Intel Midrange Workstation
We'll wrap things up with a nice quad-core "workstation" that might be used for more serious work. We're not talking about a workstation that can compete directly with a high-powered 3D rendering workstations (at least not without spending some additional money), but this is still a computer that packs a lot of punch and would be suitable for software development, video editing, graphics artwork, etc. Again, overclocking isn't going to be a serious consideration; certainly this configuration is capable of some overclocking, but stability is going to be a far bigger concern.
| Intel Midrange Workstation |
| Hardware |
Component |
Price |
Rebates |
| Processor |
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 (2.40GHz 1066FSB 2x4MB Shared) - Retail |
$278 |
|
| Motherboard |
ASUS P5K-E/WIFI-AP (P35 ICH9R) |
$155 |
|
| Memory |
G.Skill 2x2GB PC2-6400 (F2-6400CL5D-4GBPQ) |
$170 |
|
| Video Card |
Powercolor Radeon HD 2600XT 512MB (26XT512M/D3HDMI) |
$142 |
|
| Hard Drive |
Western Digital Caviar SE16 320GB 7200RPM 16MB (WD3200AAKS) |
$80 |
|
| Optical Drive |
Samsung 20X DVD+R SATA (SH-S203B) |
$36 |
|
| Case |
Lian Li PC-7B plus II |
$106 |
|
| Power Supply |
Seasonic S12 Energy Plus SS-650HT |
$149 |
|
| Display |
Acer AL2216Wbd 22" 5ms (1680x1050) |
$235 |
|
| Speakers |
Logitech X-140 5W 2.0 Speakers |
$27 |
|
| Keyboard and Mouse |
Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 (B2L-00047) |
$28 |
|
| Operating System |
Windows Vista Home Premium 64-bit (OEM) |
$110 |
|
| Bottom Line |
$1516 |
$1516 |
 |
Obviously, the biggest change from the previous configurations is that we are using a quad-core processor. Intel's cheapest Core 2 Quad, the Q6600, now easily allows people to create a quad processor system that can outperform 2P systems from just two years ago, all at a much lower cost. Still, $278 for a "midrange" processor isn't exactly cheap. In order to make room for the added expense, we have trimmed some other areas. Looking at the overall configuration, however, you can see that we didn't have to compromise much.
 |
For the motherboard, we chose the ASUS P5K-E/WiFi-AP, which uses the P35 chipset. This is definitely not an inexpensive motherboard, but if we had to choose one motherboard brand that provides overall better stability than just about anyone else (outside of the server motherboard market), we would choose ASUS. That's not to say that ASUS is perfect - there have been a few problem releases over the years - but by and large they are one of the "safe bets" when it comes to overall quality. Getting WiFi support is simply an added bonus.
 |
For the memory configuration, we have upgraded to 4GB of RAM (in a 2x2GB setup). Naturally, we are also recommending a 64-bit version of Windows Vista. Overall compatibility with the 64-bit operating system has gotten a lot better since Vista's launch, and if you're going to open up a lot of applications at once having more memory really speeds things up. All we need now is to get more native 64-bit applications, but at least we'll be ready when they arrive. In fact, if you really want to take things to the extreme, you can try running a 4x2GB configuration. We haven't had the chance to verify that this works properly yet, but we hope to do so in the near future. In the meantime, we can verify that 2x2GB works fine. In terms of raw performance and overclocking, a 4x1GB configuration is better, but since this is a workstation losing a few percent performance and skipping out on overclocking isn't really a problem. The option to add more memory in the future is far more important.
For the graphics card, we wanted to make sure that we selected something that included a dual-link DVI output. No, we're not going to be able to fit a 30" LCD into our midrange components, but a true workstation environment might want to add one in the future. The Powercolor Radeon HD 2600 XT provides two dual-link outputs, plus an HDMI adapter. The 512MB of memory may not really help much, but Windows Vista is able to do a bit more with graphics card memory so it certainly won't hurt either. For alternatives, the 8600 GT/GTS all support at least a single dual-link DVI connection and cost about the same amount (though with half the amount of RAM). If you want a Linux workstation (or you're planning on dual-booting at least), NVIDIA cards remain the better option, despite
AMD's latest efforts.
The remaining component selections are mostly the same, except that we switched to a Lian Li case that we felt was a bit classier looking and more in tune with a workstation design, and we also upgraded to a Seasonic S12 650W power supply. Neither of these upgrades is strictly necessary, but we do feel that they provide a bit better overall package. We also downgraded the keyboard, mouse, and speakers; naturally, some people will prefer some other brand of input device, but we've always felt that the Microsoft Comfort Curve 2000 is a good baseline recommendation.
The total comes to almost $1516, and honestly we would really like to have a larger LCD. Trimming costs in a few areas in order to fit a 24" LCD into the picture might be possible, but with 24" LCDs now starting at $400 for basic models we would probably just spend the extra money instead. That's not to say that the quality of a cheap 24" display is the same as what you might get with some of the $600 24" LCDs, but the increased native resolution alone is worth the price of entry.
Conclusion
As usual, even after four midrange systems, we've hardly scratched the surface of what's possible. There are numerous tweaks that could be made in order to save a few dollars or increase performance in a specific area, but for those of you looking for a "State of the Midrange Industry Address" we have hopefully provided you with a good starting point. While there are plenty of new products that are just around the corner, we would also like to warn against paralysis by analysis. No matter when you look at building a new system, there will always be newer/faster parts coming out within the next couple of months. If you're at the point where you need a new system, we recommend taking the plunge and not looking back. After all, no matter what you buy, you'll probably be looking at putting together a new system again in just a couple more years.
10/29/07 Update: As many of you are probably aware, the NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT is now available. Given the price and performance, not to mention other benefits such as power requirements and a single slot design, we can see absolutely no reason to even consider the 8800 GTS 320 cards any longer. The 640 cards do come in slightly faster in a few specific situations, but overall we'd take the 512MB 8800 GT. In fact, if you were previously thinking of an 8800 GTX/Ultra, 8800 GT SLI is almost certainly the better option now (barring price cuts). We won't be updating the rest of the article text, but this is an important enough announcement that we wanted to make sure our Midrange Guide doesn't mislead anyone.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
41 Comments
View All Comments
leexgx - Friday, October 19, 2007 - link
i got an customer that mite be wanting an Quad cpu with 8gb ram soon :) and it ant going to be running vista, it be XP x64 (he uses 3DS)so i need to start to look it up but i cant see there been any problem sticing 4x2gb sticks in one pc
The Boston Dangler - Tuesday, October 16, 2007 - link
"...the abit IP35-E is selling for $102 shipped, plus a $20 mail-in rebate. The quality of that motherboard is a bit suspect, however, with quite a few users reporting compatibility problems and other quirkiness. We haven't had any serious issues with our own test subject, but you might need to exercise a bit more patience if you go with abit."i'm considering this board. could you please link me to a description of these issues?
JarredWalton - Wednesday, October 17, 2007 - link
Read the Newegg comments (and take them with a grain of salt, most likely). You can also try googling for reviews, which may are may not result in useful information. Basically, Gary said the board is a good "budget midrange" offering, but the overall quality is definitely lower than what you would find in something like the IP35 Pro (which costs twice as much).yyrkoon - Wednesday, October 17, 2007 - link
Better yet, go to the ABIT forums, and READ. Newegg reviews are fairly subjective, with a lot of the reviewers obviously being seriously in-experienced when it comes to building systems.You probably will not see a more candid forum than the ABIT forums, or at the very least, they do not censor because of a posters dislike for a product. Incidentally, when buying a new motherboard, and if it is an ABIT board, the first place I go to is ABIT forums, and read.
n yusef - Tuesday, October 16, 2007 - link
As the owner of a Lian Li PC-7 Plus (a generation older than the 7B Plus II), I have to recommend against it. As a workstation case it is limited at three hard drive bays. This may have been fixed in the new version, but the front panel of my case is no longer attached. The bezel is connected to the case via four quite flimsy plastic pins, two of which have broken off. Although the pins can be replaced, a high end manufacturer like Lian Li should never produce such a poor design, especially on a case as simple as the PC-7 is.Pirks - Tuesday, October 16, 2007 - link
I don't understand this. I got myself 4GB of DDR2-667 RAM at newegg for _ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS ALTOGETHER_, which comes to $25 per 1 GB, and you always sugges this crazy overpriced $50 per 1 GB DDR2-800 memory. What the heck is this shoot?? Why pay almost twice more if you get just 2% of performance increase? Well, maybe 5% is you're really into synthetic Sandra stuff..I just don't get ya guys
JarredWalton - Tuesday, October 16, 2007 - link
DDR2-667 with an Intel platform and a 1333FSB is going to seriously handicap overclock, for one. AM2 will also suffer a 5-10% performance loss compared to DDR2-800 at stock speeds. If you're happy with cheap DDR2-667, by all means go for it. I've built enough systems over the years that I've learned from painful experience that cheap memory can create unforeseen problems. Basically, I'm not going to stake my reputation on it if I can avoid it. I spent $250 on DDR2 memory that's not as good as the $114 RAM recommended in this article, and that was less than a year ago. (That memory, incidentally, was RMA'ed when one stick failed after five months.)Pirks - Wednesday, October 17, 2007 - link
But it's not going to handicap overclock on those 800 MHz FSB Intel Allendales. Hence you can get seriously overclocked CPU with all its 40%-50% system-wide performance increase goodness for _much_ less money, compared to overclocking on duper expensive DDR2-1066 sticks.JarredWalton - Wednesday, October 17, 2007 - link
Okay, let's take the E4400. 10x333 will put the RAM back to DDR2-667 using 1:1 ratio. The CPU can likely handle that with appropriate $70 cooling. So you've spent $210 or so on your CPU+HSF. How does that compare to an E6750 that sells for $195? I haven't tested, but I'd imagine the OC'ed E4400 wins by a bit. Then you can OC the E6750 and close the gap. But using DDR2-667 with the E6750 (or E6550) means a 1:1 ratio already has the RAM at DDR2-667.$15 already has us about half way to the upgraded memory you despise, or we can just stick with the $75 stuff and see about pushing the E6550 to 7*400, or the E6750 to 8x400. Now we've topped out on inexpensive DDR2-800 (which you can probably push to 850-900 MHz if you make an effort, but I've had more than a few DDR2 modules fail after a few months of that). So go with DDR2-1066 and now with the right mobo you can try for as high as 7x533 without taking the RAM out of spec.
Feel free to disagree on what's more important, but the bottom line is that I would much rather spend a bit more money on quality RAM, especially when looking to overclock. At the top overclocks, I've seen performance differences of 20% with cheap RAM vs. high-end RAM - when trying to push the whole system to the maximum stable speed. With some time and effort, you might get that down to 10%, but for a 3% system cost increase I'm more than happy to eliminate most of that effort.
Pirks - Wednesday, October 17, 2007 - link
Okay, I got your point. When you invest $1500 in a new system then you can add another $100 to the cost of the memory, not a large difference compared to the total price. I was looking at this from the point of view of building gaming rig where it's usually better to invest in large high resolution monitor and high performance video card, while saving on CPU and RAM which are much less important for games, compared to video card/monitor combo.From the pure CPU overclocking perspective (ignoring games and 3D) your solution is better than mine, it's more expensive tho, but (I have to agree here) not much more expensive, considering total system price.