Intel Core i7-equipped Falcon Northwest Mach V gaming desktop hands-on

Benchmarks and reviews of Intel's Core i7 processors are pouring in, and while mere mortals must wait till later this month to get their hands on the hardware, we spent much of our weekend working overtime with Crysis, Fallout 3, and Age of Conan on an $8,238 Core i7 965-equipped Mach V gaming desktop from boutique PC manufacturer Falcon Northwest. It's got the works and then some: liquid cooling, dual ATI Radeon 4870X2 graphics cards with 2GB of RAM on-board, 12 GB of DDR3 RAM, Blu-ray, HD-DVD (yes, you read that right), and over a terabyte of storage. Based on our dozen or so hours of grueling, utterly boring hands-on tests, all three games were plenty playable maxed out at 1920 x 1080 resolution with 4x anti-aliasing -- only Crysis ever dipped below 40 frames per second, and we never saw Fallout 3 under 60. We sincerely hope you appreciate the backbreaking, soulcrushingly hard work we do for you -- more photos and benchmarks (including Crysis) in the gallery.

Gallery: Intel Core i7-equipped Falcon Northwest Mach V gaming desktop hands-on

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

[Sean Hill @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:23PM]

That's a lot of RAM...

[balls @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:46PM]

Yeah no doubt. 12 GB ram?

[Vander @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:48PM]

Large Intel Collider!

[Frankenstein Black @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:52PM]

Such awesome power hidden under such a typical, square, cliched PC case. Why aren't case designs keeping up? No one would care if a Hugo had 1000 horse power! At least these guys are trying "something new'ish"
http://www.engadget.com/2008/10/02/acer-aspire-predator-gaming-pc-and-matching-g24-lcd-now-on-sale/

[cesium @ Nov 3rd 2008 9:02PM]

I'd take the silverstone case the FNW computer is in any day over that ugly POS acer

[Valicore @ Nov 3rd 2008 10:32PM]

May seem like a lot, but I remember I was in a computer shop with my parents when I was around 5 or so, and some old man computer builder was like "There are some people who get as much as 16mb of RAM, but that's only useful for the most intense gaming systems and games, and even then it's overkill."

and then there's this famous blooper:

"640 K [of ram] ought to be enough for anybody."
-- Bill Gates, 1981

As for the case being typical, square, cliched case:

While it is square (well, a rectangle, but a rectangle is just a type of square, right?? Actually wouldn't it be a box?), I certainly don't think it's typical or cliched. I, who in general don't give a rats ass about a computer's case, have to admit that thing is pretty beautiful, and if not ground breaking design wise, it is pretty hot. While I agree that it's cool the Acer people tried a new design idea, that doesn't change the fact that it looks like a stylized industrial trashcan from "The Fifth Element".

[E71 @ Nov 3rd 2008 11:30PM]

Hooray... we're effectively taking up 3 slots per graphics card now. Soon, we'll have to plug the CPU and memory modules OUTSIDE the machine to make room for these inefficiently designed cards.

[erm87 @ Nov 4th 2008 12:48AM]

@ Valicore

A square is a type of rectangle :p

[Razor @ Nov 4th 2008 1:18AM]

Valicore, Bill gates never said that.

You dumb shit.

[Vik @ Nov 4th 2008 1:42AM]

Nah, its just enough RAM. Keep in mind, this computer should even be able to run Vista! NO WAI!

[Marcus @ Nov 4th 2008 6:15AM]

Why that much? Isn't 3GB maximum on Windows?

[Ekauq @ Nov 4th 2008 7:19AM]

@Marcus

32-bit versions of Vista can only support upto 4GB of ram

64-bit versions on the other hand can support more:
- Home Basic: 8GB
- Home Premium: 16GB
- Business, Enterprise, Ultimate: 128GB

[BananaBoat @ Nov 4th 2008 7:48AM]

For a gaming desktop, that much ram is overkill.

Also, if you don't like square cases, feel free to get an Antec Skeleton. It's your ears that will pay the price.

[BananaBoat @ Nov 4th 2008 7:49AM]

Oh, and I forgot to mention that the cable management in that case is EPIC. I spent hours trying to cable manage in my case, and there are still wires everywhere (they just go behind the mobo now, but they still stick out)

[Andrew @ Nov 4th 2008 12:00PM]

@E71
First of all, the graphics cards DO NOT take up 3 slots. They take up two. Secondly, they are not inefficiently designed, they are about the same size as nVidia's 280 graphics card and they have TWO GPUS on board each.

Yes, so taking up two slots for two GPUs just as high-end single GPU graphics cards take up two, is totally inefficient. Clearly you're running some fucking mainstream, mid-range, Intel integrated piece of shit or something. Either that or you don't understand efficiency.

[E71 @ Nov 4th 2008 11:15PM]

@Andrew

First off, my bad about the 3 slots. Those tight looking cables looked like they extended the fan outwards and so taking up the far end of the 3rd slot, which is why I said EFFECTIVELY. Most cards (for example my 12-port RAID controller) aren't nice and low profile so they won't be able to squeeze in.

Secondly, graphics cards are the only cards getting bigger and are now producing more and more heat.

It's obvious that somewhere along the line, the more powerful the chips became, the more heat they started to produce. Instead of dedicating time to coming up with an innovative way to ensure a normal future for video cards (i.e. without slapping on a mega-sized fan) they decided rivalry to get faster cards out into the market first was more important.

Even if multiple GPUs were necessary, I highly doubt that sticking a 2-slot card on a motherboard and rendering one of them useless is any better than getting to use any two slots OF YOUR OWN CHOICE for Crossfire/SLI mode. I lost two single lane PCI-E slots on my last motherboard because of two dual-slot cards and left with one PCI -- NOT COOL, because I needed one PCI-E single lane slot and not PCI.

The only reason I have mid-range graphics (HD4850 single slot) is because of SCUM LIKE YOU that give manufacturers a nod and the impression it's okay to make over-sized, overheating junk like the HD4870 X2 or the GeForce 280 series.

[B.Cherry @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:26PM]

It's...BEAUTIFUL!!!

[Peste @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:37PM]

Yeah, beautiful and hard to clean after it gets dusty... ha, who cares?!

Now i can play awesome games on a 40" Full HDTV!!!

If only I had the money :(

[balls @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:47PM]

@Peste: Uh, your 40" HDTV only has a resolution of 1920 x 1080. A 8800 GTS can handle that no problem.

[solu @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:24PM]

3d mark tests without AA are silly. Its like turning the resolution to 640x480 to try and eek out better numbers. If you are going to buy a system like that you sure as hell are gunna run AA and probably a lot higher resolution that that as well. But its all about the big numbers i suppose.

[maveric101 @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:28PM]

no, they turn down the resolution when testing CPU's to take the GPU out of the equation.

[mackid105 @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:25PM]

now i hope you guys are planning on some sort of contest to give this godly system to us "mere mortals" since most of us probably cant afford something like this.

you know you want to :D

[micromarty @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:25PM]

That thing is a beast

[EB @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:14PM]

I know this might be getting old, but ...

that's what she said

[jeesusfreek @ Nov 3rd 2008 11:12PM]

nope, it's not old yet. at least it made me laugh.

on a slightly related note, great fu**ing scott!!!

[tsw @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:26PM]

muther ****er!

[offroadering @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:26PM]

TITS!!!

Thanks Engadget!!!,
I love the 9 GB of RAM. Some people are still dumbfounded by my whole 2.5GB of RAM

[maveric101 @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:28PM]

it says 12.

[GreezyG @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:30PM]

you fail at... ramming

[offroadering @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:50PM]

ahh... I got a lil excited with all the RAM i saw today, with YoYotechs 9GB of RAM

[chris @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:11PM]

Ramming speed, Go!

[maveric101 @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:26PM]

my envy of you guys if palpable.

[thedesolate1 @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:29PM]

Damn you Engadget! You guys get to play with all the shiny new toys! =P

[Engadgetier @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:14PM]

I just cant wait for their next "toy" giveaway!!

[Colin B @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:30PM]

I got chubs for that system

[RoboDan @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:31PM]

I really hope you used a Velociraptor hard drive

or better yet some MTron Pro SSD's in RAID - just for programs and the OS, of course.

Otherwise it's like having a cockroach places on your ridiculously expensive birthday cake

[RoboDan @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:32PM]

AND also a 64-bit OS
Haha

[Shinigami @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:16PM]

Read some tomshardware reports. They tested the new VeloRaptor thingie and found out its almost the same fast as any other 750gb drive so no need in it. Its a 2.5in drive for the corporate market.
As for SSDs - you want the price to become $2000+ higher? That would be totally awesome.

[deyanimay @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:32PM]

Wow. Everyday you never stop reminding me that i need a new computer.

[ethana2 @ Nov 3rd 2008 9:43PM]

Be grateful. This time they didn't remind you that it needs to be from Apple.

[thedesolate1 @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:32PM]

I second that.
Holy S#*T!

but....
Utterly Boring?
is my sarcasm meter off or something...

[TareX @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:34PM]

$8,238

Oh God. That's a lot. I mean, I always presumed gaming desktops saved more money than highest-end gaming laptops.... But that's like 2X the new "overpriced" Alienware highest end gaming laptop with Core 2 Quad Extreme, Dual 512 ATI..... 4GB.... etc.

And in the end of the day, developers are steering away from PC game developing because of piracy.

[balls @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:03PM]

No doubt.

If only Fallout 3, Dead Space, Left4Dead, COD6 were coming out for the PC.

RIP PC Gaming. You will be missed!

[Ruben @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:22PM]

PC gaming isn't dead. What is dead is the freedom you had with the software you purchased.

To be honest, i cant blame them.

PC gaming will never die, because there are way too many big players like Nvidia, ATI/AMD, and Intel who have way too much invested in this field to just have PC game makers back out of this field.

Without games, no one will buy high end cards. And high end cards/processors help pay the bills.

[Einhanderkiller @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:26PM]

Falcon Northwest is an ultra high-end PC manufacturer. Their computers have excellent build quality, but that build quality comes at a very, very high price. You could build a similar computer yourself for probably around $3,000. But this kind of computer is only needed if you wanted to play at 2560x1600. A computer powerful enough to play all the latest games at high settings at a "modest" resolution of 1680x1050 would run you around $700.

[digitallysick @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:35PM]

I love that cooling system, watercooling? does it run to a tank?

[toxicpiano @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:38PM]

No there is a small man chained to the computer that pours water over the components.

[Peste @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:39PM]

Yeah, one cooler do the job of cooling the liquid that goes back to the processor...

"cool"... hehe :D

[Mark @ Nov 3rd 2008 7:41PM]

ROFL!! toxicpianos got it!!!

[Valicore @ Nov 3rd 2008 8:50PM]

LOL, that was pretty epic toxicpiano lol. I can just imagine some evil rich gamer opening the case and yelling at some poor little man "FASTER! FASTER I SAY! I'm getting ready to play CRYSIS!"