Wow. It took me a week for the second part. Oh well. Moving on...
Of note in the table from the previous part are the costs of the two computers. My work PC costs around 20% more than my home PC. That makes sense since it is justifiable for a machine that’s meant to generate income to be more expensive than one meant for entertainment. (The latter actually results in more cost but the income from the former offsets that. Besides, we work to have fun afterwards. Haha. Anyways...)
Removing the software cost as those don’t really have a performance impact, it makes less sense now. It went from a difference of PHP 12,000 to only PHP 4,000. With only that difference between the cost of productivity and the cost of entertainment, the home/play PC begins to seem a bit overpriced. The work PC on the other hand, even with the higher cost, becomes of better value. This is where subjectivity comes in.
| | Work PC | Home PC |
| Intel Core i7 (LGA 1155) | Intel Core i5 (LGA 1155) | |
| Total Cost | PHP 81,000 | PHP 69,000 |
| HW only | PHP 66,000 | PHP 62,000 |
Value Workstation
The work PC was specified to reduce cost on parts that didn’t need to be extreme and maintained the high end parts that maximized the productivity potential. This was done within the chosen platform. Remember, despite the i7 moniker, this is still a mainstream LGA 1155 platform. An ideal workstation would have a workstation-class Xeon or Opteron processor. A really high end consumer-class PC would employ Intel’s much more expensive LGA 1366 Core i7 on an X58 platform. I do not have first-hand experience using those kinds of system so I really can’t say much about their performance for their price.
How can I say that my work PC is of good value? For one, it doesn’t get in the way of work getting done. When I work with it, I don’t feel that it’s underpowered for what I have to normally do. It’s also as good as I need it to be, that any more resources spent on higher specs would have been a waste and should have just been added to my bonus instead. I think that’s what happened.
Priced Entertainment
The home PC was specified to consume a set budget and maximize potential within that budget. This allowed for very capable upper-midrange parts. It was also not meant for full HD gaming given the initial preference for a smaller, HD+ monitor. A budget gaming build would have had an i3 or a Phenom II and less flashy cooling (case, CPU, RAM). That would probably have been less future-proof and look a bit more boring inside and out.
I’ve reassured myself that I wouldn’t have gotten better performance at a lower cost, nor do I feel that I should have spent more and find that spending worth it. Also, more than performance, my home PC fits my aesthetic preferences. Like the work PC, it serves the purpose—to entertain. At the same time, it doesn’t feel like an overpowered facebook machine. In the same way, it’s not too powerful to get me addicted to gaming that it would prevent me from having an actual life.
Goldilocks
I think those two are goldilocks machines. I’m happy with the work PC for work and the home PC for play. They are both just right and being that way even after 2 years mean something good.
Component Comparison
Allow me examine the differences by component on the upcoming parts to this article. I’ll start with the CPU, Motherboard, and RAM (Part 3). Following that would be about the graphics card, drives, and the rest of the internal components (Part 4). Next I’ll tackle the common and different peripherals (Part 5). The last part on the components would be for the monitor, Windows, and MS Office (Part 6). This will turn out to be a 7-part article including a recap and conclusion just to close the story properly. I guess I’ll be blogging about more current stuff in between.
No comments:
Post a Comment