Budget Buyer's Guide - October 2006
by Jarred Walton on October 25, 2006 8:10 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Conclusion
Unlike our last high-end guide, we have chosen not to bother with a large list of alternatives this time. There are always choices to be made, and there are compromises in any budget computer. In many cases, this year's budget configurations are just last year's midrange offerings, with a few minor tweaks. Out of the four configurations we put together, the baseline builds had an eye more towards cutting costs whereas the upgraded configurations looked to add more performance and features. As the price nears $500, the differences between one component and another similar component often become small. Should you get brand A or brand B memory? Who makes the best motherboard? Which hard drive is better? There are definitely still differences, but we would mostly concern ourselves with the features you may or may not be getting as "best" becomes more of a marketing term in the budget sector than anything concrete. Given that the performance of most budget systems is going to be a lot like last year's midrange models, an alternative to building a new budget system is to instead look for a good price on a used midrange system from a year or two ago. You may not get the latest socket, memory, GPU, hard drive, etc., but you might also get better overall performance for less money. There are, after all, many different ways to part with $600.
As is often the case, two of the builds today stand out as being better overall choices than the others. If you are looking to cut costs and stick closer to $500, we would currently give that market to the AMD configurations. True, you don't get a dual core processor, but that will add at least $50 to the total system cost, and a lot of people simply don't use their computers in such a way that dual cores are necessary. Athlon 64 processors are still very fast, and the single core chips are a great bargain compared to what the cost last year. In fact, Athlon 64 chips are so cheap now that we see little reason to consider getting a Sempron processor. On the other end of the spectrum, if you're looking to upgrade performance slightly, the most sensible decision is to go with a budget Core 2 Duo configuration. This is especially useful if you do use a lot of applications that will benefit from multiple processor cores, as Core 2 Duo is currently the fastest dual core architecture available.
Finally, let us reiterate once again that it is virtually impossible to cover every reasonable component choice at a given price range with a single buyer's guide. That's why we have all of our individual review sections, with these guides being more a look at what sort of system we would put together at the given price points. There are plenty of possibilities that we didn't even touch in this guide. For example, you might want to go with a cheaper processor and other components in order to max out your GPU, with the aim of getting maximum gaming performance. How do you balance that so that your CPU is still fast enough to keep your GPU fed? Feel free to ask questions in the comments section, and we will do our best to respond - or you can always use email if you prefer. And if you think that prices are currently too high, there's no harm in waiting as something better is almost always right around the corner, and other than a few periodic spikes like we've seen with memory, component costs will trend downwards over time. Thanks for reading, and suggestions are always welcome!
Unlike our last high-end guide, we have chosen not to bother with a large list of alternatives this time. There are always choices to be made, and there are compromises in any budget computer. In many cases, this year's budget configurations are just last year's midrange offerings, with a few minor tweaks. Out of the four configurations we put together, the baseline builds had an eye more towards cutting costs whereas the upgraded configurations looked to add more performance and features. As the price nears $500, the differences between one component and another similar component often become small. Should you get brand A or brand B memory? Who makes the best motherboard? Which hard drive is better? There are definitely still differences, but we would mostly concern ourselves with the features you may or may not be getting as "best" becomes more of a marketing term in the budget sector than anything concrete. Given that the performance of most budget systems is going to be a lot like last year's midrange models, an alternative to building a new budget system is to instead look for a good price on a used midrange system from a year or two ago. You may not get the latest socket, memory, GPU, hard drive, etc., but you might also get better overall performance for less money. There are, after all, many different ways to part with $600.
As is often the case, two of the builds today stand out as being better overall choices than the others. If you are looking to cut costs and stick closer to $500, we would currently give that market to the AMD configurations. True, you don't get a dual core processor, but that will add at least $50 to the total system cost, and a lot of people simply don't use their computers in such a way that dual cores are necessary. Athlon 64 processors are still very fast, and the single core chips are a great bargain compared to what the cost last year. In fact, Athlon 64 chips are so cheap now that we see little reason to consider getting a Sempron processor. On the other end of the spectrum, if you're looking to upgrade performance slightly, the most sensible decision is to go with a budget Core 2 Duo configuration. This is especially useful if you do use a lot of applications that will benefit from multiple processor cores, as Core 2 Duo is currently the fastest dual core architecture available.
Finally, let us reiterate once again that it is virtually impossible to cover every reasonable component choice at a given price range with a single buyer's guide. That's why we have all of our individual review sections, with these guides being more a look at what sort of system we would put together at the given price points. There are plenty of possibilities that we didn't even touch in this guide. For example, you might want to go with a cheaper processor and other components in order to max out your GPU, with the aim of getting maximum gaming performance. How do you balance that so that your CPU is still fast enough to keep your GPU fed? Feel free to ask questions in the comments section, and we will do our best to respond - or you can always use email if you prefer. And if you think that prices are currently too high, there's no harm in waiting as something better is almost always right around the corner, and other than a few periodic spikes like we've seen with memory, component costs will trend downwards over time. Thanks for reading, and suggestions are always welcome!
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
mpc7488 - Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - link
Thanks for the reply. I'd like to caveat my response by saying I'm *not* trying to argue or be a jerk - I just enjoy a good hardware discussion :) I also use your guides for comparison to what I'd do for myself (midrange usually) or for my friends, coworkers, etc. (budget). I totally agree, in this price range, you're still always getting better expandability with these. However, features and performance is much greyer to my mind, and with the right deals I think an OEM with a little tinkering can be a powerful option for the non-power user, even at prices outside of the bottom range.Speakers: point made, I meant to include them and forgot. The X-230s are $31.25 at Newegg (free shipping).
OEM configurations: I've found the trick with Dell is generally not to upgrade their base configurations to get the best deals. For instance, buying the DVD-R/W and speakers from Newegg saves you $38. That can get put towards a real video card, instead of the 7300LE. Upgrades will quickly inflate the price and skew the deal.
Ok, direct comparisons:
Budget AMD: Athlon 64 3000+, 1 GB DDR2-667, 160 GB HDD, GeForce 6150, DVD-R/W, 19” Sceptre, keyboard, mouse, X-230 speakers, Win XP Home, $749
Dell E521: Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 1 GB DDR2-533, 160 GB HDD, GeForce 6150, DVD-R/W, 19” Dell 1907FP Ultrasharp, keyboard, mouse, X-230 speakers, Win XP Home, 1 year on-site warranty, $686.25 (with burner and X-230 speakers from Newegg)
"better expandability, performance, and features at roughly the same price"
Expandability: Without a doubt. This is where OEMs can't compare.
Features: $65 savings for a faster dual-core processor, better monitor, and warranty coverage. You lose DVI output (thanks yehuda) and have slightly slower memory. It's close enough though, as prices will fluctuate, I'll concede this one.
Performance: I'd have to say the crown would go to the 3800+! More impressively for media encoding and Windows tasks than for gaming, with the weak 6150.
Upgraded Budget AMD: Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 2 GB DDR2-533, 250 GB HDD, GeForce 7600GT 256 MB, DVD-R/W (with DVD-RAM), 19” Sceptre, keyboard, mouse, X-230 speakers, Win XP Home, $1090
Upgraded Dell E521: Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 1 GB DDR2-533, 160 GB HDD, GeForce 7900GT 256MB, DVD-R/W (with DVD-RAM), 19” Dell 1907FP Ultrasharp, keyboard, mouse, X-230 speakers, Win XP Home, 1 year on-site warranty, $875 (with burner, PCIe video card and X-230 speakers from Newegg)
Expandability: Without a doubt. This is where OEMs can't compare.
Features: $215 savings for a much faster video card, better monitor, and warranty coverage. You lose 1 GB of memory and HDD space.
Performance: The 7900GT would absolutely smoke the other box in just about any game, even with less RAM. Media encoding and Windows tasks would benefit from the greater RAM of the other config.
Obviously I am bored at work today. To each their own of course - I think OEM builds with alterations can be a powerful adversary, in price, performance and features, to self-builds in the budget price range, especially if overclocking is not a consideration, and shouldn't be relegated to the bottom of the heap. Just my $0.04.
It'd be interesting to see how a custom build would hold up against a Dell box with upgrades, in a cheapo-gaming-and-media-machine shootout.
batter - Friday, November 10, 2006 - link
Nice discussion; I always compare to dell/hp and always decide to build my own: I know what is in it, I build with future upgrades in mind, I do not use proprietory hardware. Also keep in mind that a bunch of people already have a keyboard, mouse, windows license, speakers etc and might even be able to re-use the case and or PS. With that in mind I usually come out ahead.Calin - Thursday, October 26, 2006 - link
For the difference between the Dell and the homebuilt system (75$) you could easily buy a video card with not one but two DVI outputs. So, in features, Dell (with upgrades) would be a better deal(but I would build my own anyway :D )
JarredWalton - Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - link
You can also do:Upgraded Budget AMD Alternative: Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 1 GB DDR2-533, 250 GB HDD, GeForce 7900GT 256 MB, DVD-R/W (with DVD-RAM), 19” Sceptre, keyboard, mouse, X-230 speakers, Win XP Home, $1109 shipped.
Upgraded Dell (purchasing everything from Dell): Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 1 GB DDR2-533, 250 GB HDD, GeForce 7300TC LE, DVD-R/W, 19” 1907FP, keyboard, mouse, 2.1 speakers, Win XP MCE2005, $759 (plus taxes). Add $240 for 7900GT = $999. You still get MS Works for "free" though.
Once you start going online and purchasing upgrades, however, I think you have moved away from your typical Dell PC buyer. Most people either want to buy the whole system with everything they want, or else they will go to a local store to buy a system or just put the whole thing together themselves. If you actually want Dell to put together a better gaming solution -- or anything with even moderately upgraded graphics -- you basically have to move up to their XPS line. That gives you a better CPU and maybe a few other extra perks, but the price suddenly jumps up to $1289.
As you say, you can usually do better getting the base OEM configuration and making upgrades on your own, but I'm not sure how many people really go that route.
yyrkoon - Thursday, October 26, 2006 - link
I recently upgraded for under the cost of your listed upgrade, however I migrated HDDs, mouse, keyboard, monitor, and PSU. In my opinion, this would be a 'true' upgrade for a person such as myself. I could have even saved another $160 usd, if I didnt care about the onboard graphics where gaming is concerned, and unfortunately, for my wallet, I do ;)At last tally, I spent between $750-$800 usd, including the low-end Lian Li case (very nice BTW), eVGA 7600GT, AM2 3800+, Corsair DDR2-6400 XMS (advertised at 5-5-5-18 timings, but my motherboard typicaly detects it as 4-4-4-12, as long as I'm running it stock), and an Asrock AM2NF4G-SATA2 motherboard. I'd like to add that this motherboard is JUNK, it overclocks fine, but the system gets BSoDs regularly, whether I OC it or not. Wont be long before I make a platform upgrade, to a Conroe CPU/ ABIT motherboard . . .
ThelvynD - Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - link
It's a fairly decent monitor and you can pick them up from Newegg right now for 179.99. My biggest complaint about it is the rather cheap stand it's on.imaheadcase - Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - link
That memory is now the most expensive part of a normal computer.Memory manufactors are making a fortune I bet on all types of memory. Not to mention off all these suckers who buy "gaming" memory. "Oh please mom i have to be the best geek on the net to have camo on my memory heatsink spreader!".
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - link
Memory manufacturers make the finished dimms, and almost all of them buy memory chips on the open market from Samsung, Micron, Elpida, and other huge semi-c0nductor manufacturers, This means companies like Corsair, OCZ, Kingston, Mushkin, etc. are as much at the mercy of chip prices as buyers are. I bring this up because the chip makers themselves are where chip prices haves been rising, and that is where the questions should be directed.yyrkoon - Thursday, October 26, 2006 - link
Forgot to mention, look at the latest part (sold by newegg) thats obviously jacked up in price, the 'Killer' network adapter, marketed as the 'the ultimate gaming NIC'. Somehow, I seriously doubt the card is worth $270 usd, I dont care if it shoots sparks out its behind . . .yyrkoon - Thursday, October 26, 2006 - link
Yeah well, Crucial is part of Micron, and they charge more for thier memeory than alot of 'manufactuers', IF you buy direct from them. Then again, if you buy direct from Crucial, IF your memory ever goes bad, they will send you a replacement before they even recieve the bad part (atleast this is what thier reps claim over the phone).I myself paid $230 usd for my Corsair DDR2-6400 XMS memory about 3-4 months ago, 5-5-5-15 timings (supposedly, my system regularly detects it as 4-4-4-12 timings). At the time, I thought it was outrageous, and they also gave me a $50 rebate, which I've recieved by now. Turns out comparred to now, I actually recieved a good price ;)
This all seems to be a trend started by the graphics companies over a year ago, offer a product that you CLAIM is a gaming part, and jack up the price. Motherboard manufactuers, and memory manufactuers just now seem to be catching on, this wont go away, until the kids stop spending mommies, and daddies money on such parts. Hopefully, this trend will go away eventually, and once these companies realize they could actually make more money from people like us who build systems for more than just themselves. *shrug* I dislike buying non branded memory, and preffer a company with a reputation for reliability, but at the same time I refuse to buy parts that have obviously been jacked up, because the manufactuer has turned greedy.