Review: £600-£700 to spend on a PC base unit? MESH and ARBICO battle for top honours

by Tarinder Sandhu on 20 July 2009, 09:35 3.5

Tags: MESH MATRIX II 550BE, ARBICO OC 2695 XL, MESH Computers, Arbico

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qas26

Add to My Vault: x

Final thoughts and rating

There's significant performance to be had once a user is committed in spending more than £500 on a PC base unit. The two review systems, from MESH and ARBICO, are both cases in point, shipping with decent performance on all fronts.

Turning our attention to the £649 MESH, outfitted with a dual-core Phenom chip, 790GX motherboard, and Radeon HD 4890 1GB graphics, integration is good, starting off with the rather plush NZXT HUSH chassis. Given a similar budget we'd change a couple of items. We'd add in a quad-core AM3 chip and then make the necessary saving by dropping the graphics to a Radeon HD 4870 512MB card, which is some £60 cheaper than the HD 4890 specified here.

The rest of the specification is solid enough, so a change or two is all that's required for it to be considered as a serious option in the mid-range space.

ARBICO takes a different tack with its system, Priced a little higher than the MESH, at £699, and not shipping with input devices, the bulk of the money has been spent on the CPU and graphics. Intel's Q9550 chip is overclocked to 3.4GHz, helped by a decent Scythe Katana cooler, and gaming thrills are provided by an ASUS GeForce GTX 260.

Placing a great emphasis on two components is telling elsewhere. The chassis isn't as nice as the MESH's, integration and build a little unruly, and the motherboard precludes the option of adding a second video card at a later date. Performance is excellent at this price-point, especially the CPU's, making a good system for users not planning on upgrading the machine in, say, a year's time.

Building systems to a certain budget is always a case of balancing what goes where. MESH's Matrix II XGS550BE provides better futureproofing of the two at the cost of present performance. The ARBICO OC2695 XL is a faster out-of-the-box solution that's comparatively limited in upgrade potential.

Bottom line: two good systems that offer decent all-round performance. The ARBICO OC2695 XL is the faster machine, no doubt, but the MESH's Matrix II 550BE, based on the AM3 form-factor, will provide greater longevity, we feel. Neither is perfect, sure, but both have merits in different facets

HEXUS Rating

We consider any product score above '50%' as a safe buy. The higher the score, the higher the recommendation from HEXUS to buy. Simple, straightforward buying advice.

The rating is given in relation to the category the component competes in, therefore the systems are evaluated with respect to our 'mid-range' criteria.

70%
MESH Matrix II XGS550BE

72%
ARBICO OC2695 XL

HEXUS Awards

70%
MESH Matrix II XGS550BE

72%
ARBICO OC2695 XL


HEXUS Where2Buy

The ARBICO OC2695 XL is available for £699, including VAT, by following this link.

The MESH link will be provided as soon as it's made avaiable.

HEXUS Right2Reply

Farooq Ahmed, director of operations for ARBICO, submitted the following HEXUS Right2Reply:
Having taken on board your comments, we have decided to upgrade the motherboard in this PC to the Gigabyte GA-EP43-DS3 motherboard which has a slot for a second 16x PCI-Express graphics card and also provides firewire ports on the back of the PC for no extra cost. Also the cabling and wiring in our PCs is normally done more neatly but for the review PC the normal pre-shipment check was not carried out.

The PC will be supplied with a choice of the NVIDIA GTX 260 896MB or the ATI HD 4870 1GB graphics cards


HEXUS Forums :: 13 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Your gaming tests seem very heavily weighed towards nVidia cards - you pick a rare openGL-based game and also use the 3dmark Vantage test which nVidia cards ‘cheat’ on by using the full GPU to aid the CPU score (an unrealistic scenario given that while playing games you'd expect the GPU to be spending some time actually drawing things).

I'd be interested to see either the graphics score on its own from the Vantage test, or prevention of this ‘cheat’ by disabling hardware physX acceleration.
I'd expect an i7 system for £700.
Terbinator
I'd expect an i7 system for £700.

I doubt it, i7 920's are still £200+, and the lowest priced mobo is still about £150 - so if you add in all the essentials (including the OS), it'd still cost more.

920 ~ £210
X58 Mobo ~ £150
6GB DDR 3 ~ £80
Vista Home Basic (64bit) ~ £65
GTX 260 ~ £110
500GB HDD ~ £40
Optical Disk (DVD-RW) ~ £20
Case (Antec 300) ~ £46
600W PSU (Corsair 650W)~ £70

= £791, or about £800

You could go cheaper with some components, but to be honest I doubt think you could chop an extra £100 no matter how cheap you go.
As you said you could go cheaper, but even so when you factor in the £50-100 difference give or take the i7 is a lot more bang for the buck.
kalniel
Your gaming tests seem very heavily weighed towards nVidia cards - you pick a rare openGL-based game and also use the 3dmark Vantage test which nVidia cards ‘cheat’ on by using the full GPU to aid the CPU score (an unrealistic scenario given that while playing games you'd expect the GPU to be spending some time actually drawing things).

I'd be interested to see either the graphics score on its own from the Vantage test, or prevention of this ‘cheat’ by disabling hardware physX acceleration.

Vantage is Direct3D so we've added an OGL title to balance things up. Historically, results from ET:QW have tallied up well with the HEXUS.bang4buck. CoH, for example, gives NVIDIA a much higher comparative score.

The complete test is used so that Joe Average can get quick idea on their own comparative performance, but we'll publish the GPU score in subsequent reviews. I'll add them to this one too.