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
SiliconDoc - Wednesday, August 5, 2009 - link
The idea that the 4870 or the 4890 beats the GTX275 is a FANTASY.-
http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=7...">http://www.driverheaven.net/reviews.php?reviewid=7...
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2009/04/...">http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphi...03/radeo...
http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1539&pageI...">http://www.bjorn3d.com/read.php?cID=1539&pageI...
http://www.dailytech.com/422009+Daily+Hardware+Rev...">http://www.dailytech.com/422009+Daily+H...adeon+HD...
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-275-revi...">http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-275-revi...
http://www.legitreviews.com/article/944/15/">http://www.legitreviews.com/article/944/15/
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_3d_...">http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_3d_...
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/hardware-canu...">http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/forum/ha...a-geforc...
http://hothardware.com/Articles/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX...">http://hothardware.com/Articles/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX...
http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/02/nvidia-gtx-275-...">http://www.engadget.com/2009/04/02/nvid...275-ati-...
http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_gtx...">http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/nvidia_gtx...
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=684&type=...">http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=684&type=...
-
If you're spending $700.00 to $1,600 dollars and a $15 difference on one of your most important components, the videocard, makes your mind up for you... well...
---
NVidia often has 1 or TWO free games with it at the egg - while the red card far less often has just 1. There's another $50 - or $100, going with Nvidia - because of course with either card that makes it a GAMING system - and one would need some games.
---
I wasn't surprised that EVERY CARD in EVERY SYSTEM recommended was the red rooster card - considering where we are.
Mirrorblade - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
Hiya, for HDD choice you write"While there are differences between hard drives, outside of running benchmarks most people aren't likely to notice the difference in performance between Western Digital, Seagate, Samsung, Hitachi, and other major brands." -
but for memory, you recommend an overclocking memory set, where you could easily save some money (and you don't even give an alternative "for the people that will never want to overclock at all).
.. I don't see any point in advising only overclocking stuff. Sure one might want to overclock, but in this case you could add something as an alternativ, not recommend the OC stuff in general.
Wesley Fink - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
Even if you never overclock the low-voltage designs of the memory we recommend in the Guide will perform well and last a last time. You can certainly substitute lower cost and lower spec'ed memory if that better meets your needs.Search for a standard like DDR2-800 for the DDR2 systems and DDR3-1066 or 1333 for the Performance mid-range systems. Name brand memory with a real warranty is the better choice - even at the low end. If anything goes wrong quality memory suppliers will replace the bad memory quickly and many better companies offer a lifetime memory warranty.
In comparing memory at the same price choose the one that has the tighter timings, like 5-5-5 instead of 7-7-7. At the same timings and price the one that is specified with the lower voltage is generally the better choice.
nafhan - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
I think they recommended overclocking memory because they are recommending overclocking in general at this price point. Notice the processor and motherboard choices are geared towards overclocking as well. If you are definitely NOT going to overclock the value midrange, you could buy cheaper memory, motherboard, and (on the AMD side) a non-black edition CPU. You'd save about $100, and still have a fast, reliable system.It might be interesting if they listed a non-overclocking alternative for those parts (Mem, CPU, MB). Although, that may just push things down into the "budget" system range.
IlllI - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
can anyone tell me if the OCZ ModXStream Pro is better than the ENERMAX PRO82+ http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8... ? they are both about the same priceThe0ne - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
I don't know about the enermax but I've researched before purchasing my OCZ 700W PS. Their lower wattage PS have good reviews except for this one but with the recent updates it's gotten better reviews. It was below average before. Sorry I don't have the link to the website that reviews PS.One thing to keep in mind is that if you're not really going to use the max wattage then I wouldn't worry about it. Also, it's best to know your system configuration and try to get a PS with some buffer wattage just in case....you know like when it ages :)
Wesley Fink - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
Today's price on the OCZ Modular 600W is $50 after a $20 rebate, or an initial cost of $70. The Enermax is a decent PSU, but current cost is $60 after a $50 rebate or an initial cost of $110.The OCZ slightly higher power rating, modular design, and 3-year warranty tilt the value toward the OCZ. Both units are 80 Plus certified, and OCZ has an excellent reputation for Customer Service.
C'DaleRider - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
That OCZ ModXStream isn't even in the same class as the Enermax Pro82+. Interior construction----the OCZ uses Chinese off-brand capacitors while the Enermax uses high quality name brand Japanese capacitors.Efficiency----not even a contest, the Enermax by a landslide.
Voltage regulation and ripple/noise suppression----again, the Enermax trounces the OCZ.
In all, the OCZ is a mediocre power supply that failed testing when subjected to temps above 40C. On the other hand, the Enermax is better constructed, more efficient, and flew through testing despite being subjected to temps in excess of 40C.
You make the call.
jonup - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
First the Enermax comes with $50 MIR. Which is a turnoff for many.Second, I just bought OCZ ModXStream Pro 600W (it should ship today) and I did some reading before I bought it. Non of the reviews had an issue with the performance. It performed as rated or better with stable voltages.
Third, for a midrange system it should be running in less then 400-450. At such output the OCZ if working 2 85-86% efficiency. I am not saying that it is better than the Enermax, but in worst case the OCZ will be behind 1-2% which is immaterial.
erple2 - Monday, July 27, 2009 - link
My system (non-overclocked E6750, radeon 4890, 2 memory sticks etc) eats about 325 W at the wall when running at or near full tilt. Factoring in even the highest efficiency available for my PSU (85%), the system is using about 275W of power. I think that the midrange systems listed here (particularly the lower midrange ones) will be chewing through about 300W at full tilt. So I think that the 600W psu should be more than enough.Yes, you can play games with specific efficiencies at specific wattages, but for that you're going to need to see the charts to make that fine-tuned an estimate. But, most power supplies that I've seen reviews for hit max efficiencies between 30 and 60% utilization.
Also, does that extra few percentage of watts make that much of a difference? I dunno. Turn off a light instead. That will save you more power.