integrated graphics

[Guest]

anyone settle dispute? Friend says good integrated graphics/ sound chipsets are good because they run faster than isa/pci/agp bus athough they are not expandable. Is that true?

 

[LancerEvolution7]

LOL!

Intergrated sound chipsets used to be horrible, but they are getting better and better. So if you want to save a couple bucks its ok to use the intergrated one.

Intergrated video was never good and never will be because it takes a part of your regular memory and uses it as video memory. Thus slowing your system down as a whole. That and there are no good intergrated graphics chipsets, the best one out there is the one from nvidia which is basically a geforce 2 MX. That card is $hit.

 

[Kzzrn]

"Intergrated sound chipsets used to be horrible, but they are getting better and better. So if you want to save a couple bucks its ok to use the intergrated one."

They're great for listening to windows sounds, but I wouldn't recommend them for most games.

"That and there are no good intergrated graphics chipsets, the best one out there is the one from nvidia which is basically a geforce 2 MX"

That whole chipset sucked. In anycase, for email, word processing, DOS games, StarCraft, and a few other things, that card will work just fine.

Knowledge is the key to understanding

 

[Kzzrn]

"anyone settle dispute? Friend says good integrated graphics/ sound chipsets are good because they run faster than isa/pci/agp bus athough they are not expandable. Is that true?"

Oh, and you're friend clearly doesn't know what he's talking about.

Knowledge is the key to understanding

 

[Crashman]

LOL, most use System RAM instead of much faster video RAM. So onboard graphics make you whole computer act slower, not just the video portion. Of course there were a few boards with 8MB of onboard video memory, but even the cheapest cards come with 32MB now. And the quality of the internal components was a joke, using such cores as the ancient i740 and S3 Savage Pro. All in all, most new onboard graphics give slightly better performance than a decent PCI graphics card. The only one that stands out is the nForce, with graphics comparable to a $40 video card, about twice as powerfull as a PCI version (at best).

<font color=blue>You're posting in a forum with class. It may be third class, but it's still class!</font color=blue>

 

[tombance]

Hey.....

GF2 MX400 aint that bad, i get 70fps in most games and 2745 3dmarks on a p3 750. It just depends on how good u r at setting up ur comp. My friend has a GF3 ti500, he gets 60fps in CS, he hasnt upgraded his drivers in ages, and his whole comp is full of shareware crap.... I can beat him in terms of fps in same settings.

My sig's faster than yours, and it overclocks better too....

 

[Spitfire_x86]

<i> Originally written by LancerEvolution7 </i>

Intergrated sound chipsets used to be horrible, but they are getting better and better

<i> Originally written by Kzzrn </i>

They're great for listening to windows sounds, but I wouldn't recommend them for most games.

nForce APU is at least as good as audigy in terms of quality. As nForce APU uses Hypertransport instead of PCI, nForce audio uses less cpu than audigy, I don't know the actual comparison. $32 SB Live! 5.1 takes at least 5 times more cpu time compared to nForce APU.

Recent integrated sound chips are almost as good as $32 SB Live! 5.1 in terms of quality. CPU usage may be little higher or equal.


<b><font color=red> Long live piracy! </font color=red></b>

 

[Spitfire_x86]

Yoe are 100% correct. Shared video ram hurts memory performance badly. Even memory performance of nForce becomes about 15% worse when you use integrated grahics. This has pretty bad effect on real world performance.

<b><font color=red> Long live piracy! </font color=red></b>

 

[LancerEvolution7]

Have you listened to the lastest intergrated sounds? They really don't sound all that bad. In fact its better than the usual el-cheapo sound card that you get for $15. Yes, i know its not as good as the sound blaster audigy line, but those are in the $50 price range. All I'm saying is that its not the greatest thing in the world but its not the worst either.

 

[shloader]

I second that your friend needs to do his reading. saying something like that I'd take any advice of his with a grain of salt the size of Manhattan. Seriously though...

ATI weilds decent onboard graphics and I say that only because their 2D quality can always be counted on. nVidia's first Geforce wasn't the unholy joke everyone said it was... Good memory performance for long running video encoding. It's integrated sound was on par with Soundblaster live 5.1 cards. It's graphics weren't meant to be the meanest thing around. In fact I think there were far better performing Mobile graphics chips for laptops. Until now integrated graphics were largely unusable in terms of gaming but now just about all graphics card vendors are getting their acts together (S3 being an exception). Upcomming nForce2 integrated graphics and sound will be enough to make just about all games out now fun, some even in 32 bit.

Still... The best integrated graphics still won't touch on performance levels of a good $125 - 175 AGP card. Just depends on what you want.

Everytime my roommate turns the heat off I end up running my athlons at 100%. It all works out.