Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

MOBO Onboard Graphics vs. CPU Integrated

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
September 9, 2013 7:59:46 AM

This is a question about MOBO integrated graphics, so I hope I'm getting it into the right forum. :) 

Can someone clarify for me exactly what Onboard Graphic Chipset means and why it is important to me in the context of my specific build plans below?

I see MOBOs listing the specification "Onboard Graphic Chipset" with descriptions such as, "Intel HD Video" or "None" or "Supported only by CPU with integrated graphics."

My object for this build is a home PC for my folks, who are retired. Most of their use is Internet browsing, internet email, office software, Skype for the grandkids in the UK, and the occasional DVD. No gaming to speak of. I'm trying to build a basic machine that will last for several years, and so I want the build to be current with some sensitivity to pricing. (Here's the link to my original post asking for input on the general configuration ==>> http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1782901/cpu-buil... )

Thought process on the CPU is a Core i5-4570, which has Intel's most current graphic chipset built in for high definition video. However, I'm now realizing that I don't understand how the graphics on the CPU interact w/ the MOBO "Onboard Graphic Chipset."

So... a few pointed questions:
1. I'm assuming that it's a BIOS setting as to which graphic chipset will be in use - MOBO Onboard or CPU integrated, is this correct? Or will MOBO Onboard override integrated graphics on the CPU?

2. If the MOBO supports Intel's most current graphic chipset, then do I need to get the Core i5-4570, or can I drop back to a cheaper/earlier i5 version and still have the functionality of the most current, basic Intel HD graphics?

3. If I can get the current Intel HD graphics from the MOBO chipset, am I giving up any appreciable speed advantage or other functionality by dropping back to an earlier version of the i5?

4. I'm confused by the difference between "None" and "Supported only by CPU with integrated graphics." Does this mean a MOBO with "None" will require a graphics card and not work with the integrated CPU graphics? Is there a minimum MOBO spec that I need in order to know that I'll be using the i5-4570 integrated graphics?

5. Is there anything else I should be considering with respect to integrated CPU graphics?

Thanks much in advance!
-GorfTheFrog
a c 175 à CPUs
September 9, 2013 8:25:13 AM

GorfTheFrog said:
My object for this build is a home PC for my folks, who are retired. Most of their use is Internet browsing, internet email, office software, Skype for the grandkids in the UK, and the occasional DVD. No gaming to speak of. I'm trying to build a basic machine that will last for several years, and so I want the build to be current with some sensitivity to pricing. (

1. I'm assuming that it's a BIOS setting as to which graphic chipset will be in use - MOBO Onboard or CPU integrated, is this correct? Or will MOBO Onboard override integrated graphics on the CPU?

2. If the MOBO supports Intel's most current graphic chipset, then do I need to get the Core i5-4570, or can I drop back to a cheaper/earlier i5 version and still have the functionality of the most current, basic Intel HD graphics?

3. If I can get the current Intel HD graphics from the MOBO chipset, am I giving up any appreciable speed advantage or other functionality by dropping back to an earlier version of the i5?

4. I'm confused by the difference between "None" and "Supported only by CPU with integrated graphics." Does this mean a MOBO with "None" will require a graphics card and not work with the integrated CPU graphics? Is there a minimum MOBO spec that I need in order to know that I'll be using the i5-4570 integrated graphics?

5. Is there anything else I should be considering with respect to integrated CPU graphics?

Thanks much in advance!
-GorfTheFrog


You're in the market for an AMD APU, spending cash on an intel makes zero sense. Anyone who's used intel's onboard graphics will tell you the truth about it in a heartbeat. It benches well but sucks in the real world, as the drivers are terrible

Now as to the questions-

1) You're confusing the lingo. any socket 1155 intel motherboard will support the igpu that comes on the core i cpu you get. There is no onboard graphics with those motherboards, just monitor outputs.

2) yes

3) the igpu is deturmaned by the cpu not the motherboard, the chipset on the board has nothing to do with it. so yes, you can go back to an older cheaper motherboard just fine.

4) nope. they mean it doesn't have a gpu on the motherboard, it will support the intel integrated graphics on the cpu just fine. the different mb manufacturers just can't agree with how to classify it.

5) yep. if you're saving cash, and looking for a good igpu, and you're not gaming, an AMD APU will save you hundreds and OUT PERFORM any intel option you go with. '

Get an A10 or A8. they're both 4 cores with better graphics then anything you'll find on an intel.
m
0
l
a c 101 à CPUs
September 9, 2013 8:25:25 AM

Back in the day, some motherboards would come with an integrated GPU into the south bridge chipset, usually a very basic intel or amd or nvidia one. It would allow surfing and that was it. it was mostly for people who didn't have a GPU.

Eventually they started to add GPU's right to the CPU to make whats called an APU. This allows the graphics to run better since they are right with the CPU, they can share the memory controller at the lowest level, send info back to the CPU the fastest possible way, etc. Intel has it in their latest i3/i5/i7 series of chips, usually being the 2000/3000/4000 series with respect to better chips have a better GPU. The intel ones allow for HD video, HD youtube, etc and that's about it. They are still no good for gaming.

AMD has their APU series, the A4, A6, A8, A10 series. Their built on GPU is far better than intels. AMD is a graphics card company and has the experience to add it to the CPU and you can actually do some basic gaming on them as well as full HD video, etc. For a basic PC that is going to be surfing, online video, watching , etc, I like the AMD A-series chips. I've built about a dozen of them for older people, basic surfing users, etc and none of them have had any problems with the use they use it for. A few were even surpirsed when their kids or grandkids wanted to use the PC and play a game or two and it played and they only bought a basic system.
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 309 à CPUs
September 9, 2013 8:27:50 AM

1. They are the same. In the past, motherboard graphics(onboard) was done with a separate graphics chip. Today, the graphics is integrated into the cpu chip.
2. Any intel integrated graphics will have enough power for normal desktop operations and even play HD movies. There is little advantage in the stronger versions for your usage.
3. No, an earlier intel cpu will be fine.
4. A motherboard with "none" will likely be an older one that needed a discrete graphics card. I think any motherboard that supports a i5-4570 will have support for the integrated graphics.
5. If you will want to use a monitor with > 1080P resolution and integrated graphics, or more than 2 monitors, then you will want a haswell cpu and motherboard.
It will support up to 3 monitors, and 4k resolution.

Here is what I might suggest:
1. No need for an expensive quad. A dual core with hyperthreading will be fine.
i3-4130. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
2. I strongly suggest you base the build around a SSD. It will make everything you do feel very quick.
I will not build today without one. 120gb is minimum, but really, get 240gb. I like the Samsung EVO.
3. Most any B75 based motherboard will do. I like smaller cases and would favor a M-ATX or even a ITX build.
4. Think about the case. He will see and touch it every day.
For ITX, I might pick a lian li Q07 case. They exude quality. Check the dimensions, it gives new meaning for desktop.
I have used one in several similar builds. A small case is a challenge, but doable. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
For a more conventional M-ATX case, the Silverstone TJ-08E: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

You can reuse your monitor, but think about adding a second monitor. It is most useful for normal desktop work.
m
1
l
September 9, 2013 12:12:07 PM

geofelt said:
1. No need for an expensive quad. A dual core with hyperthreading will be fine.
i3-4130. http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
2. I strongly suggest you base the build around a SSD. It will make everything you do feel very quick.
I will not build today without one. 120gb is minimum, but really, get 240gb. I like the Samsung EVO.
3. Most any B75 based motherboard will do. I like smaller cases and would favor a M-ATX or even a ITX build.


Hi Geofelt,
Appreciate the answers as well as the additional thoughts. A few questions about your comments:

1 => I've gone back-and-forth in my head about an i3 vs an i5. One of my objectives is to build this to run the standard stuff for quite some time. If I'm looking towards the future, my thought process is that having the 4 cores will be a hedge against future needs, vs. two cores.
2 => I pitched the SSD option to my dad, but he was price sensitive about this vs. a standard HD. Not sure I can make a case for it.
3 => I'm curious if you have any other thoughts on the B-series mobos. As I understand, the B-series will not support using the SSD as a cache, and I've internalized this to mean that I've limited my upgrade ability. What am I missing?

Thanks,
-GorfTheFrog
m
0
l

Best solution

a c 309 à CPUs
September 9, 2013 1:09:41 PM

A I3 with hyperthreading like the 4130 does give you 4 processing threads. The hyperthreads use residual cycles from the main threads.
They are perhaps worth 1/4 ro 1/3 of a full thread. Sort of a compromise between 2 and 4 cores.
I find it does not help to "future proof" The future proof Q6600 was launched at $851 5 years ago. It had a passmark rating of 2974.
Compare that to today's i3-4130 selling for $130 with a passmark rating of 5027.
If your time horizon extends more than a yer or two out, I think it is better to buy what you need today, and plan on upgrading in some manner when/if the need arises.

2. If you do not get what you need, you will have paid too much. Yes, the price per gb is higher than for a hard drive. But a ssd is 50x faster in random I/O than the fastest conventional hard drive. That is what the os does most. A SSD will also be 3x faster than a hard drive in sequential operations. You would have a more responsive PC with a $50 cpu and a $200 SSD than you would with a $200 cpu and a $50 hard drive. Ask anybody who bought a SSD if they were not pleased. I don't think you can find one.
3. The main drawback of the B series chipsets is the lack of overclocking capability. Yes, that could be important if you contemplated a future upgrade to a "K" cpu. If that were the case, I would pick a Z87 based motherboard. Really, they are not that much more expensive. Here is a chart with the differences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGA_1150
The ability to cache reads with a SSD turns out to not be that useful compared to using the same size ssd directly for reads and writes.
If you use a Samsung EVO SSD, they have a utility that can use up to 1gb of ram as a cache to the SSD!
Share
!