Midrange Gaming Machines

As mentioned on the previous page, the GPU market has been very dynamic as of late. We've seen new 600-series cards from NVIDIA and 7000-series cards from AMD, as well as price cuts on many models from both companies. The following three builds are aimed at three price brackets: $750, $1,000, and $1,250. As the builds increase in price, the GPUs and CPUs increase in capability and cost while we hold the rest of the components more or less constant.

$750 gaming computer

Intel's new Ivy Bridge-based Core i3-3220 offers better gaming performance compared to its Sandy Bridge-based Core i3-2120 predecessor, the king of low-midrange gaming CPUs. The i3-3220 offers about a 10% increase in performance across the board while using less power, compared to the i3-2120. AMD's Radeon HD 7850 graphics cards can now be found for around $200 after its recent price drop. That puts its cost slightly above the NVIDIA GTX 560 Ti (which can be found for just under $200). You can compare the Radeon HD 7850 and GTX 560 Ti in Bench. The two cards trade blows with many titles, but when AMD wins, it usually wins more handily than NVIDIA when NVIDIA wins. Furthermore, the Radeon HD 7850 pulls less power under load; most 7850s require only one PCIe 6-pin power connector while 560 Ti requires two. Thus, because the 7850 generally performs better while using less electricity, it gets our nod here. That said, the 560 Ti remains a good choice that's worth your attention (i.e. watch for sales).

Rounding out the rest of the build, we're recommending Crucial's M4 128GB SSD. Anand reviewed this model a while back and it remains a very good performer with a solid reputation for reliability. That said, larger gaming libraries will quickly eat up a 128GB SSD's capacity. Thus, you might need a higher-capacity HDD instead to stay under the $800 budget, and the 1TB Western Digital Black is an alternative to the SSD. Of course, if you want to go over budget, you could install both the SSD and HDD.

MSI's B75MA-E33 motherboard is a nicely-featured product with an attractive price tag; in my experiences thus far (a handful of builds) it is stable and reliable. It also ships with a BIOS that fully supports the newer i3-3220 out of the box.

Ivy Bridge supports DDR3-1600 natively, but you won't notice any real world differences between DDR3-1600 and DDR3-1333, so either speed is fine. Given that DDR3-1600 kits are typically only a few dollars more than DDR3-1333 kits, it doesn't really matter what you go with. We're putting together midrange builds here so we decided to spend a bit more for a kit of DDR3-1600 (about $4 more than this DDR3-1333). Most of the major brands are at parity, so just look for a good price and look at the CAS Latency and voltage--there's not much point in paying more for RAM that requires 1.65V and runs at CL 11, for example.

NZXT's Tempest 210 has become an AnandTech forum favorite: it offers a lot of bang for the buck and is a very high quality case given its price tag. Because the i3-3220 CPU and Radeon HD 7850 are relatively low power components, a lower-wattage, high-quality 80 Plus power supply is included in the build. The Antec Neo Eco 400C frequently goes on sale for $30 or less (sometimes not even with a rebate).

Component Product Price Rebate
Case NZXT Tempest 210 $55  
Power Supply Antec Neo Eco 400C $50  
CPU Intel Core i3-3220 $130  
Motherboard MSI B75MA-E33 $65  
Video Card Sapphire Radeon HD 7850 2GB OC $210 -$10
RAM Wintec One 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 $39  
SSD Crucial M4 128GB $110  
HDD Alternative Western Digital 1TB Black $90  
DVD Burner Lite-On IHAS324 $20  
Operating System Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit $91  
Cost with SSD: $770 $760
Cost with HDD: $750 $740

$1,000 gaming computer

While the less expensive system outlined above is a very capable low-midrange gaming computer, this $1,000 machine, in my opinion, really hits the sweet spot for gamers. The Core i5-3570K, like its Sandy Bridge-based Core i5-2500K predecessor, is the king of the gaming CPUs. Keep in mind as well that the 3570K is an unlocked CPU, so it can be easily overclocked. That said, we're not spending extra money on an aftermarket CPU cooler with this build because the 3570K overclocks well with its stock thermal solution (though more agressive overclockers will want to look for an aftermarket solution). To support the Core i5-3570K's overclocking capability, we're recommending a Z77 chipset-based motherboard, and Samsung's 8GB kit of DDR3-1600 listed in the build is a great kit of overclocking RAM.

Stepping up from the $800 gaming build also gets us a faster GPU: AMD's Radeon HD 7950 or NVIDIA's GTX 660 Ti. Both the Radeon HD 7950 and NVIDIA GTX 660 Ti are priced around $300. Bench illustrates how the 7950 and 660 Ti compare: very evenly. The AMD card wins some titles and the NVIDIA card wins others. They use very similar amounts of electricity. You'll want to do your research and weigh how important specific current game titles are to you before deciding which card to use. Here, we're recommending either one. You can compare the GTX 660 Ti to the above system's Radeon HD 7850 on Bench here and the Radeon HD 7950 to the Radeon HD 7850 on Bench here.

The Samsung 830 128GB SSD was reviewed on AnandTech and it performs very well (like the Crucial M4 128GB SSD), with a similarly stellar reputation for reliability. The same Antec Neo Eco 400C power supply is capable of powering both the more powerful CPU and GPU, though you'll need to upgrade this power supply if you intend to add another GPU down the line. As an alternative to the NZXT Tempest 210 we're highlighting the Fractal Design Core 3000. Like the Tempest 210, the Core 3000 offers great build quality for its price, excellent thermals to accommodate the higher-powered components, and sleek aesthetics. Compared to the Tempest 210, its only real drawback is its lack of front panel USB 3.0 support.

Component Product Price Rebate
Case Fractal Design Core 3000 $50  
Power Supply Antec Neo Eco 400C $50  
CPU Intel Core i5-3570K $230  
Motherboard Biostar TZ77B $100  
Video Card XFX Radeon HD 7950 Double D $320 -$30
Video Card alternate EVGA Superclocked GTX 660 Ti $300 -$10
RAM Samsung 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 $45  
SSD Samsung 830 128GB $100  
HDD Alternative Western Digital 1TB Black $90  
DVD Burner Lite-On IHAS324 $20  
Operating System Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit $91  
Cost with SSD: $1,006 $976
Cost with HDD: $996 $966

$1,250 gaming computer

The only major differences between the $1,000 gaming computer above and this $1,250 system are increased overclockability thanks to the aftermarket CPU cooler and a more powerful GPU. That said, as an alternative to the Crucial and Samsung SSDs noted in the above two builds, here we have an Intel 330 series 120GB SSD, which is reviewed here. Like the Crucial and Samsung SSDs, Intel's solid state drives have a great reputation for reliability. (Keep your eyes on their prices—if you catch one on sale, grab it.) The ASRock Z77 Pro4-M is another solid Z77 performer with an attractive price tag as an alternative to the Biostar board in the above build. Though the stock cooler that comes with the Core i5-3570K is capable of facilitating modest overclocks, the Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO will help you overclock more aggressively.

To accommodate the higher power draw of an overclocked Core i5-3570K and a more powerful video card, we're stepping up to the Antec Neo Eco 520C, a 520W model that like its less powerful sibling features solid quality at a relatively low price.

As for the more powerful video card, how about (arguably) the fastest single-chip GPU on the market? NVIDIA's GTX 680 was released back in March of this year, and accomplished what Ryan called the 'holy trifecta'—best performance with lower power consumption at a lower price than the previous GPU king. In response, AMD re-worked the Radeon HD 7970 into the "GHz Edition," which Ryan reviewed and compared to the GTX 680. Bench gives you a further idea of how the two cards compare. While the two top cards perform very similarly in games, we give the nod to the NVIDIA GTX 680 in this guide because it uses less power, is quieter, and cooler than the 7970GE. (Note that while the Radeon HD 7970 GHz Edition uses more power than the GTX 680, both can be run on the Antec Neo Eco 520C recommended.) You can also compare the GTX 680 to the Radeon HD 7950 in the $1,000 gaming system on Bench.

Component Product Price
Case Fractal Design Core 3000 $50
Power Supply Antec Neo Eco 520C $60
CPU Intel Core i5-3570K $230
CPU cooler Cooler Master Hyper 212 Evo $35
Motherboard ASRock Z77 Pro4-M $110
Video Card EVGA GTX 680 $480
RAM Samsung 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR3-1600 $45
SSD Intel 330 Series 120GB $103
HDD Alternative Western Digital 1TB Black $90
DVD Burner Lite-On IHAS324 $20
Operating System Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit $91
Cost with SSD: $1,224
Cost with HDD: $1,211


The three gaming computers detailed above represent three distinct segments of the gaming market: moderate (1080p on high without anti-aliasing), upper midrange (1080p high with 4xAA), and very high end (typically able to handle most titles at >60FPS at 1080p, and even 2560x1440/2560x1600). There is a substantial jump in both CPU and GPU capability going from the $750 to $1,000 build. The increase going from the $1,000 to $1,250 build is less pronounced and starts to show diminishing performance returns—though for some readers, bragging rights about owning a GTX 680 alone might warrant the extra money spent. Thus, of three builds above, the $1,000 system represents the best value for a midrange gaming desktop computer.

What if you don't play games, and are instead interested in productivity work? Check the next page for our workstation builds.

Developments in the Midrange Market Midrange Workstation
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • just4U - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link

    Nice post Jarred and overall I agree with it. Not sure on the math power draw wise.. but it does add up over time.
  • rscoot - Thursday, September 13, 2012 - link

    None of this disproves what I've said in any way though. They're slower CPUs at the price point being considered and they use more power to deliver that performance. That is why they aren't competitive.
  • antef - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link

    For the $1000 system is the GPU choice really that much of a toss-up? I'm having a hell of a time choosing between the 660 Ti and the 7950 myself. People in the forums seem to say the 7950 is faster but I'm not really seeing that from benches as this article suggests. However, the article also says the two are equal on power consumption and it seems that the 7950 actually consumes a fair bit more. Does the 7950 actually have better prospects over the next 2-3 years or can I go with the lower TDP of the 660 Ti?
  • just4U - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link

    It's hard to say... /w 3G of ram and room to play with performance via driver updates I'd say the 7950 is the better buy. But that's a personal opinion. I like the 660TI to but feel it should be sitting in the mid 200 range price wise. For me it was a toss up between the 670 (clearly supirior) or the 7950 which was cheaper. But since the the 7870 recently tanked in prices (I picked up a "HIS" 7870 GHZ ED. for $220 CAD) I just had to have it. Lower power consumption and heat then the 580 (which is no slouch!) and comparable performance. Love that.
  • just4U - Tuesday, September 11, 2012 - link

    As a side note. I've found that die-hard Nvidia fans (or ATi Fans) have a hard time going to the competitors GPU. They always look for faults and talk themselves into thinking it was a poor purchase. Other less biased see things as they are and jump back and forth all the time. Just depends on what suits their needs and price range.
  • crazyboy1 - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link

    seriously only 8GB of RAM? 16 GB RAM is not that expensive and would definitely help out in gaming! RAM is cheap these days getting 8GBX2 is not that much more expensive. if you wait for special deals on newegg, they get pretty cheap!
  • Streetwind - Thursday, September 13, 2012 - link

    How can 16 GB RAM help in gaming, when a single game is usually only able to address up to 2 GB by itself? That's the limit any 32bit software can grab for itself at the same time, regardless of how much the OS offers. And before games come as native 64bit applications, a few more years will go down the road. You probably won't see it until at least 90%-95% of all Windows users run on 64bit. Right now it's more like 50%.

    Playing a game works perfectly fine without RAM bottlenecks on 4 GB RAM. However, using 8 GB has additional advantages, such as caching more data which prevents slow HDD accesses, and allows multiboxing (many EVE players run several clients at once) or smooth video recording/streaming.

    However, 16 GB? I don't see a use case, as far as gaming goes, right now.

    You are correct, however, in stating that RAM is extremely affordable right now.
  • tigerslicer - Wednesday, September 12, 2012 - link

    Its funny, I came up with nearly identical CPU cooler and PSU recommendations just prior to this post. I published to me blog about an hour before your article. Great minds think alike? :P

  • jbaker8935 - Friday, September 21, 2012 - link

    i recently did a build with a coolermaster HAF 912 with and instant rebate & combo was less than the nzxt case . the coolermaster was much more enjoyable...

    it included an adapter for the samsung SSD. the nzxt does not... [mad now since my build is on hold until i can get one ]:

    i thought the overall drive mounting scheme using the slide in clips was better on the cooler master.
  • _complexmath_ - Friday, October 19, 2012 - link

    I picked up the ASRock Z77 Pro4-M board based on this buyer's guide and wasn't paying terribly close attention to the description on NewEgg when I got it. It turns out this is a Micro ATX board, and while it works just fine in a full ATX case, the board layout is pretty cramped. The HD Audio jack is directly underneath the only PCIE-3.0 slot on the board, for example, and putting a double width GPU in the PCIE-3.0 slot also covers the only PCIE-1.0 slot (the mini slot) on the board. Finally, a large aftermarket cooler overhangs one of the DIMM slots, so depending on the DIMMs purchased this slot may be unusable. In short, the board is great from a features perspective and I've managed to get everything plugged into it that I actually cared about using, but were I to do my build over I'd choose a full ATX board instead. I really don't think it's worth saving a few dollars to get this particular board when comparable full ATX boards are available.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now