Printable View
Should anyone consider buying a computer with integrated graphics? I was reading the specs on a DELL that uses shared memory and they said that about 32 to 64Mb are used for graphics. Would a computer running 256Mb with shared memory be sufficient for most tasks?
Yes, it is more than enough. I have an 8 meg card on my programming computer. But a 128 meg one on gaming and 3d design one.
If you are not an extensive user of a graphic card then it's way more than enough but if not then stand alone graphics card would be the best option.
I would recommend, it you can, getting one with an AGP slot so that you can upgrade later. Mine has an integrated video card but I installed an ATI 32MB AGP Rage Fury Pro. I wouldnt have bought the bard if it didnt have a AGP slot.
I thought the AGP slot was on the mother board so the Graphics board could plug into it instead of the older PCI slots. :confused:Quote:
Admiral Michael
I would recommend, it you can, getting one with an AGP slot so that you can upgrade later. Mine has an integrated video card but I installed an ATI 32MB AGP Rage Fury Pro. I wouldnt have bought the bard if it didnt have a AGP slot.
The computer with the board i was talking about is actually for my cousin which my aunt is going to buy for her since she is starting college. The only thing i didnt like about it was that it had integrated graphics. I just suggested that they order it with at least 256Mb of ram insted of the 128Mb it comes with.
Im running an old 3dfx Voodoo I which i would like to scrap and put in maybe a ATI Pro Radeon 128Mb or a Nividia NV30
As I said b4, as long you are not a heavy users of graphics cards potential integrated would be fine. Also all modern motherboards come with AGP so you can always go for seperate one in future.
I would suggest to get 256 MB RAM though.
Cheers.
It is on the motherboard. What Im saying is that some boards (like mine) that do have integrated graphcs) also have a AGP slot.Quote:
Originally posted by Dilenger4
I thought the AGP slot was on the mother board so the Graphics board could plug into it instead of the older PCI slots. :confused:
The computer with the board i was talking about is actually for my cousin which my aunt is going to buy for her since she is starting college. The only thing i didnt like about it was that it had integrated graphics. I just suggested that they order it with at least 256Mb of ram insted of the 128Mb it comes with.
Im running an old 3dfx Voodoo I which i would like to scrap and put in maybe a ATI Pro Radeon 128Mb or a Nividia NV30
That's cool that they give you an AGP slot on a mother board with integrated graphcs. :)
They better! On-board video cards typically suck.Quote:
Originally posted by Dilenger4
That's cool that they give you an AGP slot on a mother board with integrated graphcs. :)
Yes they do but they aint bad either for general purpose.Quote:
Originally posted by DiGiTaIErRoR
They better! On-board video cards typically suck.
Ya, but I'd still like the option of being able to upgrade it later on. A friend of mine has a integrated motherboard with integrated graphics and no AGP and he regrets not gettin it with an AGP slot.
Dude nowadays all the motherboards with inbuild sound and graphics also have an AGP slot.Quote:
Originally posted by Admiral Michael
Ya, but I'd still like the option of being able to upgrade it later on. A friend of mine has a integrated motherboard with integrated graphics and no AGP and he regrets not gettin it with an AGP slot.
I don't know when they started to add AGP slots on motherboards with integrated graphics but maybe Admiral Michael's friend bought his computer a while ago. :D
My computer has integrated graphics (Intel 8245G Graphics Controller-8mb shared), and I use Microsoft's Flight Simulator 2002 and it has quite good graphics.
My friend was lookin at the motherboaqrd about 6 days ago. So, not all include an AGP slot.
Some various comments
1. Get 512MB of RAM if possible.
2. Integrated graphics are okay for "office-type" tasks. The only issues you may run into are crappy DACs and thus low refresh rates/blurry pictures, and no DVI (although if you aren't into LCDs I guess it doesn't matter). If you get enough system RAM then the UMA isn't so bad. But get 512MB.
BTW Intel graphics are pretty horrible. Get an nForce 2 IGP board...might even be cheaper as its AMD. Cheaper and faster...what more could you ask for?
3. It is possible to get AGP slots and integrated graphics on the same motherboard because the integrated graphics are done on the southbridge, which is coincidentally the same thing that the AGP bus is connected to. So, if you plug in an AGP card and disable onboard video in the BIOS, the SB just disables its own graphics and passes through to the AGP slot. Tada.
Er.... stability for one thing!Quote:
Originally posted by siyan
BTW Intel graphics are pretty horrible. Get an nForce 2 IGP board...might even be cheaper as its AMD. Cheaper and faster...what more could you ask for?
God... I just arrive back, and i'm already correcting you Siyan! :p :p :p
Ahh... it's good 2 be back! ;)
He's dead right about the Intel GFX though! There a bit like Packard Bell in a way... they may look nice at times, but you always know they are a bag of bollox inside! :)
Regards,
Paul.
This A7N8X has been pretty darn good so far. Barton 2500 at 2.2Ghz 200x11 with RAM at 200Mhz 8-3-3-2.5 dual channel. Screw Intel. LOL.Quote:
Originally posted by VisionIT
Er.... stability for one thing!
God... I just arrive back, and i'm already correcting you Siyan! :p :p :p
So :p
Never realized that this topic is going on and on for 20 days now.:eek:
Why the hell would you even consider getting on-board graphics? First off, they suck, the CPU speed is extremely slow (even if it has 120mb, it won't be near as good as a Geforece 4 Ti4200) and they arn't over-clockable.
Get a nice, cheap Geforce 4 Ti4200 and BUILD the computer.
Not exactly my point but I will still buy a seperate graphics card.Quote:
Originally posted by kasracer
Why the hell would you even consider getting on-board graphics? First off, they suck, the CPU speed is extremely slow (even if it has 120mb, it won't be near as good as a Geforece 4 Ti4200) and they arn't over-clockable.
Get a nice, cheap Geforce 4 Ti4200 and BUILD the computer.
I run an abit kr7a, XP 1600+, 256 MB Micron Crucial DDR RAM.Quote:
Originally posted by VisionIT
Er.... stability for one thing!
God... I just arrive back, and i'm already correcting you Siyan! :p :p :p
Ahh... it's good 2 be back! ;)
He's dead right about the Intel GFX though! There a bit like Packard Bell in a way... they may look nice at times, but you always know they are a bag of bollox inside! :)
Regards,
Paul.
I have no stability problems.
I have a packard bell laptop with a S3 Savage and it ran better than my rage 128 pro 32 meg. onboard is often lower and with less features than independant cards but they are ok.
What is she going to use the pc for??? No point in 512MB ram for word and excel.
P.s Avoid Windows XP with a passion i do :D :D :D :D
Nah...for just a normal home users XP is ok. As long as updated properly with a decent firewall and antivirus installed.Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
I have a packard bell laptop with a S3 Savage and it ran better than my rage 128 pro 32 meg. onboard is often lower and with less features than independant cards but they are ok.
What is she going to use the pc for??? No point in 512MB ram for word and excel.
P.s Avoid Windows XP with a passion i do :D :D :D :D
Networking is crap
security is crap
reliability is crap
compatibility is crap
WINDOWS XP IS CRAP!!!! :D :D :D
I never said you'de have stability problems... I just continued Siyan's comment on "what more could you ask for"Quote:
Originally posted by DiGiTaIErRoR
I run an abit kr7a, XP 1600+, 256 MB Micron Crucial DDR RAM.
I have no stability problems.
----
Siyan...
Don't stick your tongue out @ me! I don't know where it's been! :D :D :D
----
I can't actually comment of o/b graphics and unstable systems... cause i'm running an 800Mhz Athlon/512mb PC133/120Gb 7200!!!!!! The insurance company has taken all the good systems for investigation! :( Damn power surges!
I never realised until now, just how damn small 15" screens are! I can't see a thing! :( :p
Circuit Breakers are wonderful ;) ;)
I didnt look for thingys on my 15 inch screen when i had one so i couldnt say (Not that i look now :eek: :eek: :eek: )
:D :D :D :D
Are one of those ANTI WINDOWS guy because I really don't want to start any debut here.Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
Networking is crap
security is crap
reliability is crap
compatibility is crap
WINDOWS XP IS CRAP!!!! :D :D :D
Only i hate windows xp
i have win 2000 and win 98
my experiance with XP is touch and go :mad: :mad: :mad:
:D :D :D
End of conversation ;) ;) ;)
I think you are unlucky...;)Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
Only i hate windows xp
i have win 2000 and win 98
my experiance with XP is touch and go :mad: :mad: :mad:
:D :D :D
End of conversation ;) ;) ;)
No, WIndows XP is the EXACT same thing as 2k except for more features, faster booting and better support for just about everything.Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
Networking is crap
security is crap
reliability is crap
compatibility is crap
WINDOWS XP IS CRAP!!!! :D :D :D
Windows XP is the most stable operating system microsoft has made, it has great security (it even comes with a firewall, which 2K doesn't, how the hell can you say the security sucks :confused: ) it's more reliable than 2K (in all of my experiences) and the compatibility is better than that of 2K.
The stuff you listed was listed out of ignorance, Windows XP was built apon 2K and has the same compatability as 2K has, if not, more.
I wouldn't say that.Quote:
Originally posted by kasracer
Windows XP is the most stable operating system microsoft has made.]
Firewall is crap so no point there.Quote:
it has great security (it even comes with a firewall, which 2K doesn't, how the hell can you say the security sucks :confused: )
But it's still a good product.
No i have a regular contact with winxp and i hate it.
No it doesnt have the same compatability i use windows 2000 as well and that seems to have more reliable compatability some programs dont work unless you put them in compatability on windows xp.
The networking is no good for automation. Sharing and unsharing just to make it work is now common place here.
I can see the benefits for normal use but its not or me :) :) :)
Windows XP is 1 of the most stable versions microsoft has ever made.Quote:
Originally posted by wrack
I wouldn't say that.
Firewall is crap so no point there.
But it's still a good product.
Also, the firewall is fairly good. Not the best but what do you expect from something integrated?
This is wrong. Windows XP is based apon Windows 2K. Anything that works on 2K will work on XP (unless it is something that works WITH a Win2k feature). If the program only works on WIndows 2000, then you are doing something wrong.Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
No it doesnt have the same compatability i use windows 2000 as well and that seems to have more reliable compatability some programs dont work unless you put them in compatability on windows xp.
Windows XP's compatability system is, by far, superior than 2K's.
:confused: Are you trying to say the automated wizards are useless or something? Window's XP Pro's networking capability is superior to 2K's and no one I know has ever had any problems with it. You are also doing something wrong here if sharing and un-sharing is required for something to work. Maybe get a new admin?(if it's in a business)Quote:
Originally posted by BodwadUK
The networking is no good for automation. Sharing and unsharing just to make it work is now common place here.
Windows XP Home is just as good, but the networking ability is lacking compared to XP Pro. Home probably on par with 2K's networking ability.
*laughs*Quote:
Originally posted by VisionIT
I can't actually comment of o/b graphics and unstable systems... cause i'm running an 800Mhz Athlon/512mb PC133/120Gb 7200!!!!!! The insurance company has taken all the good systems for investigation! :( Damn power surges!
I never realised until now, just how damn small 15" screens are! I can't see a thing! :( :p
Barton 2500 @ 3200 (more headroom left)
512MB PC3200
2x 120GB Seagates
nForce 2 with Soundstorm
Ti4200 128MB @ 250/566 (more headroom left)
19" Samsung 191T
:) :) :)
Wait.... have I been owned? NEVER!Quote:
Originally posted by siyan
*laughs*
Barton 2500 @ 3200 (more headroom left)
512MB PC3200
2x 120GB Seagates
nForce 2 with Soundstorm
Ti4200 128MB @ 250/566 (more headroom left)
19" Samsung 191T
:) :) :)
Here's my PC spec (which the insurance company are using ATM)
XP 3200 @ 3200 (lol)
GA-7NNXP SE
1Gb DDR 2700 (enough head room, i'm growing a second! )
2 x 40GB 7200RPM in RAID0
1 x 120GB 7200RPM @ IDE0
1 x 250GB 7200RPM @ IDE1
NforceII with Soundstorm
Leadtek Winfast 2000XP Deluxe (finally with teletext - woot :) )
Geforce III Ti500 (damn it, you do own my GFX card... noooooo)
17" Dell 1025HE
Oh.... and a mouse with a light :D :D :D
The only thing better on yours is the fact it's not jet black inside and doesn't smell as if it's been cremated. Mine does.... hahaha... so there! ;) :rolleyes:
Oh wait... that's a bad thing! Noooooooooooooooooooo
You got me beat ONLY by CPU and ram speed :(Quote:
Originally posted by siyan
*laughs*
Barton 2500 @ 3200 (more headroom left)
512MB PC3200
2x 120GB Seagates
nForce 2 with Soundstorm
Ti4200 128MB @ 250/566 (more headroom left)
19" Samsung 191T
:) :) :)
Athlon XP 2100+
512MB PC2100
2X 80GB Maxtor 7200rpm HD
1X 120GB Maxtor 7200 rpm HD (280GB total)
Turtle Beach Santa Cruz
Geforce 4 Ti4600 (I did OC it but forgot the speeds, I'll check later)
19" ViewSonic
VisionIT and kas...you guys just wait until I kick this puppy up to 2.4Ghz...MUWHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!!
And then we'll talk about video card O/Cing.
Barton ACQUA all the way. :cool:
And my LCD eats you alive. :)
LCD? BUWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAQuote:
Originally posted by siyan
VisionIT and kas...you guys just wait until I kick this puppy up to 2.4Ghz...MUWHAHAHAHHAHAHA!!!!
And then we'll talk about video card O/Cing.
Barton ACQUA all the way. :cool:
And my LCD eats you alive. :)
Hope you don't game on it. CRTs are best for graphical design(which I do on a daily basis) and games look better on them. The freaking refresh time sucks on the LCDs as well as color.
CRT > LCD
The ghosting is very much a psychological thing. Use it for a bit and you dont' notice it any more. I play UT2K3, etc. just fine on this thing.
And the colour and geometry are both excellent IMHO.
But I mostly just do basic office tasks on this (well..soon anyways. Going to university) and its MUCH easier on the eyes for me.
A decent quality CRT kicks a*** of any LCD all the way.:o
Crts hurt my eyes so i try to use lcds where possible
I mean automation through a vb program. The networking xp tends to hang (So does 2K but not so much). The problem with the sharing in an obscure one we dont know why it does it but when sharing sometimes the folder decides that a single sub folder can not be shared (even though it was fine the day before) and causes a host not foung error.Quote:
Are you trying to say the automated wizards are useless or something? Window's XP Pro's networking capability is superior to 2K's and no one I know has ever had any problems with it. You are also doing something wrong here if sharing and un-sharing is required for something to work. Maybe get a new admin?(if it's in a business)
windows 98 tends to be better but because the systems we use cant overscan in win 98 we had to go to xp. Big mistake!!!!
Yesterday had a wierd thing where a HASP would not be read when the machine was plugged into the network. The engineer on site opened it up fiddled and bit and then rebooted. XP took 5 mins to boot and then it was fine and works well.
I have to put my program into 98 compatibility becuase windows xp kept closing the app almost at startup. Turns out the parrelel port is not so cooperative in win xp as 98 and a handset (That plugs in parralel) was causeing windows xp to just close the application.
The reason we didnt use 2000 was because it could not overscan with the gfx card we use :( :( :(
Beleieve me my experiances of windows xp for buisness use on jukeboxes is very bad and my patients wares thin with xp.
P.s In XP when you click search in explorer should a new dialog appear??? :confused: :confused: :confused:
I still adore my 486DX4 - 66!
It has a turbo button and everything! :D :cool: :D
I ran 3DMark2001 on it last week... and more score was "-19786"
LOL :p
I am suprised it ran the program!!!!
Guess you wont be playing unreal tounament 2003 on it then :D :D :D
UT2003 works fine! :D
Takes 4 weeks to load, and a further 11 years to print 1FPS, but it's still playable! :D
Even Doom strugles! :)
well i wonder why :)
Actually, if it takes 11 years to print the FPS, and if we assume that the FPS counter is painted on the first frame, then shouldn't it be 2.882708362 * 10^-9 FPS? (Give or take a little bit for leap years and the innacuracies of the RTC generator over such a long period of time).Quote:
Originally posted by VisionIT
UT2003 works fine! :D
Takes 4 weeks to load, and a further 11 years to print 1FPS, but it's still playable! :D
Even Doom strugles! :)
/me is bored. :rolleyes:
/Yes you is boring
:D :D :D :D
The fact that Windows wont run for more than 2 days wihout crashing means that he must be using Linux :D :D :D
You have too much time on your hands! :DQuote:
Originally posted by siyan
Actually, if it takes 11 years to print the FPS, and if we assume that the FPS counter is painted on the first frame, then shouldn't it be 2.882708362 * 10^-9 FPS? (Give or take a little bit for leap years and the innacuracies of the RTC generator over such a long period of time).
/me is bored. :rolleyes:
But shouldn't it be 2.882708362*3.142/80 + 1? :p