Looking for a nice prebuilt system for 1K Including monitor

[entropy1982]

Hey guys,

You've helped me build 2 awesome computer over the past few years and thought I'd get your thoughts on a present for my father in law. I want to spend about 1K. He is a network admin. He does not play games, mostly does "productivity work" (whatever that means.) Want to get him something nice (which will be overkill for what he is doing, but I'm fine with that. He currently uses like a 6 year old computer and 2X19 inch monitors.
Basically I want to get him something nice with a bigger monitor and I haven't built anything for about a year and a half so I'm not sure what's gone on in the hardware world. I also need this prebuilt because he lives in a different state and I don't want him putting together his own present.

Any suggestions would be highly appreciated, even if it's simply telling me what store to buy from (dell, etc)

 

[lsv]

i5 + mobo + ram + ssd+ regular hd + monitor?

 

[entropy1982]

Any Idea where I can buy something like this prebuilt from? how does i5 compare to i7 (i have an i7 920 running at like 3.9ghz and it's still really fast for me)

Thanks

 

[Sp12]

The i5-7X0 is a bit faster in most applications, but for things like video encoding the i7 would have an advantage.

The dualcore i5s are not good values, however.

 

[entropy1982]

Thanks sp12

Still looking for a decent place to buy this machine. Should I just give in and go with dell? or is there a better option?

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

The i5-7X0 is a bit faster in most applications, but for things like video encoding the i7 would have an advantage.

The dualcore i5s are not good values, however.

Umm what? Anyways

Core i5-750 2.66GHz, 4GB, 1TB, DVD+-RW, ATI Radeon HD 5450 1GB DDR3, 19 in 1 Media Card Reader, Windows 7 Home Premium 64bit for only $680 w/ free shipping.

http://configure.us.dell.com/dellsto...95476-1909457-

ASUS VH236H 23" Widescreen 1080p Full HD LCD Monitor $144 After $20 rebate

http://slickdeals.net/forums/showthread.php?t=2189523

 

[entropy1982]

The first link doesn't seem to work work nehalem

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

try this: http://www.xpbargains.com/index.php/send_deal/151799

 

[Sp12]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/109?vs=47

Yes what. 930 is a bit slower in most applications.

 

[JEDIYoda]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/109?vs=47

Yes what. 930 is a bit slower in most applications.

depends on what6 he is using the computer for....
He could go Dell or he could even go HP.

Both Dell and HP I believe have some descent "refurbished" PSU`s.
They are under full warranty.
He might need to buy a descent video card but if his PSU cost is around 6-7 hundred doolars he can pick up a decent vid card with what is left.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/109?vs=47

Yes what. 930 is a bit slower in most applications.

The Anandtech Bench suite isn't very accurate, it gives you a rough estimate. The 930 is clocked higher and has HT so it'd be superior in everything.

 

[Davidh373]

The Anandtech Bench suite isn't very accurate, it gives you a rough estimate. The 930 is clocked higher and has HT so it'd be superior in everything.

They are both clocked the same in that link. The i5's turboboost clocks the CPU higher if that is what you mean. Hyperthreading can boost performance in some cases, but holds back performance in others (unfortunately this happens more often than not :/). Theoretically performance should be better, but real world performance is what matters.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

They are both clocked the same in that link. The i5's turboboost clocks the CPU higher if that is what you mean. Hyperthreading can boost performance in some cases, but holds back performance in others (unfortunately this happens more often than not :/). Theoretically performance should be better, but real world performance is what matters.

The 750 and 920 are both clocked at 2.66GHz, but the 930 which is what we are discussing is clocked at 2.8GHz. Regardless, i7 quadcore>i5 quadcore. The i5 is not faster in anything.

 

[Sp12]

The reason I didn't compare to a 930 is because the equivalent i5 (760) isn't on the bench. The 920 and it's equivalent (750) both are.

An equivalently clocked i5 better gaming CPU than the X58 i7, and is often quite a bit faster. Not only does it perform better than an X58 i7, but the money saved can be put towards a higher-end GPU which will again give better game performance. It also has ~100$ on top of that in platform savings.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

The reason I didn't compare to a 930 is because the equivalent i5 (760) isn't on the bench. The 920 and it's equivalent (750) both are.

An equivalently clocked i5 better gaming CPU than the X58 i7, and is often quite a bit faster. Not only does it perform better than an X58 i7, but the money saved can be put towards a higher-end GPU which will again give better game performance. It also has ~100$ on top of that in platform savings.

Okay, you obviously have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[Sp12]

I've posted benchmarks and the reasoning for why it's faster in games, at this point I'm going to let you impress me.

 

[Davidh373]

Okay, you obviously have no clue what you are talking about.

The 9xx series is a professional xeon chipset marketed to gamers. The 9xx would outperform it's 6xx and 7xx counterparts in things like media encoding and 3D rendering (not rendering through a game engine, but through renderers like mentalray, or Vray). The only real benefit to hyperthreading goes to apps that utilize more than 4 threads, and very few games need to utilize more than 4 threads, so they don't. As far as clock speed goes, the turbo boost on the 1156 goes higher than the X58 turbo boost. If only 4 cores are being utilized (most times not even 4) the processor with the same basic architecture and the same core count at a higher clock speed will win hands down.

 

[mfenn]

The 750 and 920 are both clocked at 2.66GHz, but the 930 which is what we are discussing is clocked at 2.8GHz. Regardless, i7 quadcore>i5 quadcore. The i5 is not faster in anything.

Because a 133MHz clock speed bump to both parts is going to change the relative standings.

You better call Anand and tell him that his benchmarks are all wrong.

Face it, in a stock configuration the i5 is faster due to the turbo boost.

 

[mfenn]

OP, to answer your question, a Dell or HP sounds like the way to go. I would go with something like an XPS 8100 with an i5 750 and a 24" monitor or an XPS 7100 with a Phenom II X4 945 and 24" monitor.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

Do you three call each other every time someone disagrees? Sp12 didn't mention that turbo was involved since many people overclock and turn it off. Besides, "a 140MHz speed bump over the 930's turbo mode isn't going to change the relative standing." You fail to realize that every cpu in that benchmark is benchmarked with different hardware that can affect performance. Stop trying to relate everything to value and complicate things by linking inaccurate benchmarks. I'm not sure why you three have a personal goal to troll me in every thread but if that makes you guys happy keep on doing it and I'll keep on proving you guys wrong.

i7 9xx > i5 7xx
1366 > 1156
2.8GHz > 2.66GHz
HT > no HT

 

[betasub]

i7 9xx > i5 7xx
1366 > 1156
2.8GHz > 2.66GHz
HT > no HT

Way too simplistic. If only it was as easy to reduce the facts to this.

Clearly there are circumstances where the above does not apply. Just like not everybody overclocks, and even those who do don't necessarily need to switch off turbo (e.g. i5-7x0 at >3.6GHz for 3-4cores or turbo to >4.0GHz for 1-2cores).

 

[Sp12]

Within a product category (e.g. CPUs) we tried to keep the testbeds as consistent as possible (e.g. same drives, memory sizes, etc...) so you can make reliable comparisons between products.

And I'll agree with one of those comparisons, with two others getting a nod in specific circumstances.

X58 means spending almost 200$ over a comparable i5 setup, while getting none/negative game performance. That 200$ could be put to use on a GPU/SSD.

 

[mfenn]

Do you three call each other every time someone disagrees? Sp12 didn't mention that turbo was involved since many people overclock and turn it off. Besides, "a 140MHz speed bump over the 930's turbo mode isn't going to change the relative standing." You fail to realize that every cpu in that benchmark is benchmarked with different hardware that can affect performance. Stop trying to relate everything to value and complicate things by linking inaccurate benchmarks. I'm not sure why you three have a personal goal to troll me in every thread but if that makes you guys happy keep on doing it and I'll keep on proving you guys wrong.

i7 9xx > i5 7xx
1366 > 1156
2.8GHz > 2.66GHz
HT > no HT

I'm not "trolling you". I'm pointing out facts which make you uncomfortable. I'm not sure where you got the quoted statement, because it doesn't make much sense. The bolded is also hilariously wrong because we're talking about the 760 vs 930 and the 750 vs 920 (ie. equal clock speeds).

First things first, every CPU benched in the AT bench uses as similar hardware as possible. The 750 and 760 use the same motherboard and the 920 and 930 use the same motherboard. So no, a 133MHz increase in clock speeds will not change the relative ordering.

Nobody mentioned overclocking or disabling turbo mode until just now. Why should we assume that something is not run at stock unless it's specifically mentioned?

I'm not relating anything to value in this argument (though the i5 certainly is a better value). Sp12 posted cold, hard performance numbers. You can't wave them away with a vague statement like calling them "inaccurate" just because you disagree with them. Answer evidence and reasoning with evidence and reasoning.

You aren't "proving" anything, you're just making vague assertions with no evidence or logic. Are you related to electroju by any chance? (OK, now I am trolling you a little bit )

 

[Davidh373]

I'm not sure why you three have a personal goal to troll me in every thread but if that makes you guys happy keep on doing it and I'll keep on proving you guys wrong.

We are not trolling, we are debating, there is a big difference. A lot of times people can't tell the difference between right and wrong because they come here to do their research through us... So when one of us is wrong, it is the responsible thing to correct them. We know they are done with different hardware... but the only things which would effect such benchmarks are the motherboard in order to get the proper socket for the processor and the RAM, which you have to change anyway to get the different processors. The fact is HT, Overclocking, and the Disabling of Turbo is not relevant here because the OP is buying a manufacturer computer for his father to do office work. He doesn't need a 930 to begin with. The OP asked how different the two processors performance really was, and if it was worth it. We replied that the answer to that was NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! and SP12 posted some benchmarks answering his question rather effectively. The argument about the X58 and the i7 930 is completely irrelevant when applied to the OP's needs. Just to stop any more futile argument, we also know that an i5 is overkill for his dad's tasks, but he has said he would like to get his father something substantial for a gift.