integrated graphics

[linkin]

It's like you didn't even read my previous post, unbelievable. Whats more noob that just stating a fact rather than backing it up with reasoning? You are the noob. Like I said, whats he need the ''best'' onboard for? What else is he doing with the PC? Nope just your noob underinformed statement of AMD has better onboard. Not a care at all that he would be buying a dead end socket board and CPU just because of your lame statement.



Seriously? Did you see the reason why I said not to count FM1? It's because no one buying retail uses it (so it has large OEM sales, that has nothing to do with the OP wanting to know about RETAIL chips). Practically everyone on here either uses either AM3 or intel. Therefore, the proper comparison is AMD 4250/4290 or intel HD2000/3000 graphics. And the answer is, both onboards can do that same thing each other can do, so since Intel has better CPU's it's best to just go intel.

Yes FM1 has better onboard, but for like the 100th time I'm asking WHAT DOES IT EVEN MATTER? What can you do better with FM1's onboard that you cannot do with Intel HD2000/3000?

Answer me that and I might be satisfied to not argue with the blanket statement of ''AMD has better onboard graphics''....because here is the TRUE blanket statement that covers all reasoning behind proper choices-

Intel has better CPU's, and onboard graphics plenty good to do anything that you would need to do with onboard graphics.

You can play games for one. Of course enthusiasts don't care about FM1. Why would they, we all have dedicated cards or onboard/oncpu backups in case you need it. FM1 has the best CPU/GPU combination which is great for playing games as casual thing, on low/medium settings at an average resolution (like 1440x900). It's great for people on a budget and family types/HTPC. Yes, Intel HD2000/3000 can do that too, but AMD's integrated graphics perform better. And on FM1, upgrading to faster RAM actually boosts graphics performance.

 

[87dtna]

Wrong, I could not play black ops on 1440x900 all settings low. I had the GPU overclocked a ton to 810 mhz (cpu at 3.5ghz 135x26) and was averaging 45fps. On stock 600 mhz I averaged 35fps.

On black ops you need 60fps to have no lag, 45fps was very laggy and 35 wasn't even playable. And black ops is not even a graphically intense game. And there was no CPU bottleneck with a quad at 3.5ghz.

I also tried COD5 with similar results, just too laggy to play. It wasn't until I lowered resolution to 1280x720 that the games became playable, at which point was just a horrendous gaming experience.

As for faster ram, well I was running the ram at 2160 cas 9 so you be the judge.

It's great for people on a budget and family types/HTPC. Yes, Intel HD2000/3000 can do that too, but AMD's integrated graphics perform better.

Whats the definition of perform better here? What exactly is it doing better?

 

[Mishkin]

I agree with both sides on this issue. Both have valid points. However, I disagree with the whole concept of what the point is to have an AMD APU over Intel HD for an htpc/family/budget types of systems.

The answer is pretty simple. It's better. There have been TONS of instances in the computer hardware world throughout history where there was more than one option for something, none of them were absolutely perfect, but one was better than the other. A little faster. A little more powerful. That scenario has more or less played out constantly in many facets of the computer world since the very beginning. If I'm going for a cheap budget system for a htpc/family build, etc...where I want to stick with integrated graphics for specific reasons, going with an AMD APU over Intel HD graphics is a no-brainer.

Sure, both options will be able to play 1080p video flawlessly. Sure, both options will have absolutely no trouble with Windows Aero and any and all basic multimedia, blu-ray, etc. And sure, neither option will be able to play Skyrim on max settings on 1080p. But the AMD APU is going to be noticeably better. When it comes to the middle-ground, the games that are 2-3 years old, lower-spec games.....I'll take every shred of integrated graphical dominance I can get.

Why? Because it will actually matter. AMD APU = more options. AMD APU = more options at better settings.

 

[87dtna]

COD5 is over 3 years old, and was a middle ground game. It cannot play it smoothly even on 1440x900.

Perhaps once trinity is released, using gaming as a reason to go AMD over intel may be a valid argument...but right now, it's still not good enough. And unfortunately, like I said before, FM1 is going no where it's a dead end socket as trinity will be released on socket FM2 so there's no argument of being able to just upgrade the CPU.

 

[Mishkin]

COD5 is over 3 years old, and was a middle ground game. It cannot play it smoothly even on 1440x900.

Perhaps once trinity is released, using gaming as a reason to go AMD over intel may be a valid argument...but right now, it's still not good enough. And unfortunately, like I said before, FM1 is going no where it's a dead end socket as trinity will be released on socket FM2 so there's no argument of being able to just upgrade the CPU.

Is COD5 playable at all on an AMD APU? Will an AMD APU be able to play COD5 better than Intel integrated graphics? What about people with laptops that want to game for a bit in a hotel room? You see where I'm going with this. As it stands, AMD integrated graphics are better than Intel integrated graphics, and that's what this entire thread is about.

In my opinion, using one game to try to prove your fruitless point is pretty silly, as is your comment as to its age in response to my statement about 2-3 year old games. Don't you think there are probably quite a few 2-3 year old games that an AMD APU can play well? Even if COD5 was the only computer game on the freakin planet, the fact is that AMD APU would be better.

Furthermore, the discussion is concerning current AMD APU graphics vs current Intel integrated graphics. Bringing up the fact that FM1 is a dead-end socket doesn't help your argument in this specific discussion whatsoever. I'm curious to see how far you start branching out. Maybe a few days from now your argument will somehow incorporate power-efficiency. Maybe in two weeks you'll be talking about toasters and easy-bake ovens.

Dig that hole, man. Dig that hole.

 

[87dtna]

LOL, thats like saying you have a car that won't go anywhere and a car that will only go 5mph. The 5mph will get you there but you will have a horrible experience doing it. If you don't mind gaming at 1024x768 or less good for you.


The only hole being dug is the one you are throwing your money into by buying a current AMD APU.

 

[Mishkin]

LOL, thats like saying you have a car that won't go anywhere and a car that will only go 5mph. The 5mph will get you there but you will have a horrible experience doing it. If you don't mind gaming at 1024x768 or less good for you.


The only hole being dug is the one you are throwing your money into by buying a current AMD APU.

That's a horrible analogy. Some of my best experiences in cars were when they were parked.

 

[phillyd1918]

Who has better "Integrated Graphics",AMD or Intel?

He asked this as a closed question so it's basically a yes/no answer and who currently can whack out the best integrated graphics at this time it's amd no other factors should even come into play.

 

[87dtna]

He asked this as a closed question so it's basically a yes/no answer and who currently can whack out the best integrated graphics at this time it's amd no other factors should even come into play.

No it's just a closed minded answer. The question is why does he want to know?

If someone asked, which is the better card- A 5870 or a gtx460? Everyone knows that a 5870 is easily graphically stronger than a gtx460 however what if his intention was for folding? For folding, the gtx460 blows to doors off a 5870.

 

[StrangleHold]

You all might as well give up. He'll carry his little self indulged rant on till hell freezes over. Endless babble till your head hurts. Let him set in his car that doesnt go anywhere.

 

[87dtna]

You all might as well give up. He'll carry his little self indulged rant on till hell freezes over. Endless babble till your head hurts. Let him set in his car that doesnt go anywhere.

lol thought you were done posting?

You cannot dispute my statement-

No it's just a closed minded answer. The question is why does he want to know?

If someone asked, which is the better card- A 5870 or a gtx460? Everyone knows that a 5870 is easily graphically stronger than a gtx460 however what if his intention was for folding? For folding, the gtx460 blows to doors off a 5870.

 

[Mishkin]

No it's just a closed minded answer. The question is why does he want to know?

If someone asked, which is the better card- A 5870 or a gtx460? Everyone knows that a 5870 is easily graphically stronger than a gtx460 however what if his intention was for folding? For folding, the gtx460 blows to doors off a 5870.

Actually, the question was this:

"Who has better "Integrated Graphics",AMD or Intel?"

The answer is AMD. That's all there is to it. Like what's his name said, it's a pretty cut-and-dried deal.

On another note, I see you've branched out to folding capabilities of discrete video cards now. I didn't expect that quite so soon. I guess toasters just might be less than 2 weeks away.

 

[87dtna]

Believe it or not there is a group of people who do not play games. Some might enjoy watching a movie, might have word document or any other office program, maybe just use internet just to find information. Its sometimes common for these types to also not use AutoCAD or Photoshop type programs as well. They may not use video editing programs as well.

All the things you mentioned the Intel onboard can do and you would not even notice any graphical differences whatsoever with an AMD APU.

You would notice however things being faster with the intel CPU because of better raw processing power.

87dtna you are not the only person in the universe there are other people out there with different needs than what you have.

NO ONE HERE POSTING RIGHT NOW KNOWS WHAT THE OP'S NEEDS ARE! Thats my WHOLE POINT of ever posting in this thread. DUH. I've been wanting to know this the entire time from my first post. Wow you people are so retarded.

 

[Gary1]

Your whole point discusses what he did not ask. Intel CPU's are good,I am sure their onbard graphics are good too. I don't care really. On board graphics suck. You think your grandmother would know, they both work but AMD is better. More people than I care to think about would not know the difference between good GPU and bad GPU. Speaking of being retarded, this is a retarded subject to get your panties in a bunch. How do you even know the OP has intentions of purchasing a motherboard or CPU(APU) with integrated graphics? There isn't enough information to worry about anyone's needs.

What if he is using his computer only for CNC?

 

[Okedokey]

To the OP,

If you are not planning on using a dedicated graphics card, the AMD integrated graphics are better. Simple.

 

[johnb35]

Why do certain members need babysitting? I thought most of us were adults? I can't watch every thread that gets created on this forum. I'm issuing infractions, deleting posts and maybe giving out temp bans. I know we can all get along, the fanboism needs to cease. Everytime something like this comes up, someone always has to have the last word, tempers flair and members start getting insulted and other crap and I've had enough.

This thread is now closed.