Final Words
Most users that email questions about building a computer system are planning to build a midrange computer system. With a price range of $700 to $1700, this covers a huge number of potential choices. AMD's Phenom II has certainly leveled the competitive playing field in the midrange in recent months. With Phenom II AMD can now effectively compete throughout the midrange, at least to just under the price point of the Intel i7-920 at about $285. Core i7 still wins over any AMD CPU, but all the Core i7 parts have really been high-end up to now.
Looking at the current AMD and Intel CPU prices it easy to say with confidence that you can pick a price where both AMD and Intel compete and find roughly comparable performance from either manufacturer. Even the old "overclocking exception" no longer applies, as the 45nm AMD Phenom II parts are just as overclockable as the best Intel processors. That is very good news for potential AMD buyers.
So far so good, but then comes the $64,000 dollar question: with Intel LGA-1156 due to be announced next month should you buy one of the recommended midrange systems or wait for i5? Unfortunately, we don't have a clear answer for this question, and the answers we do have will not be satisfying to all readers.
If past experience is anything to go by, an announcement of i5 next month may mean it is still months before the new socket 1156 chips and boards are readily available in the market. In addition, early versions of new socket boards like the upcoming socket 1156 often take a while to mature; there are often issues with early boards with a new socket and chipset that take some time - and a few BIOS updates - to resolve. Prices for early adopters are also normally higher than where prices settle once the market pipelines are filled. Early adopters pay more, and since midrange buyers are not normally early adopters they should be less inclined to wait.
Finally, we don't yet have hard performance numbers to truly judge whether i5 is a large performance step forward or merely a technology refresh with a minor impact on performance. We have seen both from Intel in the past and we are still not far enough from the Pentium 4 to blindly trust that new Intel technology will push the performance envelope. We will have answers to the performance question in a few weeks, but that may or may not be a clear-cut answer. All of which leads to our conclusion.
If you are in the market for a new midrange system now you should buy it now. This is particularly true if you are planning to buy an AMD midrange system. Values are at an all-time high and i5 will not likely change the value equation much since Intel already controls the top performance spots. Intel does not have a history of "giving away" performance; they adjust prices when competitive pressures force them to.
History has proven that technology is always evolving and performance is always improving. Those who wait for the latest and greatest usually gain nothing and merely lose the waiting time for the newer technology. Whatever you buy today is almost always improved upon soon after you buy it. If value is good, as it is now, you have no real reason to wait and little to gain. If you have to have the latest then nothing we can write here will likely dissuade you from waiting for LGA-1156, but all indications are that socket 1366 will continue to be the performance king for a while yet.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
71 Comments
View All Comments
ChrisOjeda - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
Will onboard video (like ASUS M4A78T-E) be a solid solution for somebody that does no gaming, but would like to make a home theatre box for watching movies, playing music, and viewing pictures using a Windows solution. I have no intention of gaming on the machine and don't want to spend more than necessary for a video card. Assume all other components the same.JarredWalton - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
Yes. If you're a stickler for audio, make sure it's an IGP that can handle multi-channel LPCM audio output. NVIDIA has had this for a while, Intel added it a year or so back, and http://www.anandtech.com/weblog/showpost.aspx?i=62...">AMD just added it with the R785 (HD 4200).garydale - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
The AMD 790GX chip does pretty reasonable graphics for the non-gamer so I went with the Gigabyte GA790GP-UD4H (or some similar number) board. The six onboard SATA2 ports meant that my software RAID 5 array (4 x 500G) still allowed me to plug in a SATA DVD rewriter.With a Phenom II 940 processor, the total build (less monitor - still using an old Dell 21" trinitron) was pretty small. I found a 470watt PC Power & Cooling Silencer on sale last year and stuffed it in a case I'd picked up years ago.
The processor runs quite cool thanks to the new cooler AMD puts on them - about the same temp I was getting with with an earlier Phenom X4 and a Gladiator Max cooler. It's the hard drives that are running hot, so I'll need to add another fan at the back to pump more hot air out.
Just waiting for the Blu-ray burner costs to come down. They haven't really moved in the last year, which is disappointing. Does anyone have any idea on why the prices are staying high? I notice the media prices have been dropping, so when can we expect a $100 Blu-ray burner?
goinginstyle - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
I was surprised that I did not see a AMD 770 or cheap Intel P45 based system with the 4890 as the video card choice for the midrange system. The money you save on the board allows you to upgrade the video card choice and performance looks to be the same. Maybe overclocking is not as good but does it really matter that much.You end up with a single video card on the board but it also allows you to save money on the power supply choice, which might get you a better audio selection or two hard drives. I think having alternatives listed in these guides would be good, otherwise most of the choices were solid.
brybir - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
I was looking for the 780G as well. I think they were looking for "gamer" boards with the option to Crossfire or SLI or whatnot over strictly budget options since this is a "middle of the road" system guide for both casual gamer types as well as those in the upper end of the price range who want very good system speed.If I were building a mid range system (I am going to build one come early 2010 when Intel's i5 line is more flushed out and the new gen of graphics cards are released in oct/now) I would probably pick up a 780G board and use the money to go from the 4870 to the 4890 or even just use the money for a bump in LCD quality.
Black Jacque - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
This article makes some good points in graphics and CPU selection. However, it shows the Editors have a poor understanding of PC power consumption.By reasonable accounts, all the PSUs in the recommended systems have twice the rated wattage that the parts lists will draw at full core-burning maximum. For the mid-range, a 400W-450W PSU is more than enough.
The recent, excellent Xbit Labs article "PC Power Consumption: How Many Watts Do We Need?" clearly illustrates that 750W PSUs are a waste of money in the mid-range when not going with SLI or Crossfire. This article shows the trend in PC parts is downward in power consumption.
When building a mid-range machine, you need to keep your eye on your budget. You are trading dollars for performance in every choice. A 450W PSU is less expensive than a 750W PSU. That difference is one budget bump UP toward either a: faster CPU, an upgraded GPU, or more RAM.
The high-wattage PSUs in the parts lists show a poor understanding of PC power consumption. Selecting lower wattage, PSUs that perform as needed in high performance situations (and more efficiently at idle) allows for higher performance parts to be used in the price/performance mid-range categories, or generally lower the cost-of-entry to a category. I expected a more canny and not “Big is Best” recommendation of PSUs in this article.
The0ne - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
While there's already arguments going back and forth on this it's usually a good idea to buy a beefier but not necessarily more expensive PS. The reason is because many users don't have the capability to determine precisely how much power their system is consuming. Hell, I'm an Engineer and I don't have the tools at home to even do it. So I can't expect the same for your average Joe to be capable of. Secondly, not all low range, mid-range or high end configurations are the same. Some have more components and some have the basics. Having more requires a bit more power.In addition, not all power supplies are created equal. Even same power supplies are not exactly the same. And while specs are great to look at chances are if you don't know what you have in the first place it's best if you look for a performance/price deal that is more than what you "think" you need.
Due to reviews I keep seeing people make comments like "consumers only need 400-450 watt for their mid-range computer!" While this may be true for most cases it is not entirely 100% foolproof. For example, my 600watt PS in my main refuses to run my new 4870 1Gig video card where it's already powering my current 9800GX2. Why, I've no idea. I just know that I had spent hours trying to determine it with little success except the PS is not what the specs are telling me.
So I pop in the OCZ 700, after doing some research and knowing I would have some good buffer afterward, and my system is running just fine. I'm not maxing it so I really don't have to pay attention to the tight specifications. What matters was that I bought it for $50 when it was on sale and there wasn't a similar PS that came close in price. That's what importantly :)
SiliconDoc - Wednesday, August 5, 2009 - link
You don't need home tools to determine what PS requirements are, there are tools all over the internet - how about one form the experts:http://www.thermaltake.outervision.com/">http://www.thermaltake.outervision.com/
---
Now they make PS's and you would think they would promote a higher number, but run through it once and you'll likely find a much lower result than you expected.
The0ne - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
Speaking of PS, here's the one I got...and it's on sale again for $49 after rebate :ohttp://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?Pr...">http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?Pr...
Nfarce - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
"For the mid-range, a 400W-450W PSU is more than enough. The recent, excellent Xbit Labs article "PC Power Consumption: How Many Watts Do We Need?" clearly illustrates that 750W PSUs are a waste of money in the mid-range when not going with SLI or Crossfire."Uhm, yes and no. As someone who recently build an E8400 mid range gaming system who also has the Corsair 750W, there are things you need to consider other than pure wattage. For instance there are hardly any quality power supplies in the 450-550W range that offer 2 6-pin PCIe connectors (a requirement to run HD 4870/90 and GTX 260/275 cards). Finally, the ones that do aren't that much less expensive. If you are going to spend $75 on a minimum requirement power supply, it makes good long term sense to throw in another $25 and get a more powerful PS for your future upgrade needs. Power supplies, unlike other PC components, don't really drop in price over time.