| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 113384 | 2010-10-17 06:44:00 | Dedicated vs Integrated Graphics | LynX (14542) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1145616 | 2010-10-17 06:44:00 | I'm thinking about getting a new computer, most likely i3+H55 or Athlon II+880G . Should I get a separate graphic card, or use the onboard graphics instead? I am not a gamer, and I won't be using much high-powered application (nothing that a C2D E6300 can't handle, anyway) . But I am a multi-tasker, and doesn't appreciate sluggishness too much . Secondly, what "level" Intel GMA HD and Integrated Radeon 4250 are at? Would they be able to run Aero smoothly? I currently have a GeForce 7600GT and am happy with it (though gaming at 1680x1050 is at a pinch) . Thanks in Advance . |
LynX (14542) | ||
| 1145617 | 2010-10-17 07:01:00 | I was running aero just fine on integrated graphics using an Asus P5KPL-CM motherboard and core2duo CPU and 2GB ram have now put in a Asus 5450 fanless so that I could use the digital input to my monitor, performance for most of what I do hasn't changed | gary67 (56) | ||
| 1145618 | 2010-10-17 07:15:00 | Thanks for the fast reply, Gary67. It seems that the integrated graphics just keep getting faster, and not having a separate graphics card does save some money. It's just that I'm not so sure about whether IGC is enough for everyday computing. | LynX (14542) | ||
| 1145619 | 2010-10-17 07:20:00 | Main thing is you see something on the screen | Speedy Gonzales (78) | ||
| 1145620 | 2010-10-17 08:22:00 | I'm using as a HTPC, an Asus P5QL-EM board with a core 2 duo 2.9 I think it is CPU. Using integrated graphics to watch HD video on the TV with no problem | Phil B (648) | ||
| 1145621 | 2010-10-17 09:20:00 | So, an integrated graphics chip is good enough for everyday stuff. But what about casual gaming? I'm only going to play old 3D games that aren't so resource-intensive, though. How much difference would there be between a GMA HD or HD4250 to my existing 7600GT? But on the flip side, that's probably a good thing, as I might spend my time on more worthwhile things if the graphics is not strong enough to provide good gaming experience. :D |
LynX (14542) | ||
| 1145622 | 2010-10-17 09:46:00 | I have just had a build using i3 + Gigabyte GA-H55-USB3 from ComputerLounge . I am using 64-bit Windows 7 with 8 Gb of RAM . I have contemplated getting a separate graphics card . I have been using the intergrated graphics with no problems . Aero runs smoothly, I have watched videos and edited home movies . Until I start getting problems I will stick with the intergrated graphics . |
Bobh (5192) | ||
| 1145623 | 2010-10-17 21:34:00 | Integrated graphics are fine if you don't do any gaming. The integrated graphics in Core i5 cpus are about the same speed as Geforce FX 5800 The new second generation core cpus have even faster GPUS, one has been tested to be about the same speed as a discrete Radeon 5450. |
utopian201 (6245) | ||
| 1145624 | 2010-10-17 21:39:00 | New games = Graphics card Other uses + real old games = integrated |
pctek (84) | ||
| 1145625 | 2010-10-18 03:04:00 | Thanks to all your replies. That cleared things up a bit. Think I'll go for an integrated graphics chip then. I'm a bit inclined to the AMD, partially because people say that i3 is a dual core charged at quad core, blah blah, but more because I haven't seen an AMD system for some time. I might go for the X4 635 (just from the feelings :) Would that be a good idea? I'm not intending to do any OC, Core Unlock or anything "not intended under normal usage". Also, a question that may make me look dumb: which one is better performer, the graphics on the 880G (HD4250) or the H55 (GMA HD)? I know it's like asking which of Toyota Corolla and Honda Civic (Stock cars!) is faster, but... it makes me wonder badly. |
LynX (14542) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||