ie8 fix
madison

Hardware 2.0

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Building a "High Performance" Windows 7 PC

By | April 15, 2009, 9:39am PDT

With Windows 7 release candidate just around the corner, the other day I was asked to spec out a high performance PC suitable for Windows 7 64-bit, This system would also be a great Vista system.

Note: Just to clarify that this is a “high performance” PC, and not a “sky’s the limit, money no object” system. I am therefore choosing parts that offer the best bang for the buck at the high end, and not the very best, bleeding edge components.

Here’s the spec I came up with:

CPU

Choosing an Intel CPU is a no-brainer when it comes to high performance PCs. Intel’s current Core i7 silicon offer the very best performance going. However, if you go for the top of the line 965 Extreme Edition then you are going to be spending a thousand dollars on the CPU alone. While some people are happy to spend such sums on just the CPU, I feel that the cost outweighs the performance gains and that the cheapest Core i7, the2.66GHz 920, which retails at a more reasonable $290 is a better option.

The 920 still offers plenty of performance and if combined with the right parts you can always overclock the system to get even more horsepower.

Price: $290

Motherboard

With the Core i7 processor in the bag, we now need a compatible motherboard. A Core i7 CPU needs a socket LGA 1366 motherboard sporting an X58 chipset, and fortunately there are plenty to choose from.

For this build I went for the ASUS P6T Deluxe V2 board. There are three reasons to like this board:

  • Support for 24GB of DDR3 RAM
  • Triple PCIe 2.0 x16 slots
  • Excellent overclocker

Price: $290

RAM

While the ASUS P6T can support up to 24GB of RAM, that much memory is overkill and a waste of money. A good compromise for a Core i7 system is 12GB.

For this build I went for 12GB (in the form of 6 x 2GB modules) of OCZ DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) high performance RAM.

Price: $220

Next –>

Topics

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology.

Disclosure

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

All opinions expressed on Hardware 2.0 are those of Adrian Kingsley-Hughes. Every effort is made to ensure that the information posted is accurate. If you have any comments, queries or corrections, please contact Adrian via the email link here. Any possible conflicts of interest will be posted below. [Updated: February 23, 2010] - Adrian Kingsley-Hughes has no business relationships, affiliations, investments, or other actual/potential conflicts of interest relating to the content posted so far on this blog.

Biography

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes

Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is an internationally published technology author who has devoted over a decade to helping users get the most from technology -- whether that be by learning to program, building a PC from a pile of parts, or helping them get the most from their new MP3 player or digital camera.

Adrian has authored/co-authored technical books on a variety of topics, ranging from programming to building and maintaining PCs. His most recent books include "Build the Ultimate Custom PC", "Beginning Programming" and "The PC Doctor's Fix It Yourself Guide". He has also written training manuals that have been used by a number of Fortune 500 companies.

Adrian also runs a popular blog under the name The PC Doctor, where he covers a range of computer-related topics -- from security to repairing and upgrading.

180
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: Building a
bigdooba 29th Apr 2010
On a machine like you're talking of building what do you think would give you a better viewing, one 28 to 30 inch monitor or two 24 inch monitors. I'm concerned with the effect of two monitors because of the black frame lines. This machine would be for mostly for fps games. Thanks
0 Votes
+ -
Contributr
Got any ...
Adrian Kingsley-Hughes 15th Apr 2009
... ideas, changes or suggestions? Let me know!
0 Votes
+ -
Memory card reader?
Been_Done_Before 15th Apr 2009
Personally, i like coolermaster cases. They have excellent airflow and usually the spacing for devices is logical and plenty.
0 Votes
+ -
LG BRD recorder...
bjbrock 15th Apr 2009
for $175 at Newegg. Sony isn't worth the extra money.
0 Votes
+ -
definitely LG BRD recorder...
BillDem 16th Apr 2009
For those who have both HDDVD (remember those?) and BRD discs, or friends who might loan them one, the LG is the best option.
0 Votes
+ -
Warped Intel MoBo's.
bjbrock 15th Apr 2009
After 6 months to a year, due to the way Intel heat sinks mount on the MB, Intel MB's warp bad enough to damage the board. I challenge you to take out an Intel MB and look at it from edge on. The board will be distorted by a full 1/8" or more. This is due to no back plate for the heat sink to mount to. Don't take my word for it, look at a year old MB.
0 Votes
+ -
re: Warped MoBo
mikey3211 15th Apr 2009
That's one advantage of the Noctua h/sink that he's chosen. Not only are they extremely cool, and very quiet, they have a back plate that has to be stuck onto the mobo.

The down side is that they're massive so you need a huge case to mount them in.
0 Votes
+ -
Noctua helps with that
BillDem 16th Apr 2009
Not only is it one of the best and quietest air coolers on the market, but it is lighter than most and uses a back plate to help stabilize the mounting. It's not stylish thanks to the flesh-tone and brown fans, but it is one great cooler.
0 Votes
+ -
Why the sound card?
CobraA1 16th Apr 2009
The motherboard already has 8 channel sound. Drop the sound card and save $135.

I don't bother with sound cards anymore.
0 Votes
+ -
I agree!
jave200372 16th Apr 2009
My ears can't pick the difference between onboard sound and a high-end sound card, but my wallet certainly can!!! happy
0 Votes
+ -
Sometimes a sound card pays
Harlz 20th Apr 2009
Not always. In my experience I've found the occasional motherboard can experience an amount of interference through the onboard sound card. A sure way to guarantee against this is with a dedicated sound card. (And I've only used supposedly good quality mobos from Asus or Gigabyte but you still get the odd dodgy model or chipset sometimes).
0 Votes
+ -
Why? Are you serious?
mc_rog46_sd1@... 4th Jul 2009
Because most sound cards have their own processors and ram (I also have a Fatality Pro PCIe), taking a load off the system, which provides for a better multitasking environment. For example I can have a utility program (virus scanner,Norton Save and Restore backup, etc.) running, listen to music, edit video content and browse the web without a hitch. That's what high end quad core computing is all about.
0 Votes
+ -
Because the system has 3 SLI slots, it makes sense to spend a bit more to get a bigger power supply for future expansion. If you already have the bigger power supply installed, it's easy to just add 2 more graphics cards down the line.
0 Votes
+ -
Video recommendation
mswift@... 16th Apr 2009
I'll be putting together an i7/Win7 machine soon. I have no need for high end video. I usually use Intel motherboards with onboard video for business desktops, they get 4 on the Vista/Seven rating with the right driver. The Intel x58 board does not have video. This is for a SQL programmers workstation. What card would you recommend? I had nothing but problems with Nvidia drivers on Vista.
0 Votes
+ -
Antec case...
BuckedUp 17th Apr 2009
I recently built a moderately high-end, pre-Core i7 system, and used an Antec P182 case.

Nice, clean style, insulated panels that keep it VERY quiet, and a big top-mounted fan that keeps heat from becoming an issue.

And it's considerably less than the $200 threshold.
0 Votes
+ -
Core i7 940
bvonr@... Updated - 27th Apr 2009
Just finished building a Core i7 940, Giga-byte GA-EX58-UD5 with 12G OCZ 1600mghz ram, ATI 4870X2 video ( I decided not to go with blueray as my DVD player upgrades DVD to HD anyway) I have 5 Seagate HDD's ranging from 120 to 640G ( for different OS's (Win 7, Vista 64 and Ubuntu 8)), Creative XFi PCIe sound and A Samsung T260HD 25.5" and 910T monitors. So far Windows 7 64 7057 is the best os on this system :o)
0 Votes
+ -
I just don't understand
mjolnar@... 8th May 2009
You can get an AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition Deneb 3.2GHz 4 x 512KB L2 Cache 6MB L3 Cache Socket AM3 125W Quad-Core Processor for $245 at newegg. That is a 3.2 Black Edition.

There is nothing wrong with a ASUS M4A79 Deluxe AM2+/AM2 AMD 790FX ATX AMD Motherboard that newegg sells for $189.

You can get a SAPPHIRE 100251SR Radeon HD 4870 X2 2GB 512-bit (256-bit x 2) GDDR5 for $325

You spent $800 on a slower setup, this one cost me $759.

I always buy from the competition because it helps keep the cost of the big dog down. Intel gouged for years, but AMD has helped to keep them somewhat in check the last decade.

On price/performance the AMD system wins this one. I will admit that, though the specs are close to the same as the i7 965 is faster, just not enough to justify spending $1000 for.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Building a
drake2 15th Apr 2009
Add dual lcd monitors to the list.

Also, Intel VPro. Are there ever going to be core I7 systems available with VPro or equivalent?

0 Votes
+ -
RE: Building a
bhaydama 15th Apr 2009
How can you talk about high performance without speaking of "purpose"? What is the purpose of this machine? Gaming? 3D Design? Video Editing? Would such a "high performance" machine add much to the experience of an average user browsing the web, twittering, checking E-mail, and creating spreadsheets?
0 Votes
+ -
No
Cylon Centurion 15th Apr 2009
It wouldn't add much to internet/spreadsheet use. These machines are most likely for gamers like me, 3d design, and video editing.
0 Votes
+ -
"Purpose" is essential
oneillru@... 16th Apr 2009
Excellent point bhaydama. I think Mr. Kingsley-Hughes went a little hardware happy here (like all us IT geeks tend to do). The fact is that in today?s PC market $2500 dollars for a machine (without a good 1080p HDCP compatible monitor) is quite expensive just to say it is able to handle the new Microsoft OS (even if it is a behemoth).
The proper approach would have been to say this is an enthusiast?s gaming PC (which it seems to be slanting toward) and an alternative ?hi-end? average user?s spec given that would have cost closer to $1200.
0 Votes
+ -
Absolutely essential
Too Old For IT 16th Apr 2009
I rather like the items as spec'd out, except I have a $3500 in video editing cards to install afterwords.
0 Votes
+ -
Great example
GoPower 15th Apr 2009
High end machines don't come from Walmart at $349.00.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Building a
IE9 15th Apr 2009
From your previous benchmarks Vista seemed to outspeed XP more your AMD/ATI systems then it did on Intel /Nvidia systems.
So it might be that the AMD/ATI architecture or the drivers are better for Vista and will probably be so for Windows 7
0 Votes
+ -
amd
blackhawk556 15th Apr 2009
I attended "Microsoft together with AMD" back in 2007, and they were saying that Vista was created on machines that ran AMD and not Intel stuff. could this by why it runs better than with intel hardware?
0 Votes
+ -
... to say for sure. Advances in hardware-optimized compilers since 2007 can have an impact as well. So can the architecture of the motherboard and supporting chipsets. front-side bus speeds and the size of L1, L2, and L3 cache. And whether the code itself is written with each of these factors in mind.

All this is why two vendors can run the same benchmarks on two seemingly identical configurations and get "conflicting" results.
0 Votes
+ -
DDR3 and LGA 1366
ChiperSoft 15th Apr 2009
Just last year I built a new system using LGA 775 and
DDR2 because I thought it would be around long enough
to make it through a few upgrades. From what you're
saying here, it sounds like that's already been outmoded.

I've been feeling the need to update my Core 2 Duo to
something newer. What is the lifespan on 775 looking
like? Is the Core 2 line still worth using or should I just
expect to have to put down on a whole new
mobo/cpu/memory set?

Mind you, Win7 is running excellently on my current
hardware, I just feel the pinch in some CPU heavy
processes.
0 Votes
+ -
Move on when you can...
BillDem 16th Apr 2009
Everyone knew even a year ago that i7 and 1366 were going to be the future upgrade path. If it were me, I wouldn't pour any more cash into an old 775 based system. I'd save that cash towards my eventual move to 1366.

If you just want to boost your old system and hang onto it for a couple more years, you could just get a fast Core 2 Quad and plug it into your 775 MB. Actually, where you should spend your cash really depends on what you need to run faster. For games, forget the CPU and spend your money on a better graphics card because you can take that with you when you move to i7 and 1366 later. For media encoding, video/audio editing, or lots of multitasking in Windows, the C2Quad will help.
0 Votes
+ -
Will do it upgrade after next
ChiperSoft 16th Apr 2009
Thanks for the response. My video card is actually already as high as I
can get it without spending a stupid amount of money. I splurged on
a 1GB GTX 280 two months ago and absolutely love it. My framerates
are enormous in pretty much every game... except for one.

World of Warcraft is known to be very very CPU heavy, especially when
you get a lot of people doing a lot of things in one place. The new
video card made WoW look absolutely amazing, but didn't improve my
frame rate at all. That's when i realized I needed a better CPU (since
I've already got 4GB of RAM).

That said, looking at newegg prices for the 1366 chips, i think I'll stick
with 775 for just a bit longer. I can get a Q9550 for less then the
cheapest i7 and wont have to spend a bunch on new support
hardware. That should tide me over until I'm ready for the jump to
DDR3.

Funny, I built this system because I needed to jump to DDR2/PCIe
0 Votes
+ -
Not so fast...
BuckedUp 17th Apr 2009
Worth noting that prices on LGA775 CPUs haven't dropped at all since the introduction of the Core i7s. In fact, the Q9550 I bought last October seems to have actually gone up in price.

What this tells me is that at least some builders looked at the Core i7 when it was rolled out, and decided to stay with the 775 platform for a little while longer.

The i7 is definitely a great platform, and it seems to benchmark really well, but there's some question about how "usable" that performance really is. And given the relative expense of X58 mobos and DDR3 RAM, it just doesn't (yet) represent the same "bang for the buck" that a high-end 775 system does.

...just my 2 cents...
0 Votes
+ -
Add $50 and get 2 quad ...
bjbrock 15th Apr 2009
core Barcelonas. Especially if you are making a database server. Dual socket MoBo maybe a tad more, maybe not.
0 Votes
+ -
Why would anyone go AMD for high end right now? The i7 with HT and it's ability to OC makes it the natural choice. At least right now.
0 Votes
+ -
For $25
mjolnar@... 8th May 2009
You tell me how the i7 920 can come anywhere close to the Phenom II 955. That my friend is a 3.2 GB CPU not a 2.66.
0 Votes
+ -
Out of curiousity....
storm14k 15th Apr 2009
I'm wondering what this machine will be used for.

Video editing? Modeling and rendering?
0 Votes
+ -
I think in future you should spec out two systems, one based on AMD kit and the other intel.
0 Votes
+ -
I was thinking the same once again...
storm14k 15th Apr 2009
I am just curious as to why AMD is never mentioned when they offer much cheaper options. Is the difference in performance that great?
0 Votes
+ -
Yes
bjbrock 15th Apr 2009
AMD has nothing to compare to Intel's fastest offering. Not even close.
0 Votes
+ -
Yes
ChiperSoft 15th Apr 2009
AMD has had lackluster offerings for the past few years. Yes their
chips are cheaper, but they're also more power consuming, more heat
producing, and don't perform as well.

As for ATI, they suffered from several problems. The company has
been hurting for several years, which is why they merged with AMD in
the first place. They fell behind on driver updates, letting nvidia get a
lead on Vista and performance in general. ATI fell behind on SLI
technology, especially since so many Intel boards are now sporting NVIDIA savvy chipsets. Finally, ATI simply fell behind on raw
processing potential on their GPUs. NVIDIA was constantly putting out
better and better processors and ATI just couldn't keep up.

ATI has managed to get a few good cards out recently that rival the
GeForce line, but it's a constant struggle for them.
0 Votes
+ -
At least ATI chips aren't...
bjbrock 15th Apr 2009
burning up while using them. Nvidia's quality is down the toilet. Dell and other OEM's have had to spend millions cleaning up after Nvidia's GPU's that were burning up due to poor manufacturing processes.
0 Votes
+ -
AMD CPU Chipset = good power savings?
mikefarinha Updated - 15th Apr 2009
It's been a while since I paid attention to the hardware scene but last I heard AMD CPUs did consumer more power than Intel CPUs but when you combine AMD CPUs with AMD & ATI Chipsets the power consumption is equal to or better than Intel CPUs with Intel chipsets.

I dunno how intels new i7 setup compares to the new phenoms...
0 Votes
+ -
Misinformation...
pwn0tr0n 16th Apr 2009
Dude you have no idea of what you are talking about. ATI behind on SLi?

They have a competing technology, it's called CrossFire. ATI doesn't even do SLI.

Not only that xfire is better because it's software agnostic. For SLI to work the game has to be coded with SLI support. Crossfire is transparent to the game and Just Works(tm) with few exceptions.

As well historically nForce chipsets, which are required for SLI, have been the worst ever made with problems ranging from interrupt handling in multi CPU boards and workarounds that negate most of the performance benefit, etc.

nVidia blows. I've built 3 systems using nForce chipsets and to the last they were sucktastic.

I built my first ATI CrossFire system this year, because I was tired of getting burned with nForce chipsets,(quad core Phenom) and it freaking rocks.

I used to be an nVidia fanboi til I knew what was up.

Their driver quality kicks ass now because they opened their drivers.

You are going on 3 year old information.

Here's a hard OCP link that compares single nvidia and ati cards made by ASUS. The performance is just about identical and in some cases the ATI card is 10FPS better.

http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTYyNiwzLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==
0 Votes
+ -
You obviously haven't looked at Radeon HD48xx
Mitch 74 Updated - 17th Apr 2009
... which put the hurt on Nvidia so much they had to slash their prices to stay relevant.
Current RadeonHD 4890 is pretty much as powerful as the Geforce 260, but (and this is where it shines) Radeons scale almost LINEARLY in Crossfire mode - so, a pair of 4890 put the hurt on a single 285 while not costing much more.
0 Votes
+ -
Wow
Cylon Centurion 15th Apr 2009
You Linux spammers sure know how to convewrt users.


I'm so totally going to switch to *n*x now! happy
0 Votes
+ -
Great!!!
storm14k 15th Apr 2009
You'll enjoy yourself.
0 Votes
+ -
For the money
mjolnar@... 8th May 2009
AMD is a clear winner. The new 945 and 955s are much faster than others in the past. They will beat the 920 intel.

Another thing to keep in mind is that AMD runs 64 bit native, while the intel has to comvert to am64. That is why the AMD runs Windows 7 faster, at least in the 64 bit setup.
0 Votes
+ -
Wanted one that works
rparker009 16th Apr 2009
I have too much trouble with AMD processors. they seem to always have trouble with Adobe products when working on High end video editing.
0 Votes
+ -
HA!
Spiritusindomit@... 16th Apr 2009
AKH is probably the biggest AMD/ATI zealot I've ever read, thank you for making my day with that load of lolcopters.
0 Votes
+ -
I Concur
worldbfree4me 16th Apr 2009
Re:Intel/Nvidia vs Amd/ATi

But I think it all comes down to marketing and advertising, advertising dollars to be exact! While Ati is great in their own right they simply dont have the marketing muscle (dollars) like Intel to spread around to every mom and pop shop. This is why, you like me use them almost exclusively. Its like "David vs Goliath" the consumate underdog that keeps Intel/Nvdia honest in their pricing! If it were not for Ati, this core i7 kit would cost twice as much.
"The fear of losing pushes one relentlessly from behind"
0 Votes
+ -
If it weren't for AMD ...
I am Gorby 16th Apr 2009
We would still be using the "latest Intel CPU - The Pentium Pro 500 MHz" selling at $600. wink

This competition between Intel and AMD has produced outstanding processors from both manufacturers. Most of us have more computing power on our desktops (or laptops) than many 3rd world nations.

I actually think it is overkill for single user machines. Email and surfing the net do not require much processing power at all. Multi user machines and database servers do require more CPU power.

As an aside, ( and I think, flamebait) I'm amazed at the hardware requirements for Vista. Windows 7 is better, but we have been numbed by the big Vista requirements, and now think that the smaller Win 7 requirements are really nice and tidy.

But we all have these behemoth PCs with huge CPUs and Video Cards, so the OS writers make use of that power to supply us with more eye candy.
0 Votes
+ -
AMD Should Have It's Own Build Also
james800cc@... 16th Apr 2009
I agree with the person who stated that you really seem to be anti AMD and ATI. Remember, here in the real world of making a living, paying bills and hoping the bottom doesn't drop out, AMD and ATI have produced some incredible "bang for the buck" products. You seem to forget that the ATI HD 4870 X2 Graphics card with 2Gb of GDDR5 memory was speed champion most of 2008. Nvidia just keeps heating up it's GDDR3. I believe you should build and AMD AND an Intel system for comparison. Many of us can't afford a processor that costs as much as an AMD processor, ATI video card, and Corsair or Patriot memory (4Gb PC8500 1066Mhz). Give the up and coming AMD some air time.

0 Votes
+ -
Why Anti AMD ?
govmtman 9th May 2009
I agree that the origina article was mis -leading readers Inte is the Clear cut winning technology for a CPU. Dolar for dollar, the AMD more bang for the buck. Specing both technologies should be the the way to go for a balanced article.
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Building a
bigdooba 29th Apr 2010
On a machine like you're talking of building what do you think would give you a better viewing, one 28 to 30 inch monitor or two 24 inch monitors. I'm concerned with the effect of two monitors because of the black frame lines. This machine would be for mostly for fps games. Thanks

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix
Click Here
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix
ie8 fix