Difference between Onboard Graphics and Processor Graphics?

sachinaswal · Mar 12, 2017

So, if I am not wrong Intel provides integrated graphics on almost all of their core series CPU and AMD doesn't.

Most motherboards these days have decent video memory size(1GB, 2GB) on them.

So my question is how different are AMD motherboards where integrated graphics are not on CPU than motherboards supporting Intel HD graphics and how does each of the them work?

Are AMD motherboards on par with Intel ones when comes to light gaming?

aquielisunari · Mar 12, 2017

Most motherboards these days have decent video memory size(1GB, 2GB) on them.

That is incorrect. Motherboards don't come with video memory. The integrated GPU borrows system RAM.

Are AMD motherboards on par with Intel ones when comes to light gaming?

It depends on the board and the rest of the hardware. The integrated GPU, CPU, RAM and the rest of the PC can answer that question. The motherboard alone is just the foundation so it doesn't set any gaming bar on its own. Then price comes into the picture and makes your gaming question impossible to effectively answer. Not going to apply an uninformed blanket answer to such a vague question.

sachinaswal · Mar 12, 2017

aquielisunari :

Thanks for your reply. To be honest, I wasn't sure how to put out this question. Yes, you are right GPU borrows system RAM (shared video memory).

So let's put this question in more detailed manner.

AMD Build (excluding graphics card)
1) Motherboard - ASUS Prime X370-Pro
2) Processor - Ryzen 1700
3) RAM - Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz
4) HDD - Seagate 1TB BarraCuda SATA 6Gb/s 64MB Cache 3.5-Inch Internal Hard Drive

Intel Build ((excluding graphics card)
1) Motherboard - ASUS PRIME Z270-A
2) Processor - i7-7700k
3) RAM - Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB (2x8GB) DDR4 DRAM 3200MHz
4) HDD - Seagate 1TB BarraCuda SATA 6Gb/s 64MB Cache 3.5-Inch Internal Hard Drive

I hope this will put some straight picture. All, I want to know how well gaming will be under these configurations?
Will Intel's HD Graphics will put it to advantage? Also tell me how the procedure works in both builds.

Please tell me anything which I need to include. I want as much enlightenment as possible in this department..

aquielisunari · Mar 12, 2017

sachinaswal :

Now this is a question I hope I can answer

. Specifics make things so much simpler, usually, where PC questions are concerned.

With those to builds the choice is clear. The 1700(as I think you know) lacks an integrated GPU so you won't see anything on your screen without a dedicated GFX card. The Intel build is the clear winner. Am I still missing something?

I see an overclockable CPU with a complimentary board that supports OC'ing. I don't see an aftermarket cooler. The Intel coolers with a K lack the stock CPU cooler. The Cryorig H7 can handle that chip when OC'd. The Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3, Noctua NH-D14, Evo 212x and the Corsair H115i are some options.

The procedure? Simple as building the PC and plugging an HDMI cable from the board to the monitor/TV.

As you can see here http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-i5-7600k-i5-7600,4870-7.html it is okay with gaming but at lower resolutions. Take a look over here http://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-without-a-dedicated-graphics-chip-on-i7-7700k/ for more info

The above video runs through the performance of the HD 630 in a collection of 15 games. Obviously, many of these are demanding games, but I also tested at pretty much the minimum quality level and 1280x720—or 1280x768 in a few games where 720p isn't supported. I had initially hoped to shoot for 1920x1080, but that's not happening in anything but the lightest of games—stuff like League of Legends, Counter Strike: Global Offensive, and even Overwatch should be able to run decently at 1080p, perhaps even at medium or high quality in some cases. But demanding PC games are out of the question—even doubling the number of EUs would still come up short of 30 fps in many games.

sachinaswal · Mar 12, 2017

aquielisunari :

sachinaswal :

Now this is a question I hope I can answer

. Specifics make things so much simpler, usually, where PC questions are concerned.

With those to builds the choice is clear. The 1700(as I think you know) lacks an integrated GPU so you won't see anything on your screen without a dedicated GFX card. The Intel build is the clear winner. Am I still missing something?

I see an overclockable CPU with a complimentary board that supports OC'ing. I don't see an aftermarket cooler. The Intel coolers with a K lack the stock CPU cooler. The Cryorig H7 can handle that chip when OC'd. The Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3, Noctua NH-D14, Evo 212x and the Corsair H115i are some options.

The procedure? Simple as building the PC and plugging an HDMI cable from the board to the monitor/TV.

As you can see here http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-i5-7600k-i5-7600,4870-7.html it is okay with gaming but at lower resolutions. Take a look over here http://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-without-a-dedicated-graphics-chip-on-i7-7700k/ for more info

The above video runs through the performance of the HD 630 in a collection of 15 games. Obviously, many of these are demanding games, but I also tested at pretty much the minimum quality level and 1280x720—or 1280x768 in a few games where 720p isn't supported. I had initially hoped to shoot for 1920x1080, but that's not happening in anything but the lightest of games—stuff like League of Legends, Counter Strike: Global Offensive, and even Overwatch should be able to run decently at 1080p, perhaps even at medium or high quality in some cases. But demanding PC games are out of the question—even doubling the number of EUs would still come up short of 30 fps in many games.

Well, things are getting much clearer now.

That means, onboard graphics doesn't mean anything when you don't have the appropriate CPU (as far as motherboards of today are concerned) because there used to be integrated graphics on boards earlier (for eg. Asrock N68-S). Clarify me if I am wrong?

Also,
1) Does that mean that I have to buy a discrete graphics card to see anything on screen for AMD build as you said?
2) Do CPU integrated graphics share system memory (which i assume they do)?

aquielisunari · Mar 12, 2017

sachinaswal :

aquielisunari :

sachinaswal :

Now this is a question I hope I can answer

. Specifics make things so much simpler, usually, where PC questions are concerned.

With those to builds the choice is clear. The 1700(as I think you know) lacks an integrated GPU so you won't see anything on your screen without a dedicated GFX card. The Intel build is the clear winner. Am I still missing something?

I see an overclockable CPU with a complimentary board that supports OC'ing. I don't see an aftermarket cooler. The Intel coolers with a K lack the stock CPU cooler. The Cryorig H7 can handle that chip when OC'd. The Be Quiet! Dark Rock 3, Noctua NH-D14, Evo 212x and the Corsair H115i are some options.

The procedure? Simple as building the PC and plugging an HDMI cable from the board to the monitor/TV.

As you can see here http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/intel-kaby-lake-core-i7-7700k-i7-7700-i5-7600k-i5-7600,4870-7.html it is okay with gaming but at lower resolutions. Take a look over here http://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-without-a-dedicated-graphics-chip-on-i7-7700k/ for more info

The above video runs through the performance of the HD 630 in a collection of 15 games. Obviously, many of these are demanding games, but I also tested at pretty much the minimum quality level and 1280x720—or 1280x768 in a few games where 720p isn't supported. I had initially hoped to shoot for 1920x1080, but that's not happening in anything but the lightest of games—stuff like League of Legends, Counter Strike: Global Offensive, and even Overwatch should be able to run decently at 1080p, perhaps even at medium or high quality in some cases. But demanding PC games are out of the question—even doubling the number of EUs would still come up short of 30 fps in many games.

Well, things are getting much clearer now.

That means, onboard graphics doesn't mean anything when you don't have the appropriate CPU (as far as motherboards of today are concerned) because there used to be integrated graphics on boards earlier (for eg. Asrock N68-S). Clarify me if I am wrong?

Also,
1) Does that mean that I have to buy a discrete graphics card to see anything on screen for AMD build as you said?
2) Do CPU integrated graphics share system memory (which i assume they do)?

True
1. Yes
2. Yes

because there used to be integrated graphics on boards earlier

and jumpers on IDE hard drives. Floppies(War Games?) used to be huge with relatively little info on them. Yep, I remember the days of old when the BIOS couldn't be navigated with a mouse. PCs have come a long way and will continue to get faster and smaller.

Search

Difference between Onboard Graphics and Processor Graphics?

sachinaswal

Prominent

aquielisunari

aquielisunari

Judicious

sachinaswal

Prominent

aquielisunari

Judicious

sachinaswal

Prominent

aquielisunari

Judicious

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page