Video Card vs. Intgergrated Video

ozoftyre

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2009
2
0
18,510
What I am after is a laptop with 512mb of video.
I am trying to understand what would be the equivalent in a intergrated chip set.
Most all systems I am looking at are at least 2 Gig
 

ozoftyre

Distinguished
Feb 24, 2009
2
0
18,510
I am aware of the difference.
Most windows laptops are coming with cpu's that have integrated video memory.
What I don't know is how one of these compares to a standalone video card.
 

DiscoDuck

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2006
314
0
18,790
system memory and video memory are sometimes shared with "onboard" graphics whether laptop or desktop. Gaming laptops have discreet video devices with their own ram, not shared. Laptop integrated video is almost always slower than the discreet desktop version of the same chipset. A laptop may have the nvidia 9600m discreet gpu, I expect it to be slower than the desktop 9600gt. If its onboard intel graphics, forget about fps games. The chart in this link compares graphics cards
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-radeon,2151-6.html
 

NuclearShadow

Distinguished
Sep 20, 2007
1,535
0
19,810
Lets put it this way. A integrated today most likely wouldn't even compete with a video card made five years ago. I know that sounds like a exaggeration but its really isn't. If you plan on doing anything that is graphics demanding then your going to have to have a videocard.