| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 145371 | 2017-10-16 22:28:00 | Second Monitor | Driftwood (5551) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1440761 | 2017-10-16 22:28:00 | On my gaming system I run a second smaller monitor for displaying info regarding whatever game I am using. Have had it connected to the graphics card & also to the Intel graphics on the motherboard. Works just as good either way. Cant decide which would be better for the system. |
Driftwood (5551) | ||
| 1440762 | 2017-10-16 22:34:00 | The Intel graphics option off-loads some resource demand from the discrete GPU so that's the better option I think. |
KarameaDave (15222) | ||
| 1440763 | 2017-10-17 01:03:00 | That was my first line of thought. But then if they are both on the GPU, wouldn't there be less demand on the CPU. |
Driftwood (5551) | ||
| 1440764 | 2017-10-17 01:13:00 | If they are both on the GPU then that part of the CPU may as well be disabled as it's doing nothing. I think from a games performance point of view connecting one to the intel integrated graphics is better. However I connect both of mine to the graphics card because the Nvidia drivers are better (my tv tuner software does not like the intel graphics) and it lets me dual screen game in a couple of titles (supreme commander mostly) Yeah the CPU may run a little warmer if you use it's graphics, but that's what it's designed for after all. Comes down to personal usage and choice I guess. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1440765 | 2017-10-17 05:06:00 | Thanks guys. | Driftwood (5551) | ||
| 1 | |||||