Final Words
With the latest introduction of the Phenom II 955BE and the Phenom II 945 AMD now owns the midrange of computer performance - at least for today. The 955BE is the best performing midrange processor and as we showed in the launch article Phenom II is now the midrange processor of choice if you are building a new computer system. Across the board AMD has is now outperforming Core 2 Duo and Quad with their Phenom II line. That may change tomorrow with new pricing or the introduction of the upcoming Intel I5, but if you are building a midrange computer today, AMD is the best choice. It's also worth mentioning that socket AM3 should be around for a while yet, but we can't say the same for socket 775.
With that reality, we listed four typical Phenom II builds in this guide. At the low end the budget PC featured the cheapest Phenom II X3 710 - a 2.6GHz processor now selling for just $120. The budget system was built for just over $400 for the basic computer and around $750 for a complete system with keyboard, mouse, speakers, and Vista Home Premium. You could reduce costs even further by going with a cheaper combo case/PSU and/or using a free OS like Ubuntu. It is also worth mentioning that while the budget Phenom II was built around DDR2 it could have been built just about as reasonably around an AM3 board and DDR3 memory. Components would be the same except for motherboard and memory since the AM3 Phenom II processors feature dual memory controllers supporting either DDR2 or DDR3.
In the Phenom II value segment, we featured two builds. First was a DDR3 build around the unlocked 720BE X3 CPU, followed by a DDR2 build using the former top-of-the-line 940BE which is now being closed out at bargain prices. The cheap price of the 940BE is reason enough to build a DDR2 box; owning a lot of good fast DDR2 memory is another reason to build the value DDR2 box.
Both value systems were paired with components that almost beg to be overclocked. The base box for either the DDR3 or DDR2 value systems came in at less than $800 including 4GB of high speed memory, high-performance heatsink/fan, a 1TB hard drive, Blu-ray payer/DVD burner, and ATI Radeon 4850 graphics. The complete systems added a nominal 24" 1080p monitor, gaming mouse and keyboard, Vista OS, and a 5.1 powered Logitech Speaker system for a total system price of just over $1200.
Finally, the Phenom II performance system was built around the latest, greatest, and most overclockable 3.2GHz Phenom II 955BE. This DDR3 system features DDR3-1800 memory, an HSF for serious overclocking, ATI 4890 OC graphics card, a Blu-ray player/DVD burner, and an upgraded 1TB hard drive for $1100 for the base box, and around $1675 for a complete system with a 26" 1920x1200 monitor, Logitech G51 powered speakers, Vista Home Premium, mouse and keyboard.
You can easily push the performance system to 3.8GHz or higher with an accompanying increase in performance. In fact our testing shows you might reach 3.9GHz at stock voltage and perhaps as high as 4.2GHz at higher voltage. Of course not all 955BE processors will do this, and overclocking is never a given. However, the 955BE we tested were screaming overclockers and you will likely find the same among the 955BE in the market place based on the updated Phenom II core. In other words, YMMV; also, we had issues breaking 4GHz with 64-bit Vista on our test CPU.
All of this takes nothing away from Intel, which produces the best performing processors you can buy right now in the Core i7. The only problem is Core i7 is basically high-end only. The cheapest Core i7 920 CPU is around $300, with two more models going for up to $1010. In addition, Core i7 uses a new socket and supports the first triple-channel DDR3 memory configuration. Both the socket and memory are unique right now to the higher priced Core i7, which keeps i7 supporting component prices high. Leaving all other components the same, a Core i7 920 build adds about $175 to the price of our Phenom II performance system.
Below the very top is Phenom II, and as you have seen in this Phenom II Buyers' Guide you can build a lot of Phenom II system for a pretty reasonable amount of money. Competition between Phenom II and Core 2 Duo and Quad have driven prices in this segment down and value up. In fact we can't remember a time where so much computer power could be purchased for so little money.
While we have said that a lot lately, the bang-for-the-buck in today's systems continues to impress us. That's certainly a good thing in a worldwide economy that is struggling. Computers are really a necessity in our plugged-in world and it's very good you can get a lot of computer today for very little money. Competition makes the buyer the winner and keeps margins low. Competition also drives the innovations that fuel growth in the computer market around the world.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
60 Comments
View All Comments
Proteusza - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
Ha ha, since even the writer of the article questioned your integrity, I think its fair to say you are the greater troll than I.So wait... you are saying the benchmark doesnt count because its GPU bound, but you also say Phenom II is not a great gaming platform? Seems to me, that since the benchmark in question is of a GAME, that it kinda matters for determining how good it would be for gaming. And, as I said, you would be paying a few hundred dollars extra for 0.6FPS more. Now why would you do that? Nehalem may well overclock slightly better, but you said so yourself, its GPU bound, if the Phenom II gets to 3.8GHz and the Nehalem gets to 4.0GHz, its not gonna matter much.
Xeon and Opteron are enterprise CPUs you dolt, they require registered memory and special motherboards which are a lot more expensive. And the CPUs themselves are more expensive. Not a good gaming platform.
But really, what all of this shows is how pathetic you are, since even if AMD did release a CPU which beat Intel in every single way (and it has in the past, remember Athlon 64 vs Pentium D), you wouldnt buy it because you LOVE Intel. So I'm sure reading guides like this make you froth at the mouth, the idea that peope are buying AMD CPUs and not regretting it, but you know, thats your own fault.
tshen83 - Tuesday, April 28, 2009 - link
"Ha ha, since even the writer of the article questioned your integrity, I think its fair to say you are the greater troll than I."Only idiots let other people's opinions wash over your own thinking. Just because Jarred called me a troll doesn't mean he is right.
"So wait... you are saying the benchmark doesnt count because its GPU bound, but you also say Phenom II is not a great gaming platform? Seems to me, that since the benchmark in question is of a GAME, that it kinda matters for determining how good it would be for gaming. And, as I said, you would be paying a few hundred dollars extra for 0.6FPS more. Now why would you do that? Nehalem may well overclock slightly better, but you said so yourself, its GPU bound, if the Phenom II gets to 3.8GHz and the Nehalem gets to 4.0GHz, its not gonna matter much. "
Games are always GPU bound, and not well threaded enough. It would take a 7Ghz Phenom II to be comparable to i7 @4.0Ghz. Just because you can't tell a difference between two CPUs in some stupid games doesn't mean the two cpus are the same.
"Xeon and Opteron are enterprise CPUs you dolt, they require registered memory and special motherboards which are a lot more expensive. And the CPUs themselves are more expensive. Not a good gaming platform. "
Smart consumers are getting the enterprise features(IOAT, less power consumption, higher Tcase tolerance, more intel test validations) for free or cheaper even. There is not a single consumer CPU worth buying right now IMHO.
1. Nehalems don't need registered memory, only 2S Opterons do.(So get your facts straight before you badmouth me) 1S Opterons can use unbuffered DDR2 ECC ram also.
2.CPUs are often cheaper if you know which ones to buy: hint W3520 and E5504 and possibly E5520s. Those "server" CPUs are the best gaming platform money can buy right now. Only idiots would buy Phenoms because they think the naming must imply that the CPU is "Phenomenal" right? Did you know that all the good AMD CPUs ended up being Shanghai Opterons with synchronized integrated memory controller that scales linearly with CPU clock speed while consuming far less power? Phenoms are cheap because they are junk. Enterprise people won't buy Phenoms to power their workstations and servers, so the Dubai suckers ended up paying Anandtech to shove the Phenoms down idiots' throats, you know, people like you.
3. Dual Socket Nehalem boards can be found for about 230 now. Compared to $170 PhenomII class motherboards, it is not even close.
"But really, what all of this shows is how pathetic you are, since even if AMD did release a CPU which beat Intel in every single way (and it has in the past, remember Athlon 64 vs Pentium D), you wouldnt buy it because you LOVE Intel. So I'm sure reading guides like this make you froth at the mouth, the idea that peope are buying AMD CPUs and not regretting it, but you know, thats your own fault. "
Today's Intel isn't the Intel from PentiumD days. I had over 7 Athlon XP CPUs in my room during the PentiumD days, so please don't assume anything. I don't give a crap about Intel, and often critisize Intel's overpriced SSDs. Nehalems are hands down the best CPU since the Pentium Pros.
Last point: during an argument, don't start your offense or defense with the word "if", especially if the "if" is about "AMD release a CPU which beat Intel in every single way" It makes your whole statement false. Discreet Math 101.
JarredWalton - Saturday, April 25, 2009 - link
Not everyone needs even quad-core, let along quad-core plus Hyper-Threading. Spending $150+ to move from our performance (top-end) AMD Phenom II to a faster Core i7 920 is fine if you plan to do 3D rendering or video encoding, but most people won't notice the difference. We mentioned several times that i7 is the fastest current platform, but it's also the most expensive current platform.What is "inferior" about AMD Phenom II? Have you even used the platform, or are you looking at a few benchmarks and concluding it's "superior"? Or maybe that IN WIN PSU is "inferior"... tell me, who manufactures the IN WIN PSU? Most likely Enhance or Seasonic, given the look, and both are very good companies. IN WIN has been around a while, and that PSU launched at a price of over $200, so it's almost certainly a decent build, and an efficiency rating of over 80% gives you everything you need.
Your "dishonest" business claims are... well, I won't even bother responding to that. Basically, I'm with Wes: there's a lot of FUD being spread, with little to back it up. Who cares about Xeon processors when we're reviewing a consumer CPU? And on the server side, we've pretty clearly shown that AMD is hurting.
C'DaleRider - Sunday, April 26, 2009 - link
[quote]...tell me, who manufactures the IN WIN PSU? Most likely Enhance or Seasonic, given the look, and both are very good companies.[/quote]The proper answer is it a CWT PUC design, as attested to by JonnyGuru's test of the InWin Commander back in Jan. of this year.
Decent designed power supply, but has the usual CWT flaws...3.3V rail falls apart under high load, ripple/noise that increases to almost ATX spec limits under rated load, etc.
Not a bad supply but certainly not up to the standards of a good current designed Seasonic or Antec/Delta or Enermax build.
Summer - Sunday, April 26, 2009 - link
I would say that I'm an average consumer who uses the computer for web surfing, word processing, gaming, photoshopping and family video editing/encoding. From my experience, my 720x4 is already overkill compared to my dual core. I can't imagine the average user needing more than 4 cores for anything basic around the house. Even if the computer is for gaming, wouldn't the extra money be better used for a videocard?marraco - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
I would like to see the gaming performance of the Phenom II 955BE + DDR2 + Radeon 4890 against the SAME price spent in i7.surely you need to downgrade video to stay on budget, so:
What is better: Phenom2 + 4890, or I7 + same budget video?
I bet on AMD!
MadMan007 - Saturday, April 25, 2009 - link
Obviously since in the real world game settings the video card determines the performance except in a very few games. Better video card = better gaming hasn't changed.DanStp1 - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
I had an AM2 MB a couple of years ago, and I could not use all 4 memory slots with a big CPU cooler, like the ones in this article.Have the newer AM2 MB's been redesigned so that tall coolers clear all 4 memory slots?
If you have 4 slots but can not use them it limits the platform.
Thanks:)
icingdeath88 - Saturday, April 25, 2009 - link
This one is high enough off the motherboard that it clears the ram. By quite a bit too. It's more to do with the cooler design than the motherboard design, though. I would imagine that it might still have problems with ram with those big heatsinks or heatpipes on them.DanStp1 - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link
I have seen on other sites, that the southbridges on AMD chip sets, including the SB750, have poor SATA performance.Has AMD done anything to address this?
In particular I have read about ACHI issues, and NCQ problems.
Thanks:)