Base System Performance Summary

For performance comparisons, we'll turn to AnandTech’s Bench; while the individual components aren't identical to our budget system builds, in most cases the difference is small enough to not matter. Bench doesn't have the AMD Athlon II X2 250, so we've used the 255 for this comparison (the 3.3% clock speed difference is negligible). Here's how the two CPUs compare, again using standardized components—in most cases faster components than what we're using in our budget builds, but we'll discuss some upgrades in a moment.

The two chip makers’ products perform similarly, with the Pentium edging out the Athlon II in more benchmarks than the Athlon II edges the Pentium. However, in terms of real-world general usage, the two systems are similar. The AMD system is about $50 less expensive, and is therefore the recommended build. That said, we can always use the $50 for an upgraded CPU, like the Athlon II X4 640; that results in a system that handily bests the G6950. (Note that Bench doesn’t have the 640, so the 645 is used instead—another marginal 3.3% clock speed difference.) Thus, at just under $500, the quad-core AMD system is strongly recommended. Intel still edges out AMD in power consumption, but $10 or so per year for 24/7 use is hardly worth mentioning—the Intel setup might "pay for itself" in power savings eventually, but you'll probably want to upgrade again before you reach that point.

CPU Upgrades

AMD offers five compelling CPU upgrades to the Athlon II X2 250. The Athlon II X3 435 is only $11 more expensive; for that $11 you gain an extra core, though each core is very slightly slower at 2.9GHz instead of 3GHz. Unless your budget is seriously constrained, or you’re concerned about the slightly greater amount of heat produced (it’s a 95W TDP chip while the X2 250 is a 65W chip), the X3 is an excellent upgrade. As mentioned above, the Athlon II X4 640 is a quad-core processor and $39 more expensive than the X2 250.

Moving into the higher cost/performance realm, the Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition appeals to overclockers and performs better than the Athlon II X4 640, and is about $80 more than the base system’s X2 250. The least expensive, lowest clocked Black Edition CPU will typically overclock as well as the more expensive options, so there’s no real reason to go above the 955 BE. Finally, AMD offers hex-core CPUs starting at $180 ($120 more than the X2 250). The Phenom II X6 1055T is not unlocked like the Black Edition 1090T, but if you’re not overclocking there’s no reason to spend the extra $20; at stock speeds, they’ll perform very similarly. Thuban CPUs definitely aren't budget parts, so unless you're interested in some serious number crunching (or video encoding, 3D rendering, etc.) we'd draw the line at the 955 BE. Anyway, you can check Bench to see whether any of the above upgrades are worth the extra cost given your needs.

Intel offers only a few CPU upgrades that even remotely qualify for the budget range. At the very bottom is the i3-550 for $130, or there's the slightly faster i3-560 for $150; that's $30 and $50 more than the G6950, respectively. While we don't have either of those i3 models in Bench, you can see that the older i3-540 offers substantially better performance than the G6950. The i3-550 is clocked 4.5% faster than the 540 and the i3-560 is clocked 9% higher, so the gap would be slightly larger than what the Bench link shows. For a 30-50% higher cost the performance gain is nowhere near as large; on the other hand, the 10-20% increase goes well with a 5-10% increase in total system cost.

The other Intel CPU alternative is the i5-760, priced at around $210. That's $110 more expensive than the G6950, but it offers incredible computational power while sipping power relative to the higher-performing AMD CPUs. Of course, you'll also need to add in the cost of a discrete GPU, so you're looking at around $250 minimum for this upgrade. While some of these CPU upgrades are interesting, if you're looking at anything more than a budget Intel setup you're probably better off waiting for the Sandy Bridge chipset bug to get sorted out (which would also remove the need for a discrete GPU).

If you go with the most expensive AMD processor (Phenom II X6 1090T) and the same for Intel (i5-760), you're looking at a total cost of $570 for AMD compared to $581 for Intel. The two processors are pretty evenly matched, with the Intel chip pulling ahead in single core tasks and the 1090T defeating the i5-760 in tasks that can use multiple cores. Note that the i5-760 uses much less juice, so unless you are an incredibly intensive multi-tasker or use mostly multi-threaded applications, the i5-760 would be the better buy (or as mentioned, wait for Sandy Bridge to come back).

Basic System Builds Graphics, Power, and Storage Upgrades
Comments Locked

58 Comments

View All Comments

  • GeorgeH - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    A GTX 460 (the most power hungry card recommended in the article) needs ~12A of 12V under a heavy gaming load. An Athlon II X2 250 (the more power hungry CPU of the two builds) needs ~4A of 12V at 100% load.

    That's 16A total for the two most power hungry items. Factor in that the EA-380D actually has two 17A 12V rails for 34A of available 12V power, and the entire system will probably never go over 60% load on the 12V rails even with a "mainstream" GPU.
  • SteelCity1981 - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    Wow how far off you are. do you acutally think the GT 460 only needs 12a? I got an ocean front land in AZ i'd like to sell you. The minuim for a GT 460 is 24amp yes that's right 24amp on a 12v single rail Anything lower then that and you are basicly risking your gpu to short. When you facotry in the entire system and you are facvotoring in the total usage 12amp is not even close to enough.
  • aylafan - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    The minimum for a GT 460 isn't 24A on a "single" +12V rail. You can have multiple +12V rails for a combined 24A or more, etc.

    Also, the EA-380D PSU has two +12V rails.
    +12V1 = 17A; +12V2 = 15A

    Just take the total Watts for the +12V rails and divide it by 12 to get the combined Amps on the PSU.
    336/12 = 28A

    Please, post a link of a better PSU with similar Amps and 82% or higher efficiency at this price. Otherwise, everything you have said has no real merit.
  • SteelCity1981 - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    FSP Group SAGA+ 400R 400W ATX12V Power Supply

    Wasn't that hard. Not only does it have an 80% and above efficiency rate, but it also hase higher watts and a higher 12v dual rail for around the same price.
  • aylafan - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    FSP Group SAGA+ 400R 400W ATX12V Power Supply
    http://www.fspgroupusa.com/saga-400r/p/409.html

    You call +12V1 = 10A; +12V2 = 13A and only combined 23A better than the EA-380D PSU? You have to be joking me.

    You do know that Newegg.com has the wrong specs right? Even the photo of the PSU specs contradicts with the listed specs on their page.

    Apparently, you didn't research hard enough. You lost credibility once again...
  • GeorgeH - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    Do I think a GTX 460 needs only 12A of 12V? Absolutely - because I'm referencing experiments, not random values pulled from thin air:
    http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/video/display/nvi...

    Running Crysis, the 460 drew 11.7A of 12V. Running OCCT, it drew 11.2A of 12V.

    Again, educate thyself.
  • ckryan - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    Great job, Zach. I like the cut of your jib. You buying guide has some of the most sensible budget picks around. One item, the Earthwatts 380D, is my favorite budget PSU. It hits the sweet spot for a budget build. While it does eat a chunk of a budget build up, I think it's the finest budget PSU out there. You have to spend a hefty sum more to get something better. Apparently, some people haven't read Martin Kaffei's review on Anandtech.

    SteelCity1981 wrote:

    "Well that 380w Earthwatts is a cheap PSU. 17a on a single 12v rail. You can't get much cheaper then that. Good luck trying to put in a mainstream GPU in there without having to buy another PSU. I wouldn't even put in a Radeon 5670 or GT 440 let alone anything higher grade with that PSU."

    Say What?

    The Earthwatts 380w might be inexpensive, but calling it cheap is just ridiculous. It is eighty + BRONZE. It has 17a and 15a 12v rails. It is fairly quiet. It's probably as much PSU as most people need. I built a system for a friend using the 380D to power a Phenom II X3 @ 3.1Ghz AND a GTX 470. At stock clocks and voltage, the CPU and GPU loads under Furmark and Prime95 were reading under 318w AT THE WALL. Factor in the efficiency of the 380w (Read the AnandTech 380D review -- about 84%) and the system was only using about 267w. Running Prime95 and Furmark together is something that just doesn't occur under normal circumstances. Actual gaming power draw was between 220w and 280w. Again, at the wall, measured with a P3 Kill-A-Watt. Granted, you wouldn't necessarily want to run a GTX470 and a X58 platform off the 380D, but a dual- or triple core @stock? Money.

    I't doesn't come with a power cable unless you buy it in an Antec case. The spaghetti mess of connectors is difficult to wrangle. But all things considered, it's a good value at the $40 point. It's easy to find it cheaper with a combo, included in an Antec case, or on sale. I say, don't dis it ' till you've tried it. Or just understand what the hell you're talking about. Telling people about how you wouldn't want to power a "Radeon 5670 or GT 440" with this PSU just spreads more wrong information.
  • SteelCity1981 - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    Really? Go show me on this picture where you see dual 12v rails? because I sure the hell couldn't see it on the sticker.

    So by saying the Earthwatts isn't cheap is like saying a Ford Fiesta isn't cheap either right? LOL There is a reason why it's marked the way it is in price, because it is cheap. Apparently you know little about psu's that or you are a fan of Earthwatts to understand that these psu's are priced this low for a reason. Any true enthusiast will tell you that these PSU's are cheap and to make an argument other wise, you'd get laughed out of the building.

    So you make an argument about the watts. Well news flash the watts isn't' nearly as important as the amps. Everyone that's truly knowledgeable about PSU's understands that the amps are the most important factor in a PSU especially when it comes to high powered hardware in the psu. Let me give you an example. A 500w psu with only 16amps on single 12v rail is actually worse then a 400w psu that carries a 24amp single 12v rail. Why? Simple. The voltage rail supplies power to the most demanding components including the processor, drives, cooling fans and graphics cards. All of these items draw a lot of current and as a result you want to make sure that you purchase a unit that supplies enough power to the +12V rail. Which clearly shows an Earthwatt psu 17amp 12v isn't truly enough amps for any decnet mainstream gpu especially if you want to upgrade to better hardware in the future, you're going to need a much better psu. Again there is a reason why Eathwatts are priced where they are.
  • GeorgeH - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    The picture on this page clearly shows 17A+15A of 12V:
    http://www.anandtech.com/show/3902/antec-earthwatt...

    The specs on the Antec page claim 17A+17A of 12V:
    http://www.antec.com/Believe_it/product.php?id=MjI...

    Educate thyself.
  • SteelCity1981 - Monday, February 14, 2011 - link

    educate myself you are the one saying 380w are fine LOL

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now