Entry Level Buyer’s Guide, July 2005
by Jarred Walton on July 20, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Guides
Display and Speaker Recommendations
The display market - at least for budget displays - is really stagnating. New CRTs are basically non-existent and budget LCDs are hard to come by unless you want two-year-old technology (which is a long time in LCD terms). The 14 and 15 inch LCDs start at around $175 new, and with their fixed resolution of 1024x768, we'd prefer a 17" model. Here then are our recommendations.
Click to enlarge.
Price: $153 shipped (Retail)
With supplies of competing monitors now becoming scarce, the 793DF remains one of the few viable options for budget displays. The ivory model is available for $143, but we prefer the looks of the two-tone model shown above. If you like the plain white more, you can save that $10. The features are good overall, but we're sad to see the disappearance of quality aperture grille CRTs like the NEC FE771SB. Many people won't notice, but the tubes in the 793DF are still slightly curved. The ideal resolution for 17" CRTs is either 1024x768 at 85Hz refresh rate or 1152x864 with a 75Hz refresh rate. We prefer the slightly increased screen size of the latter, but some prefer a higher refresh rate. While it supports 1280x1024, the 60Hz refresh rate bothers many people, and we would stay away from it.
Click to enlarge.
Price: $210 shipped (Retail)
We're doing our best to incorporate a decent LCD into the budget recommendations, and the Polyview V17E manages to qualify, though we do have some reservations. The good aspects are that the response times are sufficient for most people (though we're not sure who makes the 14ms panel) and the display has a DVI input (as well as VGA should you go with a setup that lacks a DVI output). The manufacturer's replacement policy for dead pixels isn't the greatest, but at least it's clearly defined: 4 or more dark/bright pixels, 6 or more pixel defects, 2 or more sets of defective adjacent pixels, or 3 or more defective adjacent pixels, with "adjacent" meaning within a 1cm area. We've used quite a few LCDs, and pixel defects are becoming relatively uncommon, so hopefully you never need to worry about the warranty. A single bright pixel in the center of your display can be quite annoying, however, so be forewarned that there's a risk. The overall quality of the display in terms of contrast and colors is decent, though not the best, but that's to be expected of one of the cheapest 17" LCDs around.
If you want some other alternatives for an upgraded display, our top pick would be to spend around $300 on a 19" display. The Acer 1914SMD 8ms model performed very well when I used a couple in the past month, and both displays were free of pixel defects. Several other 19" LCDs are available in the $250 to $350 range, but we'd look for 16ms or lower response times and DVI input. Rebates on two models at Newegg even drop the price to under $250 for a 19" LCD, but we don't particularly care for mail-in rebates. The Dell FP1905FP is another good model that can often be found on sale, sometimes for under $300.
On the CRT side of things, you can still find the Samsung 997DF and it's a decent but not great CRT - it has similar issues to the 793DF, but at higher resolutions. We'd prefer the NEC FE991SB, but with availability declining and the price near that of 19" LCDs, you're better off with an LCD. Refurbished CRTs may be something else to consider, and with luck and perseverance, you can even find 21/22" models for under $200, some of which offer better specs than the current batch of large CRTs.
Click to enlarge.
Price: $71 shipped (Retail)
You'll see on the next page why we skipped the budget speaker selection. For our upgraded speakers, we're going with a higher quality 2.1 setup instead of the 5.1 configuration that we've recommended in the past. It's really a matter of preference to which you want. Gamers might want 5.1 audio while those who listen to MP3s or watch movies on their PC will generally prefer better quality 2.1 audio over cheap 5.1 setups. The X-530 is still a reasonable choice, and the speakers are actually cheaper than the Z-3 speakers that we list here.
Besides offering better tonality and response curves, the Z-3 is more convenient to set up than a 5.1 configuration - finding space for 5 speakers around your PC can be difficult for many people. The included volume control allows you to place the speakers further away from your monitor while keeping the controls close at hand, and a headphone port also allows you to tune out the rest of the world - or allow the rest of the house to sleep as the case may be. If you want to go with a less expensive setup yet still want decent sound, the Logitech X-230 can be had for around $37 - half as much as the Z-3e. We're not entirely clear on what the differences between the various Z-3 models are, so if you can find the Z-3 or Z-3i for less money than the Z-3e, we see no reason to get one over another. (Feel free to enlighten me if there's a good reason other than looks to buy one model over another.)
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
57 Comments
View All Comments
wilburpan - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Regarding Dell: before I read the comments I went over to the Dell website and looked over their current offerings. There are cost cutting measures on the part of Dell to bring the price down on their budget systems: PATA instead of SATA, questionable memory, lack of PCIe, their Celeron based systems come with a maximum of 512 MB RAM, and probaby a bunch more that I don't know about.About this buying guide: some of the recommendations take into account future upgradability. I'm not sure that this should be a real priority for a budget system. One thing that has been made clear to me over the past few years is that building a computer is an exercise in balancing all the components. As a result, once a computer gets very old, it is more cost effective to replace the whole thing rather than upgrading a component at a time. Being that this is a budget system, the lifetime of the components would be less than average, as these components have already been on the market for a while.
bob661 - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Jarred,In the article you mention that you can do 222 with the OCZ Gold at 2.8V but on OCZ's website it says 3.2V. Can you clarify this?
Zoomer - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
What about motherboards based on the RS482?They offer decent integrated graphics at a good price.
http://www.msi.com.tw/program/products/mainboard/m...
xsilver - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
#12gigabyte makes a fanless 6600GT
costs a few dollars more but if you need it
bupkus - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
I just built a system with an OEM 3000+ Venice for $115, Epox 9NPA+ Ultra for #105 and a Gigabyte X300 for about $70 and now I hear the X700 is the way to go for just a little more. I like to play Ut2004 and that's it. Hmm.. time to rma the X300 and get that X700 before it's too late.I'd consider the 6600GT but I dont' want noisy and I get that impression.
JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Bah - I caved and listed an optional PSU. I still feel like I keep repeating myself from Guide to Guide, but maybe you readers don't notice it as much? :)10 - PATA is going to be a bit slower and we don't really like the cables. The newer Intel motherboards often come with a single PATA connection (supporting two drives), making it a very poor choice for such motherboards. It *is* an option, but there's a reason PATA drives are getting large mail-in rebates. The same reason such drives often end up in OEM systems: the manufacturers are clearing out old inventory.
Anyway, I don't generally worry much about the mail-in rebate opportunities, as it's basically loaning a company your money at 0% interest for several months. If you can find a good rebate on an SATA drive, I'd prefer that personally, but PATA drives are still okay for some people.
Hacp - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
One question I had was why SATAII? Why not a 40 dollar 80GB PATA100 HD from circuit city or best buy after rebates? I know that those two stores are good for their rebates, and with the 15 dollars you save, you can defenetly upgrade the processor, which is a better bang for your buck in terms of performance.JarredWalton - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Regarding case and PSU: yes, I realize the PSU is suspect, and I always put better PSUs in computers I build. However, I've also used generic PSUs in budget PCs, and provided the systems aren't overloaded you rarely have problems. At full load, I would guess that the two budget setups will draw 150W or less. If you add in a second hard drive and a more powerful graphics card, you're asking for trouble, but as built they should be fine. Feel free to buy a Fotron Source, Antec, Enermax, etc. - I've suggested it many times and hopefully have made it clear that a nice PSU is never a bad idea.I've got some Dell systems that I use regularly that include Pentium 4 2.8 GHz processors and 1GB of RAM, and they're paired with a (generic) 200W PSU. If Dell thinks a 200W is sufficient for that setup, I'm comfortable with slightly better PSUs for these budget setups.
----------------
As for buying a Dell, that last comment of mine ought to give you something to think about. Dell/HP/etc. often take a good processor like a Pentium 520 and pair it with the cheapest remaining parts that they can find. You'll also get 256MB DIMMs, because no one else wants them these days - upgrading a Dell to 2x512 instead of 4x256 often costs as much as buying 2x512 on your own.
They're still okay, and you can often get a decent LCD with them as well. Upgrading them can often be a frustrating experience, and rarely do they make something an enthusiast would be happy with. If you're okay with that, they're decent systems. I'm not going to do buyers guides picking out OEM systems, though. ;-)
----------------
Finally, I wasn't aware that the low-end Semprons don't support Cool 'n Quiet, but it doesn't matter much to me. They're 90nm parts with 1/2 or 1/4 the L2 cache of the Venice core, so they should run relatively cool already.
I once calculated the cost of running a 60W lightbulb 24/7 for a year and it was only about $37 - 526 kWHrs at 7 cents per kWHr. Cool 'n Quiet on a Sempron isn't likely to save 60W, more like 20W, so the yearly savings would only be around $12. That's enough to upgrade to the next higher Sempron, of course, but if you're looking at the yearly costs it becomes easy to justify buying a much faster PC - at least for me.
Hacp - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
Why not buy a dell? Because Dell offers less performance, few overclocking features, a huge premium for upgrades(ram and dvd rewritable for example), and even crappier graphics than the integrated/turbocached stuff that anandtech is reccomending. Some of the choices are questionable in the article though. The power supply is a major concern.xsilver - Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - link
really #6?didnt know that!
wont it be benefitial to upgrade then as in the long run the cost of a lower power bill will make the cpu pay for itself?