Solved

HD Graphics 2000 vs. 3000

Hey people So I am putting together a system for a friend and he will be using this pc for casual use like web surfing and watching youtube videos. Nothing too demanding. So I am putting together a rig with a core i3 for him and I was wondering if it would be worth it to get a core i3 with the hd 3000 graphics or just get one with the hd 2000 graphics. basically what I am asking is would the 3000 graphics make any difference in regular computer tasks (not any gaming)....thanks guys for your input
26 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about graphics 2000 3000
  1. Best answer
    drums101 said:
    Hey people So I am putting together a system for a friend and he will be using this pc for casual use like web surfing and watching youtube videos. Nothing too demanding. So I am putting together a rig with a core i3 for him and I was wondering if it would be worth it to get a core i3 with the hd 3000 graphics or just get one with the hd 2000 graphics. basically what I am asking is would the 3000 graphics make any difference in regular computer tasks (not any gaming)....thanks guys for your input


    For just fooling around on the internet and watching youtube video's there really won't be that much of a difference and both would work just fine. Of course the 3000 graphics is a little better but again for what you want to do there wouldn't really be a huge difference.
  2. HD 3000 has twice as many cores, thus it is about twice as powerful. Either one will work fine for 1080p video, so go with the HD 2000, unless you plan on playing older games or ones that are not very GPU intensive. (like Minecraft)
  3. You should get the cheaper one, and use the saved money towards an ssd.
  4. For the usage it doesn't matter, if casual gaming comes into it then HD3000, neither are particularly good though.
  5. I would just go with which ever Core i3 model with the Intel HD 2000 graphics core.

    The Intel HD 3000 is basically equivalent to a Radeon HD 5450 without DX11 support. Then again the Radeon HD 5450 is much too weak to be considered a gaming card. I've seen Radeon HD 5450 sell for as low as $15 after rebate.

    If your friend ever decides he wants to play games, then you can just add a video as long as the power supply is powerful enough to handle it.
  6. Why the i3 if he's only surfing and watching videos? Look for a dual-core SB Pentium. It's almost as fast as the i3's (seriously, hyper threading is useless) and a lot of money saved that can be put to something more useful, like an SSD.

    If you can find a dual-core SB Pentium with HD3000 graphics, so much the better.
  7. ^

    Yeah, that's actually true. I generally tend to ignore lower end CPUs. A Sandy Bridge Pentium G840, G850 or G860 should be more than enough for simple tasks.

    However, those CPUs only comes with an Intel HD graphic core (not the HD 2000 or HD 3000). It might not be enough to watch HD video so the money saved can be used to buy an inexpensive graphic card like a Radeon HD 5450 or HD 6450.
  8. And a APU, would that do what you need to do, plus a better integrated graphics.
  9. For the usage of Browsing, playing HD videos and a slight gaming a quad core A6 or a A8 would be the best buy.
    Their intended use is that.
    You can also do some games at low settings and with a i3 you really need a discrete graphics card to get the maximum juice out of the processor.
    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819103943
  10. Pherule said:
    Why the i3 if he's only surfing and watching videos? Look for a dual-core SB Pentium. It's almost as fast as the i3's (seriously, hyper threading is useless) and a lot of money saved that can be put to something more useful, like an SSD.

    If you can find a dual-core SB Pentium with HD3000 graphics, so much the better.

    i3 doesnot have hyper threading
  11. mitunchidamparam said:
    i3 doesnot have hyper threading

    Yes, it does.
  12. A Sandy bridge Pentium would be enough for low-bitrate 1080p, like youtube, but may not be enough for full Blu-ray decoding.

    For Multi-tasking -> i3 + 8GB RAM
    For Casual Computing -> Pentium SB + 4GB RAM
    For Casual Computing and Light Gaming -> AMD A6/A8 APU + HD 6530D

    Take the HD 3000 Graphics Only if it costs less than 10$ more than the i3 with HD 2000.

    Hope it helps! :)
  13. My 1st gen. laptop i3 CPU with intel HD plays crysis @ 1024 x 768 at low settings at around 28fps without too many problems. so HD2000 will be fine.
  14. Seen a Llano based LAN rig handle BF3 on medium settings quite well, if you get a requisite HD 65XX card to run Hybrid crossfire, it makes a rather low cost all rounder.

    I used to be skeptical over the Llano, but really have grown to like them enough that I am contemplating a trinity.
  15. mitunchidamparam said:
    i3 doesnot have hyper threading



    Check the last section; "Advanced Technologies"

    http://ark.intel.com/products/53422/
  16. hehe :)
  17. mitunchidamparam said:
    i3 doesnot have hyper threading


    Really it doesn't because I'm looking at mine right now and it's showing four cores out of a dual core processor, sounds like hyper threading to me. Yes it does have hyper threading and I would take an I3 over a any of the Llano APU's. The Sandy Bridges I3 is going still be faster than the LLno APU's.
  18. On a core yes, but when it comes to IGP vs IGP performance, the Llano can still play every title, HD is not supported by BF3, Skyrim and F1 2011.
  19. OK...but really why would anyone try to play a high-end video game with integrated graphics. Thats like buying a high-end sports car and never driving it above 15 MPH. If you're going to game you would be better of with a faster processor and a dedicated video card.
  20. Some folks don't have the benefit of a cash like others, or like me just use a Llano setup as a LAN rig, it does a rather proficient job for its specs, hybrid crossfire is also a nice inexpensive feature.

    Its just a option.
  21. I guess but IMO they're a waste. If I'm going to be do something where I'm going to need good graphics (out side of gaming) then I'll probably go with a faster processor like an I5 or Phenom II with a dedicated graphics card. If I plan on doing something where graphics doesn't matter than I would probably go with an I3 or I5 and just use the onboard graphics because again there is no need for great graphics.
  22. for anyone asking questions it about the best options for their budget and needs, everything is just a option, personally I would also go with a more powerful chip, I was merely stating that the llano is more impressive than I was expecting when you accept it for what it is.
  23. llano for notebooks... :)
  24. Yes they are ok for notebooks/laptops, but even then I would probably go with something like an I3 2330M. If you're going to game on a laptop then I guess the APU would be good. You get a decent processor and better graphics. I just bought a laptop and was choosing between an I3 and a quad core APU and after doing some research I wasn't overly impressed with the APU. Yea it has better graphics but the performance was below the I3 2330M. I went for performance over graphics and IMO the HD 3000 graphics is more than enough. It even games pretty decently too, I was really surprised. I expected horrible graphics like that on the old Pentium 4's desktop integrated graphics. IMO I got the best of both sides a fast processor with decent grpahics, good enough for screwing around on the internet and light gaming.
  25. sarinaide said:
    On a core yes, but when it comes to IGP vs IGP performance, the Llano can still play every title, HD is not supported by BF3, Skyrim and F1 2011.


    The Intel HD 3000 is capable of playing Skyrim.
  26. Best answer selected by drums101.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs HD Graphics Product