Integrated Graphics for Gaming or HTPC?

[randomizer]

My experience with onboard graphics has been a little chaotic... So I overclocked the little thing, and played much better... until it detonated.

Um, duh? You overclocked a chip that already nearly burns up under stress because of inadequate cooling (like most integrated graphics chips, you don't see it with a huge copper HS with a fan blowing out the back do you?.

 

[rupert86]

@jaguarskx,

I do regularly read Xbitlabs, but the wattage figures I quote from THG. Around 3 weeks ago they published an article on efficient computing, and they had a HUGE graph showing idle and load power for many cards. Oh maybe it also depends upon the type of memory and power circuitry etc.

Also, my PSU costs equal to US$10. You'll be LOLing but Seasonic, Enermax etc. aren't options. Asus and Cooler Master are though, but I can't get myself to buy a PSU which costs the sum of my mobo and RAM.

Also, I turn off all the unused features: Parallel ports, COM ports, those USBs I don't use, the HDD controllers I don't use etc.

The other thing is: I still use a 80GB HDD. I don't need more than this. Most people I know don't. But what we want is lightning fast data transfers. Anyone else sharing my craving?

 

[randomizer]

I need more than 80Gb, but my 160Gb has never filled up (got close once though)

 

[doco1]

I liked the article - mostly because it is really relevant to my decisions as I try to figure out what I want in a HTPC. I'm not looking for a game box (last FPS I played was years ago) and this being a tertiary PC I'm looking to save money where it makes sense.

HOWEVER - what I would really like to know is not only how well does a DVD or HDDVD play, but how well do they do handle MPEG4 compressed video (the type you might have after ripping a DVD for hard-drive storage). I would also like to know how well the various solutions do for off-loading the CPU.

So, while it was a good start, on the HTPC side I would like to see some CPU utilization numbers while playing a DVD or HDDVD. And then add some quality and CPU utilization numbers for playing MPEG4 data.

Anyone have any suggestions as to which if any integrated video solution will work ok playing MPEG4 - and if so, will it work well with a lower-end CPU? Does it make a difference if I use Windows with their media solution or Linux/MythTV ?

 

[wild9]

It's a pity the tester didn't have access to a Geforce 6100/410 together with some slighter older titles. I run this DX9-capable chipset on a Socket 939 board and A64 3200+. Initially I was cautious about using it for games, but had to because my previous hardware fried and I needed something fast.

Why not test these chipsets with slightly older games? Mine runs Flight Sim 20004 fine at 1024 x 768, as long as you avoid fog data. I think the expectations are a little too high in running the likes of F.E.A.R. and even Doom 3, which aren't really designed to use anything less than good, discrete graphics.

My point is that for slightly older games (Far Cry, GTA San Andreas, FS 2004) and emulation as well as video playback, I think integrated may suffice. I have little to complain about with the one I am using, considering it's a freebie and it makes no noise whatsoever.

If you want to play the latest titles there really is no solution but to get a discrete card and not something that isn't going to deliver like the 8500 range.

 

[wild9]

You can also get AM2-based motherboards that boast the nVidia 6100/430 chipset.

 

[cvladan]

Great article! Hardware sites focus too much on the high-end.

I second that less demanding games would have been nice. FEAR is a real graphics-card killer, but I played UT2004 on an S3 Unichrome IGP recently and it wasn't too bad. Sims 2 might have been better aimed at the integrated graphics crowd, too.

 

[fatcat]

This article certainly makes sens in todays computer market. Even if it's not exhaustive, it gives a good idea of the state of the IGP and what can be expected. At the office, 98 % of the computer we have used IGP. Also, I was thinking about using an IGP for an up coming built for someone who doesn't game after reading this, I am not sure what I'll do. Even if it's not necessary, I think that spending 100.00 $ on a discreet GPU, if budget allows, still a good investment.

 

[dogman-x]

I'm waiting for the Intel G35 chipset with the X3500 graphics accelerator. This one is supposed to be a big jump over the X3000, especially for HD DVD. Isn't this coming out next month?

 

[CompTIA_Rep]

Great article! Hardware sites focus too much on the high-end.

I second that less demanding games would have been nice. FEAR is a real graphics-card killer, but I played UT2004 on an S3 Unichrome IGP recently and it wasn't too bad. Sims 2 might have been better aimed at the integrated graphics crowd, too.

Do you mean to say that the people in your office don't attempt to buy the most expensive graphics card possible because that is the "best" and they "can" ???

We get people buying Quarto cards 2kx and up in Dell systems because then they will have a fast computer, only to learn the domain we have is the slow part and a 4k system doesn't help.

Now, if they would stop doing that and pool together to upgrade the network... now that would be wise... but what do I know, im only the IT guy.

 

[branchman32]

So what about performance of integrated graphics motherboards vs those without?
I know there is a performance decrease when the onboard graphics are activated (because it shares the ram).
But when it is turned off, and a discrete card is added, is there any difference between a mATX board and a regular ATX board with no integrated graphics?

 

[CompTIA_Rep]

No. Once the integrated graphics has been turned off, there is no difference between mATX, ATX, BTX, or... AT (joking). The biggest difference is what they support and their specs, I.E. 1333fsb...