Integrated video vs non integrated video

Hello,

I have a question about integrated video vs. non integrated video motherboards. Back in the day when I built a Biostar integrated video MB with a AMD XP 2100, the system always seemed to perform slower than my Asus which had the same exact configuration except the board didn’t have integrated video. Is this because of the integration of the video or just the motherboard manufactures? I’m building a new machine for work and really don’t care about the graphics, but if is going to make a difference $25 more for a video card isn’t going to kill the deal for me. I just wanted to get other people’s experience on this.

Thanks,
Nick
2 answers Last reply
More about integrated video integrated video
  1. well if all you're gonna do is play solitaire and browse the web/emails then you don't need a video card. Though you could always get yourself a dirt cheap one, I for one have an ATI 9550 in my system pending the building of my new one and it works quite well for gaming on low rez. (And of course it kills email and browser)
  2. Usually integrated video solutions use up some system memory. 2gb with XP would be plenty for web surfing and integrated video though.
Ask a new question

Read More

Gigabyte Video Motherboards