At first glance, Intel’s initial dual-core PC processor family, the Pentium D desktop series, doesn’t compare favourably with the AMD opposition. For sure, the flagship Pentium D 840 Extreme Edition suffers a comprehensive spanking at the hands of AMD’s deeply impressive Athlon 64 X2 4800+. But that’s not the whole story.

Crucially, the cheapest dual-core AMD chip for the desktop, the Athlon 64 X2 4200+ is likely to weigh in around the £300 mark. In isolation, that sounds like a good deal – it’s a great CPU, after all. But compared with the probable £150 asking price of the entry-level Pentium D 820, it looks awfully expensive. You would have to be seriously keen on the extra power of AMD’s solution to justify the extra cost.

Which is exactly where this Evesham desktop machine steps in. By pricing its debut dual-core chips so aggressively, Intel has given system builders the opportunity to hit thoroughly mainstream price points. That’s great news for buyers on a budget, as you gain all the benefits of dual core computing without the hefty price premium that normally comes with the latest technology.

With that in mind, the £999 sticker price of this Evesham machine is a whisker more than we were hoping for. Making matters worse, we’re not convinced Evesham has spent that £1000 budget wisely. Granted, the basic specification is reasonable enough. Based on Intel’s 945G chipset, the cheaper of the two new dual-core supporting platforms, this system packs the aforementioned Pentium D 820 processor, running at 2.8GHz. Despite the unspectacular clockspeed, all round performance is impressive. Not only does this bargain basement dual-core Pentium have the better of its higher-clocked single-core siblings in multi-threaded applications (we recorded a time of 3 minutes and 14 seconds in our Windows Media Encoder test compared with 3 minutes 37 for a 3.8GHz Pentium 4 570 single-core chip). But also, no single-core chip, however fast, can compete in terms of responsiveness, when running more than one CPU-intensive task. Even in conventional tests designed with single-core CPUs in mind, such as Futuremark’s PCMark2004, this system performs well. A score of 4,793 is very handy indeed compared with the 5,000 or so an AMD Athlon 64 FX-55 is capable of, and remember that’s a £600 processor. Some credit for this snappy performance should also go to the Maxtor hard drive Evesham has specified. Spacious at 250GB, it’s a decent performer thanks to a spindle speed of 7,200rpm and a health 16MB of cache. Add-in a dual layer Sony DVD burner, 1GB of system memory and a decent 19in Viewsonic LCD monitor, and you would think Evesham has a winner.

Costly memory
Sadly not. For starters, Evesham has decided to specify pricy 667MHz DDR2 system RAM. In theory, that’s a sensible idea. When running 533MHz memory, Intel’s current DDR2-supporting chipsets fail to compete with AMD’s 400MHz DDR1-powered Athlon 64 platform in terms of memory bandwidth. In practice, however, our bandwidth test result of 4,105MB/s proves that until Intel increases the 800MHz front side bus speed of its mainstream desktop products, configuring fast and expensive memory is a waste of money. We also suspect it’s the premium paid for that pricey RAM that’s forced Evesham to cut a few corners in other areas.

The most damaging is the decision to go with Intel’s integrated video chip. Admittedly, this isn’t a system aimed at gamers, so the lowly 3D performance (it manages just 10fps in Doom 3 at a resolution of 800x600) isn’t a major issue. But in the year 2005, we think it’s unacceptable for a £1,000 system to lack both a DVI monitor interface and any kind of video-out for connecting to a television set. For office use, the lack of video-out may not be a serious drawback. But all users will suffer from the soft and slightly washed-out image quality that’s a consequence of the VGA-only monitor port. It’s especially infuriating when you consider the quality of the monitor Evesham has plumped for.

Under-powered viewing
The Viewsonic VX912 is a perfectly decent performer, with snappy 8ms pixel response times, very respectable brightness and viewing angles and, you guessed it, both VGA and DVI inputs. There’s no doubting this monitor performs significantly better when driven on a pure-digital DVI signal. Mercifully, the motherboard does offer a 16-lane PCI Express graphics port enabling a video upgrade. But the truly pitiful 250 Watt power supply Evesham have chosen will significantly limit the choice of graphics card.

While were driving the knife home, we may as well have a whinge about the system chassis. It’s solid enough and neatly finished, but it’s a thoroughly joyless and pathologically anonymous steel and plastic mini-tower affair that will date in seconds sitting on your desk. A little more of an aesthetic surprise and delight for your £1,000 would be very welcome indeed.