Midrange System Buyer's Guide
by Zach Throckmorton on September 11, 2012 12:35 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
- AMD
- Intel
- Ivy Bridge
- Radeon HD 7000
- NVIDIA
Closing Thoughts
All four systems in this guide represent a lot of value in terms of how powerful they are relative to their costs. Two things strike me as particularly noteworthy: the high-mid range gaming system includes the most powerful single-chip GPU available on the market today, and the workstation is extremely well-rounded with top (or nearly) top of the line mainstream components. In other words, a tremendous amount of capability is available to midrange buyers. Spending more than about $1,000 today is mostly necessitated by niche purposes.
Compared to our last midrange guide, the gaming systems outlined here are substantially more capable due to much faster video cards, with better SSDs and overall lower power consumption. The workstation in this guide is about 15% less expensive than last year's workstation, while including a faster CPU and SSD, as well as offering more storage capacity. It will be interesting to see how developments from Intel's upcoming Haswell CPU architecture along with AMD's Piledriver and Trinity architectures affect the midrange market. Trinity in particular appears as though it will shake up at least the lower midrange market segment. AnandTech will, of course, be covering Trinity upon its mainstream retail launch; expect a full Trinity buyer's guide at that time.
The systems in this guide are ready to go as they are outlined, but once you start spending around $1,000 on a computer, you might be interested in more customization—that's the point of doing it yourself. There are a variety of options with pros and cons for any change, and while you're always welcome to ask for help in our article comments, we have other resources avaialble. In particular, our forums are full of computer enthusiasts who can help you research which components are best suited to your purposes. General Hardware is a good place to start, and you can also save money by checking the Hot Deals forum.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
95 Comments
View All Comments
just4U - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
Nice post Jarred and overall I agree with it. Not sure on the math power draw wise.. but it does add up over time.rscoot - Thursday, September 13, 2012 - link
None of this disproves what I've said in any way though. They're slower CPUs at the price point being considered and they use more power to deliver that performance. That is why they aren't competitive.antef - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
For the $1000 system is the GPU choice really that much of a toss-up? I'm having a hell of a time choosing between the 660 Ti and the 7950 myself. People in the forums seem to say the 7950 is faster but I'm not really seeing that from benches as this article suggests. However, the article also says the two are equal on power consumption and it seems that the 7950 actually consumes a fair bit more. Does the 7950 actually have better prospects over the next 2-3 years or can I go with the lower TDP of the 660 Ti?just4U - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
It's hard to say... /w 3G of ram and room to play with performance via driver updates I'd say the 7950 is the better buy. But that's a personal opinion. I like the 660TI to but feel it should be sitting in the mid 200 range price wise. For me it was a toss up between the 670 (clearly supirior) or the 7950 which was cheaper. But since the the 7870 recently tanked in prices (I picked up a "HIS" 7870 GHZ ED. for $220 CAD) I just had to have it. Lower power consumption and heat then the 580 (which is no slouch!) and comparable performance. Love that.just4U - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link
As a side note. I've found that die-hard Nvidia fans (or ATi Fans) have a hard time going to the competitors GPU. They always look for faults and talk themselves into thinking it was a poor purchase. Other less biased see things as they are and jump back and forth all the time. Just depends on what suits their needs and price range.crazyboy1 - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
seriously only 8GB of RAM? 16 GB RAM is not that expensive and would definitely help out in gaming! RAM is cheap these days getting 8GBX2 is not that much more expensive. if you wait for special deals on newegg, they get pretty cheap!Streetwind - Thursday, September 13, 2012 - link
How can 16 GB RAM help in gaming, when a single game is usually only able to address up to 2 GB by itself? That's the limit any 32bit software can grab for itself at the same time, regardless of how much the OS offers. And before games come as native 64bit applications, a few more years will go down the road. You probably won't see it until at least 90%-95% of all Windows users run on 64bit. Right now it's more like 50%.Playing a game works perfectly fine without RAM bottlenecks on 4 GB RAM. However, using 8 GB has additional advantages, such as caching more data which prevents slow HDD accesses, and allows multiboxing (many EVE players run several clients at once) or smooth video recording/streaming.
However, 16 GB? I don't see a use case, as far as gaming goes, right now.
You are correct, however, in stating that RAM is extremely affordable right now.
tigerslicer - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link
Its funny, I came up with nearly identical CPU cooler and PSU recommendations just prior to this post. I published to me blog about an hour before your article. Great minds think alike? :Phttp://www.owenjohnston.com/2012/09/for-maximum-va...
jbaker8935 - Friday, September 21, 2012 - link
i recently did a build with a coolermaster HAF 912 with and instant rebate & combo was less than the nzxt case . the coolermaster was much more enjoyable...it included an adapter for the samsung SSD. the nzxt does not... [mad now since my build is on hold until i can get one ]:
i thought the overall drive mounting scheme using the slide in clips was better on the cooler master.
_complexmath_ - Friday, October 19, 2012 - link
I picked up the ASRock Z77 Pro4-M board based on this buyer's guide and wasn't paying terribly close attention to the description on NewEgg when I got it. It turns out this is a Micro ATX board, and while it works just fine in a full ATX case, the board layout is pretty cramped. The HD Audio jack is directly underneath the only PCIE-3.0 slot on the board, for example, and putting a double width GPU in the PCIE-3.0 slot also covers the only PCIE-1.0 slot (the mini slot) on the board. Finally, a large aftermarket cooler overhangs one of the DIMM slots, so depending on the DIMMs purchased this slot may be unusable. In short, the board is great from a features perspective and I've managed to get everything plugged into it that I actually cared about using, but were I to do my build over I'd choose a full ATX board instead. I really don't think it's worth saving a few dollars to get this particular board when comparable full ATX boards are available.