Comments Locked

41 Comments

Back to Article

  • Dnana - Monday, June 14, 2004 - link

    I disagree with the prior comments where people are taking an entry level system and modifying it until it is really not an entry level system anymore - it is really a mid-level system at that point. I think for me the test of entry level is can you beat the $399 after rebate of a Dell Dimension 2400 - along with its goodies. If not, why build your own - why not buy one that comes with less headache of gathering parts and at least has a warranty? I read this article because I was interested if something could be built that is cheaper and better than the Dell Dimension 2400 and it appears not - for an all around Office machine. Let me know if you beg to differ!! - Tom
  • Dantzig - Saturday, June 12, 2004 - link

    I must strongly agree with Tostada on changes to this budget system. However, I'd like to see a number of changes to the guides:

    1. Don't include the display as part of the system. Still have display recommendations at the end of the guide, but just don't add them into the system price. This will make the guides more flexible. Not everyone wants to buy a new monitor and some people may want a high-end display, but a budget system.
    2. Increase the minimum amount of RAM in all of the systems to 512MB. Anything less results in poor performance with Windows XP and anything but the simplest of applications. Heck, even just running IE and MS Office benefit greatly from 512MB, let alone image editing applications and games.
    3. Show a few selected benchmarks to compare the systems. It would be incredibly helpful for users trying to decided which system they need for X purpose. Anandtech shouldn't recommend anything that they haven't tested.
    4. Most of the case recommendations are dreadful. Since cases are so subjective, maybe just allocate $X to a case and then provide a list of popular cases in that price range.
  • Dantzig - Saturday, June 12, 2004 - link

  • Tostada - Saturday, June 12, 2004 - link

    I don't like this low-end system at all. There's no reason for having such an bad hard drive, and there's no reason not spending an extra $10 to be able to play DVD's.

    There's also no excuse for using a Radeon 9200SE. The nForce2 IGP is as fast as the Radeon 9200, and it's actually faster than the 9200SE. Why buy a graphics card that is actually worse than integrated graphics? Yes, I know people complain about the quality of 2D on anything integrated, but quality is certainly acceptable, and most entry systems won't go over 1024x768.

    I honestly can't believe that AT would suggest that drive. It's slow. It's loud. It has a 1-year warranty.

    Dump the Radeon, save $43.

    Get a Biostar nForce2 IGP board with IGP, save $4.

    Get 512MB of Mushkin RAM for God's sake. Spend $33 more.

    Get a Lite-On combo CD-RW/DVD-ROM. Spend $13.50 more.

    Get an 80 GB Samsung with a 3-year warranty. Spend $10.50 more.

    So there you have it. Final cost is an extra $18 for double the memory, faster (LOL!) integrated graphics, the ability to play DVD's, and a faster, bigger, quieter hard drive with a 3-year warranty.
  • techblaster - Friday, June 11, 2004 - link

    ref to my previous post, i found the abit NF7-S board under the nforce2spp category of motherboards.
    http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?desc...
    there is also a Abit NF7 board for $67.
    http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?desc...
    What is the differnce between these 2 boards. i thought that the v2 of nf7-s supports 400Mhz FSB but i saw 400Mhz FSB speeds listed even under the cheaper version. also how is the gigabyte 7nn400-L board.its a nforce2 ultra chipset. is it better than the Abit's???
  • scius - Friday, June 11, 2004 - link

    I'm going to ahve to back up AT on the hard drive choice. While certianly 40 gigs is tiny now-a-days, there are still many people who simply want a computer to check their email.
    Keep in mind the target audience for a truly _budget_ system... aka. my sister. I'm building her an email/internet/word machine, where gaming and even hard drive space are non-factors (She'll likely be on dial-up, and i know she could care less about having music on her computer).
    So, while for most people reading AT would go with the 80, most people reading AT wouldn't be using a "budget system" in the first place...
    A "budget gaming system" or eqv. OTOH is a different story...
  • techblaster - Friday, June 11, 2004 - link

    hi,
    i was thinking of making that budget system and found the article pretty good. the only thing is newegg and zipzoomfly dont carry the NF7-S rev2.0 board(the rev 2 supports 400FSB). Im looking to purchase a nforce2 ultra 400 board with my XP2500+.any ideas???
    also a real good case i purchased frm newegg is the Raidmax cobra($58) with a 420w SMPS and a side panelwith a LED color fan. it also ships with 2 more exhaust fans(80mm).
    also please advise which would be a better card
    1->ATI 9200 with 128bitbus and 128mb RAm(was thinkin on ECS one on newegg)
    or
    2->nvidia 5200(ultra or non ultra ver???)
  • RONMANLY1 - Friday, June 11, 2004 - link

    Would like to see a mid-range guide oriented to a non-gamer, non-overclocker who wants to have many hds, be able to simultaneously run several programs, download lots of big files from the web or large newsgroups, burn a CD [or DVD soon], move directories, copy files between computers [& a PVR] -- without slowing everything to a crawl.
    My current latest computer has 9 hard drives with over 870 GB [no RAID or PVR yet]. I build an added computer every three years or so and don't believe in upgrading my computers [ex added HDs, etc.]
  • Duker - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    Aspire Case with 350 PS = $40.00
    MSI KT600 MB = $59.00
    Mushkin 512 PC3200 C2 = $84.00
    GeForce4 Ti4200 = $70.00
    WD 80Gig = $70.00
    Liteon CDRW = $38.00
    AMD 2500 Retail = $80.00
    On board sound = $0
    PHILIPS 107E56 17" CRT = $90.00

    Total $531.00
    Shipping = $55.00

    This system does run Far Cry and will overclock.
  • ET - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    I agree that the entry level graphics system could have on-board graphics. This will add a little to the motherboard cost, but still less than buying a separate card. Regarding memory, I think that another 256MB (even slower) would have been a better option than a faster 256MB, in terms of overall performance.
  • MAME - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    the via chipsets are not worth saving $20
  • JuniorXL - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    What about getting the Asus A7V8X-X KT400 instead of the A7N8X-X NFORCE2? Its usually about $20 cheaper and has the same features, just a different chipset. Is the KT400 really that bad?
  • ECarlson - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    Two easy fixes for the weekly systems guides:

    1. Especially for us returning readers: Have a one-page synopsis of the changes from the last guide (for each system level). This could even be a cumulative history, including all the changes over time (That would be nice). No need for us to read mostly the same content over and over and over and over and over.

    2. Put the "Next page" button above the price list. It is very annoying to have to scroll past the price list just to get to the next article page. (Of course, if you implemented #1, this would be far less of an issue to regular readers.)
  • cparker - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

  • MAME - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    To the guys suggesting gaming and such: this is a budget system, not a gaming one. Someone even mentioned Doom 3...it's not intended to even touch a game like that.

    A $70 case someone else mentioned? You're thinking about the next level up. I think AT did a good job picking out the best product for the price (though some changes can be made).

    But for sure, $10 for 40 MORE gigs! (and 6 more megs for the buffer size)
  • cosmotic - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    What are you talking about? This is a budget system, GF4MX is perfectly fine. Infact, its better than fine. A new video card would be an upgrade. I dont think people paying 500 bucks for a computer would expect to get enough performance out of it to play all these new games. You guys are on crack! "My 500 dollar computer wont play FarCry or Doom3... I WONDER WHY!"
  • Pumpkinierre - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    From what I hear of those 5200s, they arent worth the candle. A friend who had one with a new system was so disatisfied that he got a computer repairman to swap it for a Geforce4 of some denomination and now seems happy. Admitedly he mainly does 2D graphics. However I agree with an earlier article's post: the entry level system ought to be an integrated graphics solution possibly with upgradeable AGP port. With new IG chipsets from ATI, Intel and nVidia this should make for some competition when allied to Paris/Sempron and 64bit prescott celerons as well as the older socketA's and N'wood celerons. My present favorite: Duron 1.8, ATI IGP 320 mainboard (http://www.sapphiretech.com/mainboard/a3-285.asp), 512MB DDR.

  • henan - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    I agree with that 80 gig drive, and also integrated graphics might add more room for other components (ram?).

    I'm very disappointed in the missing OC guide. Last two just haven't been there, but nothing else has filled that gap yet, just a week withiut anything. To me that is the only important one, although the others are good reading. I hope the OC system guide will be back soon!
  • TrogdorJW - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    Duker, the problem is that while the 5200 might technically be a DX9 card, it's not fast enough to actually run DX9 graphics at even the lowest quality settings, so it would end up being used as a DX8 card. The 9200SE is probably too slow to run even DX8 titles, but the 9200 is perfectly capable as long as the resolution is kept at 1024x768 or lower and detail settings aren't too high.

    If you want any real chance at running DX9 games, the minimum card would be a 9600 Pro, like this one: http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?desc... At $111, that's way out of the price range of a budget system. (IMO, on a budget system, $100 would be the maximum price of any single part, and $50 would be preferred.

    Anyway, as an alternative, the FX5200 cards might be okay, but they're still pretty much DX9 parts in practice.
  • yossiz - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    I'd really like to see an HTPC builder's guide. One that focuses on quiet, multimedia-oriented PC.

    Also, as someone mentioned already, I think that the RAM alternative should not be a lower latency module, but rather a 512MB module, making your alternative system a much more viable budget gaming machine.
  • Duker - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    Better card for a few more $$$.

    http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?desc...
  • Duker - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    Why don't you recommend a 128 bit 128 meg GeForce FX5200 for $63.00? Far Cry would laugh at that 64 Meg 64 bit ATI 9200SE and Doom 3 is closing fast. I don't think ATI is a good choice for this system and I use ATI in 3 out of 4 of my personal machines. Is ATI paying you?

    http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?desc...
  • White Widow - Thursday, June 10, 2004 - link

    Ditto on the support for the 80GB drive. If a company is really going to buy 1000 PC's, then they could probably negotiate some volume pricing anyway.

    As for overall system pricing, I think the budget system should be kept as close to $500 as possible. If you are building an internet/MS Office machine for someone, that $500 price point stands out.

    I also agree that the Overclocking System (is there still an Overclocking System Guide??) should NOT be the most expensive, but rather the most bang-for-the-buck. I see such a system pricing out toward the top end of a Mid-Range system.

    Finally, AT has GOT to fix the Price Guide. I'm not ure how it is coded, but most sections of the Buyers Guide discuss two compnents, but onlylist prices for one. How hard can it be to list prices for both CPU's and Motherboards together?
  • Apologiliac - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    CC had a sale for a 120 GB WD 7200rpm for $60!
  • nastyemu25 - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    i'm starting to hate that case
  • kristof007 - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    Is it jst me or there is no overclocking system anymore ?
  • TrogdorJW - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    Two major issues that continue to plague the low-end system. First is that hard drive recommendation. If a large corporation is buying a bunch of computers, $10 times 1000 is going to be noticeable. For anyone else, you might as well just go with the 80GB drive and be done with it. Volume levels of the WD drives leave something to be desired, though.

    The other issue is the RAM. You increase the CPU and motherboard costs $40 in the alternative recommendations, mostly for people that want decent gaming performance. You increase the graphics $9, again mostly for low-end gamers. You increase the RAM costs $15, but the difference between CAS 2.5 and CAS2.0 RAM with a low-end system sporting 256 MB of RAM is going to be virtually non-existent. How about something more useful like bumping the price up $37 and recommending a 512 MB Mushkin DIMM like this one: http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?desc... Anyone trying even moderate gaming under Windows XP is going to start encountering severe problems with the more recent games running on 256 MB of RAM.

    Finally, that Foxconn case is just fugly. If you're going to recommend that people buy the extra $20 Sparkle power supply for a total of $61 on the case, there are a lot of other options. $72 for the Antec SLK2650-BQE is one option that would only add $11, and you get an Antec 350W PSU instead of a generic 300W PSU. http://www.newegg.com/app/viewproductdesc.asp?desc...

    Since you didn't provide this, let's put it in the comments (and I'll throw in my RAM and case suggestions):

    Alternative Low-to-midrange System:
    Athlon XP 2500+ CPU: $80
    Abit NF7-S: $86
    512 MB PC3200 Mushkin: $87
    Radeon 9200: $52
    17" NEC Monitor: $166
    Antec SLK2650-BQE w/ 350W: $72
    WD 800JB 80GB hard drive: $67
    Lite-On CD-RW/DVD combo: $48
    Creative Speakers: $20
    Integrated audio and network: $0
    --------------------------------
    Total for slightly more expensive - but overall better performing - Low/Mid system: $678

    That took me all of 10 minutes to put those prices together, including finding my alternative RAM and case information. For office use, there's no real need for the alternative, but for low-end gaming, the extra $140 would go a long way toward making the system perform better.
  • gherald - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    #1 I have to agree $10 more for the WD800JB is definately a better deal.

    The article suggests that "Pushing SATA into the low end mainstream is very important for the development of that technology" so the alternative HD should be the WD800JD or perhaps this equivalent Hitachi:
    http://www.newegg.com/app/ViewProductDesc.asp?desc...
    Of course, you'd need the NF7 motherboard for that.

    #6: The reason is 2D graphics quality; Radeons are much better than onboard Geforces. At work half the stations I administer have Geforce 4 MX's directly on the northbridge and the other half have either a radeon 9x00 or ATI Rage pro 128 card. The differences in quality are clearly noticeable.

    As for prices, #4 is right on the money though I would suggest these approximate price ranges:

    Entry-level: $600 +/- $100
    Mid-range: $1100 +/- $200
    High-end: $2000 +/- $500

    #9 your high end limit is way to high. I'd call more than $2500-3000 an 'uber' system.

    #11 the absolute low limit for high-end is clearly $1500; below is most assuredly in upper-mid-range territory. Also, you are misssing the point of overclocking. Yes many high-end and "luxury" systems (as you call them) can be effectively overclocked, but this does not define an "Overclocking System" per se.

    In my opinion an Overclocking System should be roughly 5 to 15% more expensive than a mid-range one, because they'll need a few quality components like a better PSU, quality motherboard, excellent HSF and PC3500+ memory but their goal is often to get the most bang for the buck. This attitude is clearly exemplified these days by the Mobile Barton / NF7r2 crowd.
  • Pumpkinierre - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    Suprised to see those Prescott prices:

    2.4E at $123- $35 below 2.4c. making it a low to mid level system chip

    2.8E 533FSB - ~$30 higher than 2.8E 800MHz FSB or 2.8c - crazy, must be the enthusiast/upgrader/o'clocker's P4 of choice.

    the 3.0 and 3.2 are about the same (but with the 533 P4E ahead in price in the 3.0 rank again!). The 3.4E is still $60 ahead of the 3.4c (why? beyond yields, I dont know) and the EEs are'nt coming down in price unfortunately.
  • MDE - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    You mention that the NF7-S is a.k.a. the AN7, that's not really true, they're different boards, there's a reason Abit didn't name the AN7 the NF7-S 3.0.
  • jamesey - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    i think the buyers guide should be titled by price and there can be 4 of them

    $600 and less - budget/entry level
    600-1200 - mid range
    1200-1800 - high end
    1800-up - overclocking/luxury
  • aw - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    I second the motion for the SFF guide!!!
  • mcveigh - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    how setup spme parameters for the systems?

    like the budget box will be under $600
    mid-range under $1000, or 1200

    the high end system will be under $5000

    etc.
  • GP40X - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    Aw come on guys, The laste "Overclocked" system guide was April 8th. I'm starting to suffer withdrawl here. Two full months of guides & not a single one of the Overclocked system.

    Oh, I almost forgot. Recommend the 80 Gig. $10.00 isn't going to break the bank on this system. Cost vs. benefit shows to be a really good deal. More bang for the buck than the other alternatove recommnedations.
  • cKGunslinger - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link


    I'm going to agree with the 80GB HD suggestions. It doesn't make much sense to save $10-15 and only get *half* the storage space. 40 GB just doesn't go as far as it used to anymore. Especially with bloated OS and applications, MP3s, video clips, games requiring 3 CD for install, and the proliferation of Broadband access (which is assumed, since no modem is included.)

    Onboard video might also shave a few $$ off the price, as long as the MB still has an AGP slot for some upgradability. The current Entry System has a pretty good upgrade path. If the user decides he wants to get into a little heavier gaming, an XP 2500+ and Radeon 9600 can be added for relatively little scratch and you'd have a respectable system. Actually, you'd have something resembling my main gaming rig. :)
  • cosmotic - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    Why not use an NF2 board with on-board video, it would take the price down quite a bit (relitivley) and still be pretty nice video.
  • ZobarStyl - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    I'll have to agree with MAME even though it's a completely budget-oriented system a 10 dollar premium for 80 gigs is worth it; it would be a lot more tangible benefit than a processor upgrade and a lot of people these days are filling up these low-end HDD's fast.
  • buckcow - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    I would like see the average price of the mid range system go up a bit. Below is the data of the last 3 months of guides, and the prices of the systems. Column 1 is low end, 2 is the middle, and 3 is the high end system. The 4th row of data is the average of the 3. I would like to see the mid range price really be about half way between the low and and the high end. Keep up the good work.

    552 934 3034
    527 935 1965
    504 833 1979

    528 901 2326
  • Booty - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    Good call on that... of course, would it be a high-end or budget SFF? Or maybe one geared to home theater usage?
  • MAME - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    Guys, just recommend the 80 gig WD. It's $10 more than the 40 gig one and has an 8 meg buffer (instead of 2).

    I know you're keep prices low but seriosuly...$10!

    I just can't see any justification for letting someone get the 40 gig flavor when $10 provides twice the storage and a much larger cache
  • Stefpet - Wednesday, June 9, 2004 - link

    Would love to see the addition of a SFF system guide!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now