System Builder Marathon, December 2010: $2000 PC

Bechmark Results: SiSoftware Sandra

Sandra’s tests are a great way to compare the full performance of an individual component without concern for the bottlenecks of connected components. We expect a huge loss for today’s quad-core, since the previous build’s six-core CPU is also measured at its full potential.

Our current system’s memory can’t be overclocked effectively, and doesn’t even support significant latency reductions. The current system’s memory is a dead-end for performance chasers, though buying them in hopes that the delivered parts would resemble the photographed parts was a mistake we couldn't have avoided.

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
5 comments
    Your comment
  • zanmatoer
    "The number of pixels in a 2560x1600 display is slightly higher than those of three 1280x1024 displays, so the new $2500 PC could be a good choice for Nvidia Surround gaming."

    I'm fairly certain that's supposed to be "...so the new $2000 PC could be..."

    Looking forward to Day 4!
    0
  • mi1ez
    Quote:
    AVG’s anomalous performance is almost legendary at this site. We’d like to credit the new system’s faster drives for the win, but the benchmark difference is too small to represent the drives’ enormous performance disparity.

    And yet it's still in the SBM?
    0
  • tobensg
    Has anyone got £1500 to build a Performance PC at the moment?! IMO these marathon builds are a waste of time.
    0
  • damian86
    Normally those marathon pcs do not get my atraction, spending 2000 dollars in a machine with only 6gb of ram? there are better prices out there,you can make this machine more powerfull. not a long time ago THW had an article showing info about swapfile explaining that 8 gb or RAM makes a very stable machine.im just saying...
    0
  • damian86
    I would have installed 2x6870 radeons instead of these power hungry 470's...they re cheaper as well
    0