I noticed that the Intel processors all come with a graphics processor...does this mean I will not need a separate video card? also is it better to get the k model versus the T model.
Wish I could be more specific, but I built an ASUS Z87 system last year for a business associate and the BIOS finally supported using the onboard graphics with an add-in dual monitor graphics card. I easily had three monitors going. Used to be as soon as you plugged in a graphics card the onboard graphics would automatically be disabled, but I can't quote specifics on when and how this support changed.I dunno if Intel's IGP supports 3 screens, but I have used it with 2 before.
^ what he said for the most part.
I guess the exception would be if your looking at the i7's.
Even if you don't plan on overclocking a K chip the i7-4790k would be a better purchase than the i7-4790 for example. The reasoning is the default clock speeds and turbo boost. Well worth the xtra $'s for the speed increase with the option to overclock in the future. Would be MB dependent with overclocking.
Not really true. If you don't plan on overclocking and don't buy a suitable motherboard, it's not worth the $$. It's up to $30 more for a 100mhz bump by default.
You mean 400MHz bump.
It all depends on what you need and the type of software you're going to use.I noticed that the Intel processors all come with a graphics processor...does this mean I will not need a separate video card? also is it better to get the k model versus the T model.
The integrated video cards are slow. Games will run like crap with them, if they will run at all. I personally think these integrated video-cards are a waste.
