Weekly Buyer's Guide: Mid-Range System - July 2004
by Evan Lieb on July 16, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Memory
Recommendation: 2 X 256MB OCZ PC3200 EL (Enhanced Latency) CAS2.0Price: $126 shipped
We've talked about OCZ's troubled past and history in detail before, but thankfully, those issues have been resolved and OCZ is finally able to bring great memory to market, and has been doing so for over a year now. With that said, OCZ has had tremendous success with their EL series of modules for a reason: great price/performance ratio. At only slightly more than the modules that we recommended a few months before, you get lower CAS timings (CAS 2-2-3-6 1T) with OCZ EL modules instead of high CAS timings (CAS 3-3-3 4T) with the cheaper no-name modules. Lower CAS timings along with the EL series' overclocking capability translates into better performance for a great price. If you can still find the PC3500 EL modules, you can run them at DDR433. Of course, you can do that with the PC3200 EL modules as well.
Alternative: 2 X 256MB Mushkin PC3500 Level One Dual Pack (CAS2)
Price: $158 shipped
While we have been using OCZ's Platinum modules as the standard for a majority of AnandTech's testbeds, we have also been using Mushkin Level One memory in conjunction with the OCZ. Unfortunately, it is getting harder and harder to find dual packs nowadays, but Mushkin Level One Dual Packs are available at large vendors like Axion and Newegg, so they're still out there. We've been able to do lots of testing with these specific PC3500 modules and they indeed run stably at PC3500 (433MHz DDR) on many currently available motherboards. There are many PC3500 modules that aren't capable of reliable DDR433 speeds on popular motherboards, so be wary. But motherboards such as the MSI K8N Neo Platinum and ASUS P4P800 Deluxe will run these modules very well, so we suggest that you take a look at them when purchasing your motherboard. However, don't get confused, PC3500 is not an officially sanctioned JEDEC spec, and therefore there are no motherboards on the market which can claim that they officially support PC3500 speeds. PC3500 is quite easily attainable with modern motherboards, but just be aware that PC3200, not PC3500, is the highest speed that your motherboard manufacturer will officially support under warranty.
Video
Recommendation: 128MB Sapphire Radeon 9600 Pro, DVI, TV-outPrice: $126 shipped
Ever since the release of the ATI R300 cores and their later iterations, ATI has either led or has had a clear lead over NVIDIA in terms of performance and price. The same is still true of ATI at the moment, 20+ months since the release and availability of R300 core video cards. That's why, today, we highly recommend purchasing a 9600 Pro for your mid-range system, as it offers great DX8 and good DX9 performance for the price. To put it simply, the 9600 Pro is still the best bang-for-the-buck video card on the market. Sapphire makes a great 9600 Pro for just $126 or so shipped; the additions of DVI and TV-out for this price are unique, and overall, a great deal. 2D IQ quality is excellent, up to 1600x1200 desktop resolutions with the right monitor, essentially on par with retail ATI versions of the 9600 Pro. As previously mentioned, 3D performance is excellent in DX8 games and good in DX9 games, and 128MB of memory will be plenty until more intense DX9 games are released later this year and next year. We can also attest to the fact that these cards have been known to overclock extremely well, and usually come with 3.3ns Samsung memory chips.
Of course, if you're not a gamer or don't plan on playing games more than once a year, or ever, a 9600 Pro would be a pointless purchase. We would instead suggest the ATI Radeon 9200SE, 9200, 9600SE, 9550, or 9550SE, all of which can be found for under $90 shipped online (the 9200 and 9200SE for about half that). These lower end cards provide excellent 2D quality that non-gamers need, along with reliable drivers, great online ATI customer support, and up to DX9 support (in addition to excellent DX8 performance) for future Microsoft operating systems. You could always opt for the cheapest of cheap ATI cards in the Radeon 7000, but you won't be getting DX8 support, which should be the bare minimum for computer systems that plan to be used beyond the next 18-24 months, when the next operating system's release will necessitate DX8 of some form for smooth operation.
Alternative: 128MB ATI Radeon 9800 Pro, DVI, TV-out
Price: $197 shipped
ATI's 9800 Pro has been rapidly declining in price for the last several months, and over the last two months has stabilized around the $200 mark. Even with the introduction of ATI's next generation X800 GPU, we don't see the 9800 Pro dropping more than a few more dollars in retail from where it stands now for the foreseeable future. ATI's X800 GPU and the 9800 Pro's lower price are precisely why we believe that the 9800 Pro is a perfect alternative to the 9600 Pro (or even 9700 Pro) for your mid-range system. It offers good performance for tomorrow's games and great performance for the vast majority of today's games. The 128MB memory chips at their rated 3.3ns is standard these days and should fit the needs of a mid-range user. Thankfully, 2D IQ is still superb with high end retail ATI video cards like the 9800 Pro, so non-gamers have nothing to worry about in that department.
Listed below is part of our RealTime pricing engine, which lists the lowest prices available on ATI video cards from many different reputable vendors:
If you cannot find the lowest prices on the products that we've recommended on this page, it's because we don't list some of them in our RealTime pricing engine. Until we do, we suggest that you do an independent search online at the various vendors' web sites. Just pick and choose where you want to buy your products by looking for a vendor located under the "Vendor" heading.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
26 Comments
View All Comments
qquizz - Saturday, July 24, 2004 - link
Can anyone verify this statementin the article? I am considering buying one of these."We're listing a WD Raptor as an alternative purely for speed purposes. Those looking for faster load times and a generally snappier experience will want to play with a powerful drive such as this one. Thankfully, the earlier speed flaws with the 36.7GB were fixed, and WD 36.7GB drives with identical performance to their older 74GB brothers have been shipping for some months now."
smithpd - Sunday, July 18, 2004 - link
I would like to see a different spread of costs on the Buyer's Guides. You have 500 for the entry level, 1000 for the mid-range, and now 3600 for the high end. I submit that many readers would be interested in something that is in the 2000 price category, which I would call midrange. So, how about 500 entry, 1000 budget, 2000 midrange, 3000 high end, and ?? for the god box.Your previous high ends were more reasonable and sensible, IMO.
gherald - Saturday, July 17, 2004 - link
Yeah benchmarking is a good idea, and it's been suggested before.I think AT is safe in going with reputable ram. Perhaps LL isn't required, but it should at least be the alternative choice. For the main recommendation, I would go with a single ~$100 stick of 512.
Dantzig - Saturday, July 17, 2004 - link
"I will continue to ask AT to assemble these systems and run some benchmarks on them."This is an excellent suggestion! It would be wonderful to have each system run the same basic benchmark suite and then graph the results together. This way, it would be easy for a user to determine if a given system will meet his/her specific needs.
Zebo - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
I also agree with the other posters about 1024MB of ram, in fact you could get 1024MB of Adata Cas 2.5 for almost the same price ($147) as your LL choice.Zebo - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
Why recommend $126 LL ram Evan?When you consider the price/performance it's an extremly poor value over ram such as Cas 2.5 Adata for $77 for two stick of 256MB PC3200.
Almost double the price, but does it offer anywhere near double the performance? I don't think so. I'm not sure what the performance difference is using LL expensive Corsair... maybe 3-5%?
I guess I'm too stuck the linear P/P relationships to like this choice.
TrogdorJW - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
I totally agree with the memory comments. These days, 256 MB DIMMs are a total dead-end purchase. Sure, you can run dual channel (which is really only important on the P4 platform right now), but then you would be limited to a total of 1 GB of RAM (4x256) for fastest performance and stability. 2x256 + 2x512 would likely be an iffy proposition at best.Besides, you could even recommend 1GB of decent quality OCZ for a moderate increase in price. You can get 2x512 OCZ performance RAM that runs 2-3-3-6 on Intel systems for $220, or 2-3-2-6 for $240. Or if you want to stick with Mushkin, you can get their 512 MB value DIMMs for $79 each (2.5-4-4 timings), or a 2x512 Level One pack for $239 (the same 2-3-2 timings as OCZ).
512 MB of RAM just isn't going to cut it for gaming or other high-end work, which as KnightOwl explained is the only good reason to upgrade from the budget system anyway. It's like recommending someone go out and purchase a moderate sports car... only get the 2.0L 4-cylinder engine! I mean, anyone looking for a sports car is really interested in going faster than a typical car, so they would want a bigger engine (and gas mileage be damned).
Similar to the RAM argument, there's a problem with the hard drive alternative recommendation. While the Raptor is going to please a bunch of the die-hard fanboys, don't your own tests show that a good 7200 RPM SATA drive is pretty much the same performance as the old Raptor while providing significantly more storage? If you have to have a fast hard drive (for whatever reason), then you really need to get the 74 GB Raptor, as it made quite a few improvements to the original. I suppose the Maxline III isn't yet available, but if you're looking for improved gaming or high-end performance, the Raptor I is only marginally better than 7200 RPM drives, and not even many of them in gaming: http://www.anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=21...
But hey, thanks for finally adding a better alternative case recommendation and getting rid of the noisy WD JB hard drive! Silence (or at least less noise) is a wonderful thing.
BTW, just my opinion, but I think $1250 is a better target price for a "moderate" PC (and $750 for a budget PC). You're still forced to cut too many corners to meet the $1000 budget. A moderate PC really needs at least 9800 Pro graphics and 1 GB of RAM these days - even 1 GB of lower performance RAM. Like I said, though, just my opinion. :)
gherald - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
Evan,What I mean by 256mb being useless is in 2-3 years they will be like 128mb are modules today.
If and when the user upgrades to a dual channel system they can just buy a second 512mb stick. 1024mb oughta be more standard by then anyway, we all know Longhorn is going to be a resource hog, and Linux's will allways put it to good use with disk cache.
I happen to think dual channel is somewhat overrated; for an athlon XP it might be worthwhile but with the 64's integrated memory controller it's just not that big of a deal anymore. Don't AT reviews agree?
JackHawksmoor - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
I've also got to disagree with the RAM thing. It makes a lot more sense to go with higher latency RAM, and either save the money or get a better GPU, or CPU, or double the RAM. Tom's showed the Athlon 64 has at most roughly a 4% performance benefit with faster RAM, and you can get a MUCH bigger boost than that for the money. IMO low lateny RAM only makes sense for a "high-end" system.Also, where's the Asus K8N-E Deluxe review dangnabit!
Just nitpicking. I love these guides :)
chuwawa - Friday, July 16, 2004 - link
I agree with everything that has been said about the memory.I consider myself a mid-range user and I thought the guide was very good except for the video card and memory suggestions.
Knightowl explained it perfectly. I think mid-range systems are mostly for people that game and do some sort of video editing but can't afford to dish out the money for the best hardware.
512mb for a gamer really is OK, but 1GB is preferred. However, when you buy 2 256mb modules, you somewhat screw yourself for the future because you will only be able to upgrade to 756mb (well more, but who will recommend buying a 1gb stick).
Anyway I think recommending a single 512mb stick as the first choice and 2 512mb sticks in dual channel as the 2nd choise would be best.
As far as the video card recommendations: just switch them. ;)