Who has the best onboard IGP?

[bupkus]

Who has the best onboard IGP?

 

[renethx]

AMD (Radeon Xpress 1250 for Intel, Radeon X1250 for AMD).

 

[FrodeNilsen]

Originally posted by: renethx
AMD (Radeon Xpress 1250 for Intel, Radeon X1250 for AMD).

AMD got issues with 4GB RAM or more. If you ever plan to use more than 2GB RAM, and you should if you use Vista, then steer clear of AMD like a plague.

 

[bupkus]

AMD (Radeon Xpress 1250 for Intel, Radeon X1250 for AMD).

Were any tests done that demonstrate that?

 

[seemingly random]

Define best.

Originally posted by: FrodeNilsen
steer clear of AMD like a plague.

Got it.

 

[FrodeNilsen]

Originally posted by: bupkus

AMD (Radeon Xpress 1250 for Intel, Radeon X1250 for AMD).

Were any tests done that demonstrate that?

It is reviews like these that make up the 690g reputation:

http://www.hardocp.com/article...wxLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

Some sites test the integrated GFX.

http://www.overclockersclub.com/reviews/abit_m2hd/

Look at the latter link, and you will find that even if the 690g beats the 7050pv, non are usefull to play modern games though.

If you want to use the integrated GFX, and want to play anything at all, you should stick with XP. XP do not require more than 2gb either. Vista is not recomended for the 690g, as the MB do not support 4gb, and games will run slower than on XP.

There is only one ATX board with the 690g that works with Vista: MSI K9AG Neo2 Digital, so if you got room for it, beeing an ATX board, this is the one to get. The chipset cooler on this board is medium size and offers medium cooling. The board should probably last longer than most other integrated GFX boards as a result.

Please take note that these chipsets are usually passively cooled, and they run hot. They are not made to last. Nvidia is hotter than the AMD, as Nvidia put everything in one chip, compared to AMDs two chips. The power consumption of the entire system are about equal.

The Intel integrated GFX is fare worse than AMD/Nvidia. But many of them boards are made with better components, like solid state capacitors. There is a lot of new integrated chipsets comming from Nvidia, AMD, and Intel, most of them should be here here by the end of january.

 

[imported_Kreed]

It seems as if heat is a common theme in this generation of chipsets. That's probably not surprising given the amount of features they're now integrating. I wonder if we will ever get to a point in the industry where chipsets require the same amount of cooling as Quad Core CPUs.

The next generation of chipsets appear to have even more features. Let's hope the manufacturers design them to be cool and quiet.

 

[hans007]

the 690g is probably the best one, but you are limited to amd cpus obviously.

 

[NXIL]

Dear Bup,

Intel has a huge percentage of the IGP market, so, in terms of sales, it is "best".

The reason why Intel has such a massive share of the graphics market is because of its IGP products used by OEMs world wide, so it should be inevitable that AMD and Nvidia want to get in on the action.

For just standard, routine, 2D integrated graphics, just getting an Intel chipset and IGP might be "best".

Current Intel IGP chipset boards:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...%2c717%3a29251&bop=And

Only this Intel board has DVI in addition to a VGA port:

Intel BOXDG33TLM LGA 775 Intel G33 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813121315

ATI/Intel: pretty tepid response at Newegg:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...CodeValue=1256%3A28253

Older, very debugged 945G boards:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...1046%2CN82E16813121321

AM2/Nvidia:

More of these boards have DVI:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...2c1256%3a18123&bop=And

AM2/ATI-AMD:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...2c1256%3a28253&bop=And

For a basic system, I do like AMD AM2 CPUs better, partly becuase of price, and in part due to the heatsink fan attachment, which I think is better than Intel's Lunar Lander type arrangement.

HTH

NXIL

 

[renethx]

Originally posted by: NXIL
Only this Intel board has DVI in addition to a VGA port:

Intel BOXDG33TLM LGA 775 Intel G33 Micro ATX Intel Motherboard - Retail

http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813121315

Here is another G33 chipset mATX motherboard with DVI (and VGA and HDMI) that is famous among HTPC users:

GIGABYTE GA-G33M-S2H
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813128063

 

[hans007]

you could just buy an intel igp board and a add2-n card. they are like $10 for the card.

 

[bupkus]

Originally posted by: hans007
you could just buy an intel igp board and a add2-n card. they are like $10 for the card.

What's that?

 

[renethx]

An ADD2 card is a PCI Express x16 card that has a DVI (or HDMI) transmitter.

http://search.ebay.com/search/...atitle=add2&category0=

 

[PCTC2]

coming soon is the "new" nVIDIA 630i chipset with nForce 7150 IGP. It'll go for around $130, support HDMI, DVI, and VGA.

it doesn't seem to perform as well as the Intel X3000 in the single review i've seen, but i'd like to see a few more before judging it.

 

[renethx]

Originally posted by: FrodeNilsen

Originally posted by: renethx
AMD (Radeon Xpress 1250 for Intel, Radeon X1250 for AMD).

AMD got issues with 4GB RAM or more. If you ever plan to use more than 2GB RAM, and you should if you use Vista, then steer clear of AMD like a plague.

uATX Update

Glad to hear that the problem was fixed (for the GIGABYTE boards) . Apparently the problem is not the chipset itself but something else.

 

[seemingly random]

By best, I was looking for intended use.

If htpc, then I would choose a 690g chipset mb since it is arguably the most widespread at the moment and thus should have the most support. 7050 is not a bad choice but not nearly as widespread. If pure 2d speed, then g33 if one is to believe 'Vista Experience Index' results. If absolute maturity, 6150.

The mb form factor is another consideration since the above are available in both ATX and uATX. cpu brand preference might come into play - there are a mb's with 690g and Intel available. And video ports desired - different combinations of VGA, DVI, and HDMI are available. And of course, price - a build for amd cpu's are cheaper.

I haven't heard of a failure attributed to heat - semiconductors are designed to run hot.

There are several "impending" releases as mentioned in other posts - amd, nvidia, intel. One has to consider patience level in waiting for initially sloppy bios's to become stable. I have experience with a biostar and asus 690g uATX - both of which have been the most difficult builds yet encountered but they're getting better. The 690g mb's have less than preferred fan control - don't understand the regression.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: renethx
uATX Update

huh?

 

[nidhoggr]

It is still a chipset issue, because all ASUS 690G boards have the same probs. Its more like a BIOS workaround. Nonetheless, at least for Gigabyte and 4GB it works now.

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: nidhoggr
at least for Gigabyte and 4GB it works now.

Works with Vista32 or Vista64 or both? Has there been a problem with 4mb and XP or XP64?

 

[nidhoggr]

Under Vista32 and other 32bit OS there can only be used a maximum of 3GB to 3.5GB Ram depending on the installed hardware.
Under Vista64 (dont know about XP64) especially the graphics adapter and southbridge couldnt address anything beyong that 32bit barrier resulting in instability and crashes. Limiting RAM to 4096MB with msconfig (resulting in 3 to 3.5gb avaiable RAM there were no problems at all).

That got fixed with the BIOS update, basically its just the memory remapping option some motherboards offer for the use with 4gb+ and 64bit OS.
When assigning a lot of memory to the onboard graphics the problem nearly didnt occur at all, because the system RAM became VRAM so that the system hat in most cases only 3,5GB avaiable.

 

[taltamir]

honestly... spend the extra 40$ and get a really cheap video card and a mobo without a built in gpu...
EDIT: I looked it up, it costs an extra 25$ only!

Nothing is playable on the build in gpus anyways, and even if you plan to do absolutely no gaming you still have driver support issues... With an external card those just go away.
I would recommend an nvidia card since they driver support is better.

Video cards:
7200 (35$ including shipping) = http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814127273
8400 (50$ including shipping) = http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16814127296

Those will give you much better performance and the peace of mind of an easy install and lots of driver support for years to come.
On an "office" computer I would put the above mentioned 7200 card with a cheap motherboard from asus. For the mobo also get the latest chipset you can... this again is good for ensuring the useability in years to come...
Asus just makes reliable good boards... with an ECS you can expect 10 hours of fiddling, replacing parts, and making every incompatible thing work... with an asus nforce mobo it just works as soon as the parts are in.

Asus nforce 520 motherboard (62.99$ with free shipping) = http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16813131179


however, the cheapest 690G motherboard costs 72$ shipped (at least at newegg)... saving those 25$ is just not worth it... you will spend many many hours messing with it getting it to work right... while the motherboard and gpu i suggested will only require you to plug them in, and install the latest driver from nvidia for whatever it is you could want.

benefits of mobo + gpu for extra 25$:
1. Plentiful drivers for everything, which are up to date and continue to be updated.
2. Quality products that will last long.
3. Much higher video performance and quality, as well as more varied plugs (DVI + VGA, vs VGA only on a built in board).
4. Save hours of labor trying to get things to work right.
5. More...

 

[seemingly random]

Originally posted by: taltamir
honestly... spend the extra 40$ and get a really cheap video card and a mobo without a built in gpu...

This is what's good for you and that's great. Some people really like the smaller uATX case size - less obtrusive and lighter than a full ATX. This is why intended use is so important when people are looking for an opinion about what's best. There have been many improvements in uATX mb's in the last couple of years. I also try not to comment on components unless I have personal experience with them.

I have used several 6150 uATX mb's for almost two years with two monitors and am completely satisfied. Gaming on them except for Solitaire would be a joke without a gpu. I have no idea why so many reviewers waste time testing games on igp's - unless it's just to point out the obvious. One of the benefits of a mb w/igp is that it's usable without a gpu but one can be added later if desired. And an igp makes debugging problems easier as the gpu can be removed from the equation.