200 2x1024MB EPLL (2-3-2-5-1T) | 190 |
| Video Card | EVGA GeForce 7600GT CO 256MB (580/1500) | 184 |
| Hard Drive | Western Digital SATA3.0Gbps 250GB 7200RPM 16MB Caviar SE16 | 95 |
| Optical Drive | NEC 3550A (OEM) | 37 |
| Case | COOLER MASTER Centurion 5 CAC-T05-UW | 61 |
| Power Supply | ENERMAX Liberty ELT400AWT ATX12V 400W | 86 |
| Display | BenQ 20 inch 8ms Widescreen LCD FP202W | 325 |
| Speakers | Logitech X-530 5.1 70W Speakers | 62 |
| Keyboard and Mouse | Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 B2L-00047 | 32 |
| Bottom Line | 1484 | |
| Intel Mid-Range System | ||
| Hardware | Component | Price |
| Processor | Pentium D 930 2x2MB 3.0GHz (775) - Retail | 212 |
| Motherboard | ASUS 945P P5LD2 Deluxe | 151 |
| Memory | G.Skill PC-5300 2x1024MB Extreme LA (4-4-4-12) | 148 |
| Video Card | EVGA GeForce 7600GT CO 256MB (580/1500) | 184 |
| Hard Drive | Western Digital SATA3.0Gbps 250GB 7200RPM 16MB Caviar SE16 | 95 |
| Optical Drive | NEC 3550A (OEM) | 37 |
| Case | COOLER MASTER Centurion 5 CAC-T05-UW | 61 |
| Power Supply | ENERMAX Liberty ELT400AWT ATX12V 400W | 86 |
| Display | BenQ 20 inch 8ms Widescreen LCD FP202W | 325 |
| Speakers | Logitech X-530 5.1 70W Speakers | 62 |
| Keyboard and Mouse | Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 B2L-00047 | 32 |
| Bottom Line | 1393 | |
If you're looking for a system that can do just about anything well, both of these qualify. Without any extra tweaking, the AMD system will usually be faster, but the Intel system certainly isn't bad. If you're looking for more performance from the Intel side of things, you might want to try the Core Duo + AOpen + Overclocking route, or else wait for Core Duo 2 to launch. Both systems as configured currently lock you into an "outdated" platform, but we don't generally recommend building systems for upgradeability. You end up spending more money for the potential to upgrade, and when the time comes to finally upgrade you often find that it's better to simply build a new system and sell off your old one.
As always, comments and questions are welcome - either via email or in the comments section. There is no such thing as a "one-size-fits-all" computer, so naturally it is possible to tweak the component choices in order to improve performance in the areas that you need it most. Upgrading the graphics card and downgrading the CPU, for example, is something to consider for gamers. I would still rather just spend the money on a faster GPU and go a bit over budget, however, because I really like my dual core systems.
If you're looking for something significantly cheaper, our next Buyers' Guide will be covering the budget sector, followed by a high-end Buyers' Guide once AMD AM2 platforms have begun shipping. We may also look at doing an HTPC Buyers' Guide in the future - let us know if you're interested in that one.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
56 Comments
View All Comments
Spacecomber - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
Thanks for putting up an update to your buyer's guides. I always read these with interest to get other people's insights into what they think are the most useful criteria for selecting the best components to get the job done at a good price.For me, trying to sort through whose LCD monitors really offer the most in a given price range, such as the $290 to $300 range, continues to be one of the most frustrating areas of selecting components. The fact that manufacturers of LCDs seem to have no compunction about making up whatever technical specifications they think will best help them sell their products is maddening. Perhaps someone will eventually nail them with a class-action lawsuit similar to the one that got everyone to specify the difference between CRT tube sizes and viewable sizes.
Anyway, with regard to your recommendations, I'm skeptical that any of these LCDs, except the 24 inch Acer, are actually true 16.7 million color LCDs. As you said, it's easy to get to hung up on one specification, but all these LCDs, with the exception of the Acer AL2416W, appear to be using TN based panels. This means that in addition to them most likely really only being 6-bit + 2-bit with dithering panels, they suffer from the narrowed viewing angles that is the TN panel's other main weakness. Fortunately, while most manufacturers seem to have little problem with declaring all their LCDs to be 16.7 million color monitors, many continue to still be a little more honest about the viewing angles (though even these are often fudged, as well). The viewing angles on the monitors you listed are what seem to give away the true nature of these displays. They are relatively narrow, and they show smaller angles for the vertical compared to their horizontal angles, which as far as I know is very charecteristic of TN panels.
Anyway, my only point is that the more information you can dig up and provide us about what's what with LCD panels the better. This continues to be one area of computer hardware where facts and reviews are skant and hard to find.
Thanks
Space
KorruptioN - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
That BenQ FP202W 20" really is a TN panel. Some say it is a full 8-bit panel (16.7M) instead of a 6-bit panel (16.2M). I don't really know for sure. If it is indeed 8-bits, then I don't think I would hesitate to recommend it (for that price with rebate), even with the slightly restrictive viewing angles.That said, I would recommend people spend a little bit more and get the Viewsonic VX2025WM. It is a full 8-bit P-MVA panel from AU Optronics and offers the best of both worlds (response time, viewing angles, and colour depth). It can be had for just under $350. It has the height adjustment too.
kmmatney - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
The BenQ web site always lists the correct number of colors a monitor supports. In this case the web site lists 16.7 million colors, so its an 8-bit display. Its also a TN panel, so viewing angle will not be as good as an MVA panel.Here's a review, though:
http://gear.ign.com/articles/699/699896p1.html">http://gear.ign.com/articles/699/699896p1.html
My experience with BenQ's is that it takes some fiddling to get the colors right, but they are very nice after that. They are not so good out-of-the-box.
Spacecomber - Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - link
Well, you might be right, but I remain skeptical about the BenQ FP202W being a 16.7 million color monitor. It seems like it would be big news if someone was successfully manufacturing TN panels with that many true colors.www.flatpanels.dk seems to think that this monitor is using a Chungwa panel (CPT CLAA201WA01) and that this panel is also found in the Acer AL2017. Acer lists their panel as supporting 16.2 million colors, typical for how 6-bit plus dithering panels are described.
Again, this just seems to emphasize how hard it is to get factual information that you can rely on when it comes to LCD monitors.
JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - link
I've got the 19" 2ms and the 20" 8ms both setup right now, and I couldn't tell you (with my eyes) whether they're 6-bit or 8-bit. I need better eyes, I guess (which is actually true). I've edited the display text slightly if you want to check it out.JarredWalton - Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - link
Full reviews (with empirical data, rather than just using my eyeballs) will be coming soon.Spacecomber - Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - link
I look forward to those. With so much of the cost of a system potentially going into these monitors, not to mention their expected useful lifespan, more LCD monitor reviews will definitely be welcome.The trick will be how to go about getting those facts and then figuring out what they really mean. I know that ranslating numbers into users' experiences is easier said than done.
I'm sure that one of the reasons that there aren't very many in depth reviews of LCDs available is because this is such a difficult piece of hardware to get a good, analytic handle on.
Space
kmmatney - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
I meant to put in a few more reviews:http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?page=45...">http://www.trustedreviews.com/article.aspx?page=45...
http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/BenQ_FP202W/4505-3174...
http://www.gamerz-edge.com/hardware/reviews/fp202w...">http://www.gamerz-edge.com/hardware/reviews/fp202w...
There is a review out there that compared the BenQ against a few other LCDs inlcuding the ViewSonic 20" widescreen, and the ViewSonic was deemed the better LCD.
punko - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
Thanks for the Guide, Jarred.I guess sometimes its worth whining!
Punko
Yawgm0th - Tuesday, May 9, 2006 - link
I can't quite understand the recommendation of a 400W Eneremax power supply. There are more powerful modular power supplies in the same price range, with some being cheaper, even the ones from reputable brand names. There are even better PSUs in the same price range without modular cabling. A modular PSU is hardly a necessity for a mid-range computer, but a good power supply is. Enermax makes some great PSUs, but I wouldn't want to try using a 400W in a system like this, especially when there are good 500W power supplies in the same price range.