In the end, all this hardware amounts to one hell of a fast machine. And not just in theory—as in, next year when such and such comes out, this rig’s power will be evident (although we do admit that some software optimizations will be needed).
In the here and now, we routinely saw performance benefits with many of today’s applications.
For comparison, we put Dream Machine against our standard zero-point 2.67GHz Core 2 Quad Q6700, GeForce 8800 GTX box—and DM pretty much flattened it with double- and triple-digit spreads. While a sub-3GHz quad-core box might sound quaint today, we’ll remind you that our zero-point PC actually gave a new 3.5GHz Core 2 Duo gaming PC that we reviewed in August a pretty good drubbing. So it’s not exactly a slouch.
Still, perhaps that machine’s not the most telling measure of the Dream Machine’s fury. For a more worthy contender, we turned to the CyberPower Gamer Ultimate SLI Quad PC that we reviewed in July. With its 4GHz Core 2 Extreme QX9770 CPU, 4GB of DDR3, and a pair of GeForce 9800 GX2 cards, the system rocked all those that came before it and we knew this mean machine would be difficult to overcome.
But DM did it. At least in some tests. We saw Dream Machine rip past the CyberPower box in both Premiere Pro CS3 and ProShow Producer by 23 and 36 percent, respectively. That’s nothing to turn your nose up at. In other tests, Dream Machine did well, but not spectacularly. In Photoshop CS3— not exactly the most threaded application in the world—Dream Machine scored a near tie with CyberPower, taking just two more seconds to complete our test. Since Photoshop doesn’t exploit our second proc, and honestly, barely pushes a single quad-core CPU to the edge, this is about what we’d expect from PCs that operate at the same clock speed.
In our MainConcept benchmark, DreamMachine was about 10 percent slower. Why? The encoder that’s used in MainConcept Reference is license-limited to single-processor support. Multi-processor support is available only with the professional version, which on the Dream Machine cut the encode time in half, by the way.
In our Unreal Tournament 3 Direct X 10 benchmark, DM’s pair of Radeons didn’t disappoint, cranking out 145 fps. Mind you, our normal benchmarks are designed to measure system-level performance. They’re not meant for pure GPU analysis—thus, we don’t run with antialiasing or massive amounts of filtering enabled. Still, we saw almost double the numbers that a pair of GeForce 8800 GTX cards could produce and 12 percent more than quad SLI cards mustered. With AA and aniso cranked up, the Radeons really start to strut their stuff. When we were still deciding what cards to use in DM, we also ran a GeForce GTX 280 in 3DMark Vantage. A single GTX 280 belts out 9,668 in the GPU tests—very impressive. But not as impressive as the 19,014 that our two Radeons put out. For all you 3D Vantage fans, Dream Machine’s overall score was 20,539. Not bad.
Of course, this leads us to our most heartbreaking test: Crytek’s Crysis. We expected the Radeons to crush everything in this one benchmark, but they just didn’t perform. Why? First, as we mentioned earlier, our system benchmarks are designed to reflect normal system use, not act as GPU tests—AA is not enabled nor is tons of filtering. However, we do run at an all-out 1920x1200 resolution. That’s enough to make most systems whimper. While CyberPower’s Quad SLI rig spit out 55 fps, DM was chugging along at 26 fps—about the same performance we got from two GeForce 8800 GTX cards. What the frak? We got ATI on the horn and learned that the likely culprits were driver and OS optimizations—or rather, lack thereof. ATI didn’t expect to make the cards public for several more months. The company has done some optimization for the X48 chipset, but Skulltrail’s 5400 chipset wasn’t on the top of the list. The company is still sorting out some issues with how Windows Vista handles ATI’s AFR rendering. So this is what we’re talking about when we say future performance will come through improved drivers.
But what choice did we have? We sure as hell weren’t going to participate in this silly battle between the CPU and GPU camps. As true believers in pure PC power, we weren’t going to betray that mission statement in our 10th anniversary issue—thus, this machine marks our commitment to having it all.
| Zero Point | Dream Machine 2008 | |
|---|---|---|
| Premiere Pro CS3 | 1,260 sec | 547 sec |
| Photoshop CS3 | 150 sec | 80 sec |
| ProShow | 1,415 sec | 577 sec |
| MainConcept | 1,872 sec | 1,353 sec |
| Crysis | 26 fps | 26 fps |
| Unreal Tournament 3 | 83 fps | 145 fps |
Comments are closed on this article
hath80
October 08, 2011 at 5:58am
The most obvious evidence of this is the ongoing war between Intel and Nvidia. Both companies try to downplay the tension, but this war of words, drivers, and marketing puts hardware enthusiasts in a pickle. burn mp4 to dvd, dvd creator
johnsons0597
September 24, 2008 at 9:07pm
If you are looking at pushing the edge, how can this year's dream machine be it? instead of a harddrive, you should've looked at www.fusionio.com Their IOdrive in 80,GB, 160GB and 320GB gives near RAM performance for non-volitile storage without the limitations on typical solid state drives. My SysAdmins are evaluating this product. So far, nothing can hold a candle to it.
just wondering...
Reaper351
September 23, 2008 at 4:30pm
<hr/>
first page here
Well, here we are again. The Dream Machine gets
pwned once more. By Digital Storm's Bench Mark Crusher, an off the shelf computer for half
the price. A simple quad core with the lowly NVIDIA video cards. Admit
it, you dropped the ball on the Dream Machine this year. I know you are
gonna say - well we STILL don't have the updated drivers for the video
cards (That's like saying: I have this Formula 1 Ferrari that's suppose
to run on race fuel, but all we have is diesel fuel for this test) ,
Crysis isn't a good game (you chose it as a bench mark) and the Digital
Storm didn't win EVERYTHING (It won 3 out of 6), but the point was to
build a machine that was second to none in ANY category. I don't know
about you, but if I'm gonna dream, I'm gonna make sure nothing even
comes close. Maybe next year you guys can let Digital Storm and
CyberPower build the next Dream Machine. It appears these guys can
dream just as good as you, but for half the price.>
rjcouture1
September 12, 2008 at 7:16am
Okay, I know the dave left but he had said earlier monday of that week before he left he was going to retube the dream machine to prove or disprove that it doesn't effect performance it's coming up on the second week is this something I'll read about in the magazine or has anybody even done it. Iknow you have more to worry about than this silly question but with conflicting veiws from you and d-tek I'd like to know.Is there any measusable temp difference and if so how much. also as a side note do you use the quad insert or do you feel there just a gimmick.
TheMurph
September 26, 2008 at 1:22am
Sorry! Didn't have time to tackle this before I left. And in my absence, I don't think any other editor wants to fuss around with water cooling tubes. This question will have to remain unanswered... for now. Perhaps I'll get to revisit it sometime in the future.
rjcouture1
September 26, 2008 at 5:28pm
I know I seem like a hound for answers.
I hope at some point they can test this on any system to see if there is or isn't a difference as I think it poses some interesting questions into why they mark there blocks in/out.
such as
Does it impede flow?
When filling does it introduce a longer air removal time?
Is there any effect on tempurature?
What happens if someone uses the quad mid-block insert and misinstalls?
these are some of the questions that come to mind.
So thank you for your reply and I hope at somepoint someone can answer these questions.
mojosico
September 07, 2008 at 5:08pm
hey i was thinking that you guys dont use the DM for regular test right? so i think it would be cool if you guys could find it in your hearts to give mojo the DM 08 . oh and for the desktop theme it could be a pic of norm chan licking the DM 08 . NOW THAT WOULD BE KICK ASS . In a totally straight way of course . has anyone noticed all the gay undertones lately on the podcast and on the web site ? im not saying anything , but it is a little strange . oh yeah DM 08 + my house =totally frickin awsome times at mojo's house . ON MY GRAVE STONE I WOULD READ . IN 2008 MAXIMUM PC TOTALY KICKED MY ASS!! WITH THE DREAM MACHINE 2008. or here lies mojo mad at the world cause maximum pc dissed mojo and did not give him the dream machine 2008. you have the choice in your hands .
MOJOSICO
sirphunkee
September 07, 2008 at 5:54pm
Mojo,
That noise you just heard was the needle skipping across the vinyl as the music suddenly stopped and everybody turned to stare at you
scurvy
September 02, 2008 at 10:25am
Guru 3D made the ultimate Dream Machine. See how it runs.
http://www.guru3d.com/article/geforce-gtx-280-sli-triple-review-test/10
n0t_a_n000b
September 02, 2008 at 9:02am
Look, I know the dream machine sucked on Crysis and all, but can you guys re-benchmark it on the games? Please? I want to know how it compares to dual or tri SLI (280 GTX), or just how but kicking it is.
N0t a n00b
Stephenh1984
September 01, 2008 at 11:03am
i would have used an asus striker II extreme motherboard and three 280gtx's
and why didn't you liquid cool the grapics cards
EthicSlave
September 01, 2008 at 5:09pm
I think they thought it best not to try and overclock/fry their beta pre-release version ATI cards. This is what liquid cooling is best used for, is it not? Although I'm no MPC staff so best to wait and see what an "official team member" says.
As for the asus striker II extreme... this would leave how many processing cores? 4?
EthicSlave
September 05, 2008 at 9:27pm
I can't think of any uses but 2 for triple sli gtx 280's.
One is support for future games (hmm sounds like 8 cores would do this), and second run crysis respectively @ high res with everthing turned on (which requires a powerful cpu to begin with or you run into problems with the graphics pushing more than the cpu can handle and u have framerate losses similar to just having a dual sli setup). So spend that $ wisely.
Stephenh1984
September 09, 2008 at 5:30pm
their is a review on newegg of the cpu they used, where they cooled with dry ice and overclocked it to 9.4Ghz and he could run on very high with 350 fps, so you could always do that and still get you 280s. also why are the 200 series not supported with skulltrail, which sucks
n0t_a_n00b2
December 21, 2008 at 8:49am
I saw that review! The only thing was the guy said his dry ice melted and his CPU got, you know, toasted like a spaceship on Venus.
ghot
August 31, 2008 at 11:22pm
Dream machine 2008 is no doubt a nice rig.....but $17,000 for a rig that can't beat your Q6xx zero point rig in Crysis is just plain sad. The people who buy high end ethusiast rigs are "generally" gamers.....26fps is Crysis....something is wrong there folks. It IS pretty though :) I run a AMD 5000+ OC'd to 3.2Ghz, with a SINGLE GTX 280 and I can get better Crysis frame rates than that....even on high settings.
pseizure2000
September 02, 2008 at 5:28am
well, like they said, they were using a card before it was even released so the drivers hadn't been optimized for crysis at that point. That said, with driver updates the scores are probably much higher now.
Devo85x
August 30, 2008 at 8:30am
Those are nice benchmarks but i rly want to see a dream machine with gaming in mind... PLZ GIVE US A MACHINE WITH GOOD GAMING FRAMERATES!!!
AlaskaDrew
August 30, 2008 at 5:09am
DM 2008 is a nice but I would have done it a little different. If you want 600 Gigs of fast storage I think five 120 Gig SSDs would have been a better choice. Also, I would have used one OC'd 9770 and three OC'd Water cooled GTX 280's in SLI. Isn't it best to use faster unbufferd ram if your not using it in a server? Wouldn't 8 gigs of the fastest current DDR 3 be better? At least then you could use the ram in your next upgrade if you want. I am no expert but I think if your going to blow that much on a case you should have the fastest possible hardware configuration witch I don't think DM08 is. Give me an ultra fast computer in a big roomy case painted with a few economy sized cans of black spray paint. Of couse MY dream is speed not being crash proof and good looking. This is all IMHO as I am not an expert.
rjcouture1
August 28, 2008 at 11:11pm
Anybody that has the magazine look at the page with the machine guts trace the watercooling lines, see anything wrong ? look up d-tek fuzion v2 block , how bout now? either the pumps being fed hot water a pump no no or the tubings installed wrong.I believe the wrong picture got put in the mag but still I mean I didn't realize it myself at first quick read through the first time.
TheMurph
August 29, 2008 at 10:46am
Spoiler: it doesn't matter which connector of the waterblock you attach to.
Our loop is thus: Pump > CPU #1 > CPU #2 > Radiator > Reservoir > Pump
rjcouture1
August 29, 2008 at 4:22pm
Then why do they stamp in / out on the top peace why do the have the inside copper base designed the way they do? I looked up these blocks on several review sites looking for a good cpu block the explained why the pins are in the center or installing the optional quad core insert which goes in the center it hits the center to get turbulance and get the most heat tranfered to the coolant the side fins reduce that turbulance to almost nil on exit,which is why I got the fluid XP+ vortex clone similar design where your flow asumption wouldn't matter is a themaltake acrylic top waterblock thats just a wavy line.I mean you guys are the first to complain about another cases detailed insides well I see a problem installing that paticular water block like that your reducing it's performance in cooling maybe not a great deal there's no way to make a comparison you don't give your idle or load temps for the system and there are no other sites that I know of that built the same rig the way I see it should have done.
Took a little while but heres a clip strait from there instruction manual Spoiler does matter
When setting up your cooling system and running the tubing, ensure that your setup allows the water flow to enter the block from the barb marked “In” on the top of the FuZion block otherwise you will see degraded cooling performance.
TheMurph
August 30, 2008 at 12:03am
Look at a picture of the inside of the waterblock:
http://images.bit-tech.net/content_images/2008/05/dtek-fuzion-2-waterblock/dtek-10.jpg
You are going to find a very similar amount of turbulence whether you splash the water directly over the center or slightly off to the side. And even if I'm completely wrong, you'd be talking about a minor, if not imperceptible difference in temperature. Our fast-flowing coolant is going to hit all parts of that waterblock's internals whether it's directly over the top or otherwise.
rjcouture1
August 30, 2008 at 8:40am
I'm no Scientist but when something hits basicly a wall "center insert" you've effected flow does the same happen with air sure it does,on the same note when you write a review do you do it with a typewriter and then scan it to a computer no because it effects your flow to get it done as quick as possible.
Now take yourself away from the DM08 project say that the case came in for review your telling me you would not ding that case points for the way the water cooling was set up,I for one have read over the years how thorough you guys are on dell,cyberpower,polywell,and on.
And last I e-mailed D-tek heck the dog would and heres part of what they said, "just got done examining how they hooked it up and you are 100% correct that it is wrong. I never even noticed :)
There would be a substantial performance difference not running it in the correct flow orientation." Woof.
TheMurph
August 31, 2008 at 10:36pm
I will be happy to retube the Dream Machine over the next week to show the ultimate difference (or lack thereof) of the connections. I think this presents an interesting question, given the length our discussions have taken.
rjcouture1
September 08, 2008 at 8:47pm
I don't mean to be a bother but it is my belief that I was told something to shut me up.
I know that you have a publication to run but to be told something the beginning of last week by Mr. Murphy knowing he was not going to be there by the end of the week is just poor I waited the whole week for something that could be worked on in a few hours knowing the busy schedule maximumpc has I did not expect results till the end of the week.
I would respect the results given,I must also say I have posted my thoughts on a website on this subject and these people are interested to know also your results maybe these people don't read your magizine,maybe they do all I know is there is an interest for them to know if it makes a difference.
I'm also assume you don't use the seperate d-tek v2 fusion quad core mid chamber.
chronium
August 28, 2008 at 12:24pm
I was curious as to the reason why they didn't include a SSD in the specs?
EthicSlave
August 29, 2008 at 7:46pm
I too was curious as to why there wasn't an SSD included in this rig.
I have mailed one of the staff with a viable solution to this PROBLEM, and I am still awaiting a response so until then. I will just have to say that I beleive they think the RAID 0 velociraptors provide more than viable bandwidth and load times for current apps and games, and I think that they also beleive there is mere margin to hard drive performance and overall PC performance. However I would disagree, the near instant load/seek times a SSD can deliver, massive burst rates and sustained read/writes make them a POPULAR choice for something like a DREAM MACHINE!!! So I will null my comment that the TEAM doesnt think this would improve performance and state that the small size of these drives make them an uneasy choice for todays computing. I mean c'mon what are they gonna do install the OS and maybe 1 game on an SSD and use 2 velociraptors as the storage medium? That would make the massive 1TB and 1.5TB drive an obsolete choice for storage, and furthermore using 2 velociraptors or a RAID 5 setup with 3 of these drives just sound silly when they are going to be used just for storage. When cleary these drives are opted for gaming and power users!
TheMurph
August 30, 2008 at 12:05am
SSD drive are only speedy on read operations. Their write operations, especially sustained writes, lag far behind those of a common velociraptor drive, let alone a Velociraptor RAID. I'll post the numbers Tuesday.
EthicSlave
August 31, 2008 at 3:34am
I think you may have to retract your statement. In all the benchmarks that I have reveiwed 2 well known DIY SSD's almost always saturate their sata and sata ii configurations for read/write and burst speeds. Perhaps we have researched/tested different SSD's. Maximum PC itself has reviewed 2 of these drives. The hyperdrive and the I-RAM. There are sata ii versions of these drives and when u channel 4 of these drives into 4 ports on a controller like the Adaptec RAID 5405 it will come close to saturating the 8x PCI-E 1.2GB/s with sata-ii 300MB/s at saturation into 4 ports down a 1.2GB/s pipeline. I still dont see how a velociraptor comes close to this when it can sustain a read/write that saturates each port. There's even a newer 5.25" proprietary version of the I-RAM that does not require a PCI slot. I'm thinking the SSD's you may be thinking of are FLASH memory SSD's. Which I beleive to be far inferior with exception of a few GB in size on some of these flash ssd drives.
TheMurph
August 31, 2008 at 10:37pm
Wait for the November issue -- we show this write speed lapse quite clearly in our mega-roundup of seven current SSDs.
EthicSlave
September 01, 2008 at 12:22am
Hey isn't that a spoiler... SPOILER alert!
I sure hope theres a NON-volatile SSD reviewed!!! Preferably with SATA 3.0GB/s
~once again keep up the good work. :) ~mOo~
dc10ten
August 28, 2008 at 9:14am
Could you guys get back with us on how the cards perform W/optimizations?
Keith E. Whisman
August 27, 2008 at 10:11pm
Say how does this machine measure up to last years Dream Machine? I mean the Bench Marks. I think last year you guys used to quad core amd opterons.
Great build.
chaos.13037
August 27, 2008 at 8:35pm
I think they did it because 64 XP lacks driver support that 32 XP has. I think Will said it a couple of times on the podcast.
ferds7
August 28, 2008 at 5:00am
I see. Thanks for the reply. I'll have to go find that podcast. Maybe it will answer the many other questionable choices they made for me. Thanks again.
chaos.13037
August 28, 2008 at 2:20pm
Your welcome, although, I can't remember which podcast it was. I think he said it while answering a reader question if that helps.
ferds7
August 28, 2008 at 7:32pm
Hmm.. on the newest one it appears they were just talking about Vista 64 bit I think but I can see how XP 64 bit would have lots of driver issues.
Thanks again.
n0t_a_n000b
September 02, 2008 at 9:09am
Your right, the Dream Machine sucks - when compared to the IBM Roadrunner. Otherwise, it has 4360 gigaflops of power. Sure the roadrunner has 1 000 000 gigaflops, but it cost waaaaaaay more and isn't half as sexy. Oh, and your gona have to win the lottery to even house the beast. (12 000 square feet)
N0t a n00b
Wildebeast
August 27, 2008 at 12:45pm
It's good to see what's a step or three beyond the best of the best, come together.
What's the deal with the 2.1 sound though? Seems a bit like saying "let's just go with the on-board audio," in the middle of a $16,000+ build...
I know ---these speakers better than individual pairs used in bigger sets. But, it does make it sound like all your talking about EAX support and "PC gaming is not dead," were less than completely serious.
I don't think think PC gaming is dead/dying.
I do think MS decided to push hardware innovation because gaming software was not pushing any... and now anything innovative in software is low budget, across all platforms, doesn't get made at all, or requires massive power hardware.
[I do so love my 5.1 sound...]
sirphunkee
August 27, 2008 at 10:57am
Well the lesson I get from this article is that a pair of 4870 x2's, 2 of intel's fastest current quad cores, and 8GB ram won't run crysis any faster than a pair of 8800 gtx's, one q6700 and 2GB ram. Talk about diminishing returns..
dedgar
August 27, 2008 at 11:22am
But what you DIDN'T learn sifphunkee, is that the supplied drivers were pre-beta. Wait until they are optimized for those cards and I would bet there is a significant gain.
sirphunkee
August 27, 2008 at 1:04pm
I was aware of that...but when UT3 almost doubles it's fps, and crysis doesn't budge by a single frame, something's fishy. Even with pre-release drivers they should be posting better scores than the 0-point rig.
joeyjr
August 27, 2008 at 10:08am
joeyjr
Great job you guys!!!
You are masters in the art of PC building!!!
I feel your pain over the hardware wars and wish eveybody would just get along. Every year I try to guess what parts will be put into the DM and I did pretty good this year, but I was still blown away. Now, I can't wait untill next year. LOL
Thanks!!!
Talcum X
August 27, 2008 at 9:29am
Waited with baded breath for that issue to come out to see all the goodies and the numbers. Even available to us MPC readers, I wont buy a case for $1K, as cool as it looks. I'm dreaming today of just being able to rebuild my current rig of 4 years.
***********
Every morning is the dawn of a new error.
Haipyng
August 27, 2008 at 8:46am
It is certainly a Dream Machine! The chrome plating is reminicent of the old Cylon Centurion, or "Toasters". Too much bling for my tastes. I don't know whether to frag it or lick it ala Norm.
I would love to see another feature article comparing this year's Dream Machine to last year's. It would really give us a feel for what has changed technology wise. Maybe even another one with a round up of all Dream Machines past.
Thanks for the great article!
Print
