CPU and Cooler
Processor: Intel Pentium E2180
Both AMD and Intel offer attractive options to consider for a $500 system. For this System Builder Marathon, we chose the Intel Pentium E2180.
Read Customer Reviews of Intel’s Pentium E2180The Intel Pentium E2180 fits well in our budget, and paired with the right motherboard, should reach the same maximum speeds as the E2200. Both are based on the Allendale core, have 1 MB of L2 cache, and operate on an 800 MHz front side bus (FSB). The difference between the two is that the E2180 has a 10x multiplier, making it run at 2.0 GHz, versus an 11x multiplier and a 2.2 GHz clock speed for the E2200.
We don’t intend on running stock clock speeds for long, and also do not anticipate using a motherboard that will limit our FSB, thus the 11x multiplier is not a big advantage for this system. Overclocking is to some extent left to the luck of the draw with each individual chip anyway. Rather than making sacrifices elsewhere, it was an easy decision to save $10 and choose the E2180.
While on the topic of budget, it’s worth mentioning that the Intel Pentium E5200 Wolfdale may very well eventually find its way into an upcoming $500 PC, but it was $20 over our budget when we ordered the components for our low-cost system earlier this month.
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper TX2
The Cooler Master Hyper TX2 has repeatedly proven itself to be an excellent air cooler in past Tom’s Hardware tests. This quiet cooler provides stellar performance and simple installation, so it once again is awarded the job of cooling our CPU and directing that heat toward the case’s rear exhaust fan.
Another option is the very popular Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro, which shares a similar design. The $5 savings of this also excellent cooler would not have allowed for any significant component upgrades to our configuration.
Those who do not plan on overclocking their system will not reach the same performance levels, but they could use the bundled retail coolers and spend the money they save on a faster processor. They may also want to consider building around the 3.0 GHz AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ and a compatible socket AM2 motherboard.
Latest Build Your Own News
Latest Build Your Own reviews
- 23/12 – System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2011: System Value Compared
- 21/12 – System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2011: $600 Gaming PC
- 20/12 – System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2011: $1200 Enthusiast PC
- 19/12 – System Builder Marathon, Dec. 2011: $2400 Performance PC
- 14/12 – Power Supply 101: A Reference Of Specifications
Looking at the three systems that TH has put together for these reviews:
All the CPU's are of INTEL, does this mean that AMD is not an economical option in any of these price/performance brackets?
obviously not, this test is for price/power. if economy was a big factor in these reviews then im sure an amd proc would of gone in this computer.most likely not the super pc tho
It means that AMD simply isn't giving a decent power
rice ratio. As good as some of the chips AMD has released they just don't quite get there in terms of what you're paying for in comparison
Surely (as suggested in the article as an alternative) an X2 6000 which is already a 3ghz CPU would be a better long-term bet than a heavily overclocked Intel?
I woud have thought that for those with only $500 to spend, they would also be looking for years of stability rather than ultimate raw speed /shrug
Kyzarvs> well said. The conclusion I got, was there is nothing out there for $500 and you'll have to overclock.
What if you don't want to overclock?
Would anyone here play games at 800x600 to get a good frame rate with high detail. For some parts of crysis I did. guess what - it was still a great game.
well said, waxdart.
cheers,
bill
p.s. stuff and nonsense: http://www.eupeople.net/forum
Well AMD can't compete with Intel at the low because of:
However the choice of a E2180 is a bit stupid IMHO.
Bob
Kyzarvs> well said. The conclusion I got, was there is nothing out there for $500 and you'll have to overclock.What if you don't want to overclock?Would anyone here play games at 800x600 to get a good frame rate with high detail. For some parts of crysis I did. guess what - it was still a great game.
Well put it this way, Would you Spend £250/$500 to run Games @ 800x600 And then be outrun by something even cheaper in the next couple of months?
You have to look at it this way;
Spend Money on a good PC that will Outrun for months/year.
Or Spend a little amount on a PC; which you can overclock to the max and then buy another pc for a little amount once it has been outrun?
Great review guys,
Gareth.
How much are motherboard's?