Ryan's High-End Gaming System
Hardware Component Price
Processor Intel Core i7-950 Bloomfield  45nm
(Quad-core + HTT, 3.06 to 3.33 GHz, 8MB L3, 130W)
$295
Motherboard EVGA X58 SLI3 (Intel X58+ICH10R, LGA1366) $210
Video EVGA GeForce GTX 580 1.5GB $510
Alt. Video Sapphire Radeon HD 5970 2GB $460
Memory Corsair XMS3 6GB (3x2GB) DDR3 1600
(TR3X6G1600C9)
$120
Hard Drive Western Digital Caviar Black 1.5TB (WD1501FASS) $120
SSD OCZ Vertex 2 120GB (-$30 MIR) $205
Optical Drive LG 22X DVDRW (GH22LS50) $17
Sound Card Creative SoundBlaster X-Fi Titanium $80
Case Antec P183 Black Aluminum $155
HSF Tuniq Tower 120 Extreme $65
Power Supply Antec TPQ-850 (850W) $150
Monitor HP ZR24W (24" 1920x1200, S-IPS) $400
Alt. Monitor ASUS VG236H w/3D Kit (23" 1920x1080 TN, 120Hz) $475
Total System Price (Range based on GPU and LCD choice) $2277-$2402

Although PC gaming can actually be quite cheap these days (see our midrange systems from Jarred and Vivek), for the hardcore among us a system built with a GTX 460/6850 class video card isn't going to cut it when it comes getting the most out of the PC's graphical advantage. For that you need to turn to something faster, better, more expandable, and ideally not much louder. To accomplish this goal I went to work on piecing together a system for around $2000 that should be able to tackle everything short of Crysis on Enthusiast settings.

The centerpiece of the system is one of NVIDIA's new GeForce GTX 580s, which currently holds the mantle as the fastest single-GPU card on the market. Being NVIDIA's highest-end video card the GTX 580 is  by far the most expensive component in our system, but it does a great job of mixing performance, image quality (transparency AA), and reasonable amounts of noise. As all the GTX 580s on the market are reference cards, the choice comes down to the manufacturer and whether you want a factory overclocked model or not; in this case I went with EVGA based on availability, their overclocking tools, and their lifetime warranty.

An alternative here is the Radeon HD 5970, which ends up being cheaper. The performance is actually better than the GTX 580 so long as we're not VRAM limited, but the dual-GPU card means we give up some flexibility as 4-way CF scaling is limited at best, and the 5970 is a louder card than the GTX 580. However this option is a better choice if you want to take advantage of AMD's Eyefinity system in combination with 3 cheap 1080P TN monitors.

With our GTX 580 in hand we want to pair it with a fast processor and an SLI-capable motherboard to leave future expansion on the table. For this I'm going with an X58 board, specifically EVGA's X58 SLI3 as it offers strong overclocking abilities and is one of the cheapest SLI capable X58 boards on the market. EVGA has also equipped it with third-party USB3.0 and SATA 6Gbps controllers, giving the board plenty of capability in the future with new generation USB and SATA devices.

For the processor I chose Intel's cheapest X58 Core i7, the Core i7 950. At 3.06GHz base and a 3.33GHz Turbo mode it's already fairly fast, but at this stage in the game Bloomfield overclocking is dead simple. Combined with the massive Tuniq Tower 120 Extreme cooler, there's a very good chance of hitting 4GHz (or more!) on the 950, which should be plenty for even the most stubborn single-threaded game. Just be sure to install the Tuniq Tower on the motherboard before installing the motherboard in the case.

Since this is primarily an overclocked gaming system, I selected Corsair's XMS3 6GB triple-channel DDR3 1600 kit. The CAS9 latency at DDR3 1600 speeds is nothing to write home about, but gaming is rarely latency sensitive and the high speeds of the RAM will be very helpful for overclocking. 12GB is also an option here at a higher price, but at the moment only a couple of games are capable of using more than 2GB/4GB of RAM since few games come with a 64-bit executable.

As for storage, a high-end system deserves flexibility and speed, so I used both an SSD and a traditional hard drive; unfortunately, the size of modern games makes an all-SSD setup impractical. There are a number of fast SDDs on the market, and while you don't necessarily need something that's great at random reads and writes OCZ's SandForce-1200 based Vertex 2 120GB is no slouch at that or at sustained reads and writes; if nothing else it will keep Windows very responsive. Furthermore at 120GB it's big enough for at least a few games, making it perfect for MMOs and their need to aggressively pre-cache and log everything. For more traditional games that don't hit up local storage between levels, the 1.5TB Western Digital Caviar Black is plenty fast and big enough to hold more games than most people could possibly play at once.

Rounding things out I decided to go with a discrete sound card rather than relying on onboard sound. Creative's X-Fi line is still the premiere line of soundcards for gaming, as they bring the audio quality benefits of a discrete sound card with support for OpenAL for modern games and support for EAX for older games. As for external storage just about any DVD burner will do; I'm using a 22X Samsung but there are a number of alternatives. Blu-ray readers are coming down in price, but at this point there's no momentum to distribute games for PCs on Blu-ray discs.

Housing all of this will be Antec's P183, the latest in Antec's noise-optimized P18x series of cases. Ideally we don't want to make any compromises, and a fast system doesn't need to be noisy. Along with the quieter GTX 580 and the Tuniq Tower 120, the Antec P183 is the third and final piece of the puzzle. The triple-layer panels will deaden what sound comes from the CPU and GPU coolers, and the 120mm fans will provide enough airflow to keep things cool. As a mid-tower case it's not particularly huge so I'd suggest removing the upper hard drive bay to give the video card(s) extra room, and consider a 120mm fan mounted behind that if you ever expand to two cards. Antec does build the bigger P193, but this shouldn't be necessary with external exhaust cards like the GTX 580.

In order to power our existing system and to have enough extra power for SLI in the future you'll need a fairly strong PSU, and the Antec TPQ-850 is exactly that; it's also the 850W version of the PSU we use in our GPU test bed. The TPQ-850 balances our power needs against the P183's longer cable requirements (since the PSU is bottom-mounted), and the half-modular cable system means there's no need to clutter the case with extra cables unless they become necessary.

Finally, in a break from most of the other systems, I'm also going to throw in a monitor with this collection. It's my belief that a good monitor should outlast the rest of the system, so it's better to buy something good now rather than something cheap now and something still-cheap later. While this is a high-end system, 30" monitors are in a price category of their own so that leaves us with 24" LCDs. Our choice here is HP's ZR24W, a 24" 1920x1200 S-IPS monitor. It has fast pixel response times that are good for gaming without needing to compromise on the color palate or color accuracy at an angle. However since our default card here is an NVIDIA card, 3D Vision is also an option; if that piques your interest we'd go with ASUS' top of the line VG236H, which is a 23" 120Hz TN panel. The overall image quality isn't as good as the ZR24W, but a 120Hz monitor can be worth it if you like 3D Vision, or just like the 120Hz experience in general. The VG236H also includes an NVIDIA 3D Vision kit, so it won't be necessary to buy that separately.

My high-end gaming build ultimately comes out to just shy of $2000 without the monitor, or $2400-$2500 with it. Peripherals should add another $50-$200 depending on whether you're going to buy anything on top of the mouse and keyboard, such as gamepads, steering wheels, and joysticks.

Anand's Ready for Bulldozer/Sandy SSD System Brian's Dream PC: Reach for the Stars!
Comments Locked

112 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link

    While it would be great if Bulldozer could run in current motherboards, all the information I've been able to gather (including asking a contact at a motherboard manufacturer) is that Bulldozer for desktops will run in AM3r2. That socket will be similar to AM3, and it will be able to accept and run current AM3 processors, but the reverse isn't true. So, in essence it's the AM2+ situation again.

    If you search AMD's site, there's no mention of AM3r2 that I can find outside of their forums. It's still possible that we're mistaken, but AMD hasn't unequivocally stated that "yes BD will work in current motherboards" so I wouldn't count on it. I think originally the idea was to try and make it happen, but now it's not guaranteed.

    If you really want to go to the rumor mill, BD might actually work in current boards but might blow caps or have reduced performance. Maybe someone will come out with a fix. All indications however are that there will be new chipsets (980/990 most likely), a new socket requirements, etc. I guess it may be a lot like the socket 775 transitions from Intel where we had a few manufacturers that got older 945P chipsets to run Core 2 and such.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link

    Just to add a bit more: Phenom X6 will technically work in many 790FX motherboards... but it's not the same as running it in an 890FX. 790FX wasn't designed for Turbo Core, it has some power management issues with Thuban, etc. We have seen similar issues with previous updates where a CPU would work, but it didn't perform optimally. We may see that with Bulldozer as well, where it will run in 800 series boards with a BIOS update but it very likely will run best with a new motherboard/chipset. If AMD and their partners can prove me wrong, I'd be very pleased, but based on at least one source I'm not holding out much hope.
  • blotto5 - Saturday, November 20, 2010 - link

    thanks for the info good to know since im running a phenom x6 in a 790fx mobo but i think im going to wait to buy a new mobo because of this talk of a new socket a la am2 to am2+
  • baba264 - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link

    This comes quite handy as after the death of my graphic card two days ago, I was seriously thinking of buying a new system that would be quite similar to "Ryan's High-End Gaming System".

    However, when I had previewed the various parts I wanted, I had set my mind on a new lynnfield core with an i7 870 rather than the old Bloomfield core. Since I don't plan to upgrade to an SLI setting I thought that the i7 870 was the best choice of processor (for the price), was I mistaken?

    Anyway, thanks for the article, this article really comforts me in what I meant to buy.
  • Ryan Smith - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link

    The 870 is quite good. In fact when I was putting that list together I was seriously considering that instead of an X58 platform. The clincher was SLI support (P55 boards with SLI quickly drive the price up); but since you're not going to be using SLI I wouldn't be concerned.
  • mapesdhs - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link


    P55 boards run very nicely SLI, easily outperforming X58 boards, and that's
    with an 860, never mind an 870. See my results pages:

    http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/pctests.html
    http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/misc/stalkercopbench.txt

    Further tests coming soon with an 870 + GTX 460 FTW SLI.

    it's only really 3-way SLI where X58 takes over. For 2-way, the speeds
    are just as good (if not better) and the costs are significantly lower - the
    board I'm using costs less than 70 UKP ($110).

    Ian.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link

    Color me confused, but those links don't seem to provide the data you're talking about. The question is how something like i7-930 with X58 compares to i7-860 with P55 while everything else is kept constant, and all the stuff there looks like 930 + 4870 CF or 460 SLI, and 860 + 8800 GT SLI, or some other sets of data. You'd need to show X58 460 SLI vs. P55 460 SLI to "prove" that P55 is "easily outperforming X58 boards". And if you do everything with similar quality components, the X58 ought to win out by virtue of having two x16 connects compared to two x8 connects on P55.
  • mapesdhs - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link


    (my friend has 4890s, not 4870s)

    I'm surprised you'd say that given existing articles have already
    shown that SLI doesn't need full 16x to perform nicely. Some games
    need it because they're written badly (FSX), but others run perfectly
    well at 8X, or even 4X.

    Specific data coming soon (still testing) but my point was that the
    existing data already shows the same effect - people on forums
    said the 4890s should win, but they don't much of the time except
    where resolution, etc. are a factor.

    I'm still ploughing through my P55/460 tests. All takes time as I'm
    sure you can appreciate. :)

    Ian.
  • JarredWalton - Friday, November 19, 2010 - link

    I'm not saying X58 is substantially faster by any means; I'm just saying that all things being equal there's no reason P55 should be faster. x8 vs. x16 isn't a huge benefit, but especially with higher clocked CPUs and more powerful GPUs (i.e. GTX 580 or HD 5870) the X58 should come out ahead. Anyway, Gary Key did a pretty direct comparison when he was still with us:
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/2847

    In general X58 CF is better than P55 CF, though the margin is never so large as to be alarming. What Gary doesn't show is how the SLI setups compare (probably for lack of an SLI capable P55 board at the time he was with us). I'd figure they're also similar. All told, P55 is faster for single GPUs, but the x8+x8 dual-GPU configuration should and usually does incur a small performance hit.
  • mapesdhs - Saturday, November 20, 2010 - link


    Generally true, though remember the one advantage which
    can make a difference sometimes (and push it in favour
    of P55) is the better Turbo on the 870, etc. For fixed
    clocks, have a look at the CPU scores I get with the
    860 at 4018 for the 3DMark06 CPU tests, compare to
    my friend's 930 at 4136 (and btw, it's not RAM speed;
    I lowered my RAM to match, scores only dropped 1
    or 2%).

    You're right though about the top-end cards/CPUs, if
    I was playing at crazy res with expensive cards like
    the 580 then X58 would be more logical. For midrange
    though, like the 460 (with or without SLI), the gain from
    X58 is minimal at best - the cost difference (which
    may be large) can be used to have a better GPU,
    widening the gap further.

    And by cost difference I mean, for example, the Asrock
    P55 Deluxe, which is now as cheap as 68 UKP here.
    It has excellent slot spacing for SLI, ie. better cooling.

    Either way, we shall see; after doing default tests, my
    plan is to run the FTWs at lower clocks to match my
    friend's Palit Platinums, that should be interesting.

    All I'm saying is, don't be surprised if P55/SLI runs
    better than you might expect. I certainly didn't think
    two 8800GT SLI would be able to match or beat
    an X58 with two 4890s, but they can and do.

    Ian.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now