Will using integrated graphics (GMA950) hurt overall memory performance?

[HeroOfPellinor]

Say you have a very memory intensive non-3D application. Is using integrated graphics going to hurt performance or be a non-factor? I've been trying to findg 1 to 1 benchmarks with no luck so far.


----------------------------EDIT-------------------------------

Thanks guys. I actually managed to finally find a link to an article at Extreme Tech that attempts to answer this exact question. The results are pretty clear.

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1912682,00.asp

Integrated graphics have a huge negative impact on overall system performance as I feared.

 

[dfuze]

Offhand, I would think yes because integrated graphics take away from your main lot of memory, so there would be less to use for that program. I have no evidence to prove either way though...

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

I'm less concerned with the amount of memory it steals and more concerned with application calls being superceded by graphics.

 

[ForumMaster]

i would assume it could. although more cause the latency might increase. (Am i making any sense?) I'm not sure but for things such as video editing, a video card can and is still useful. what kind of app do you have in mind?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: ForumMaster
i would assume it could. although more cause the latency might increase. (Am i making any sense?) I'm not sure but for things such as video editing, a video card can and is still useful. what kind of app do you have in mind?

Audio multitracking/mixing.

I'm having a heck of a time picking out a notebook because all I need is 4GB capable and C2D, but I can't get that in a 1280x800 resolution with dedicated video memory unless I spend way more than the GMA solutions.

 

[mithrandir2001]

Your RAM may run at a lower speed because of the integrated video. That's what happens on my Dell PC at work.

 

[aphex]

My Mac Mini has a C2D w/ 2gb of PC5300 and GMA950, seems to be running at full speed (AFAICT)

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Bump. Found the answer. Integrated video memory drastically hurts overall performance.

 

[BladeVenom]

Doesn't seem to be that much difference, if you look at something like video encoding.

 

[aphex]

Isnt the reason for the drastic difference in those scores you posted, because it was testing 3d?

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Originally posted by: aphex
Isnt the reason for the drastic difference in those scores you posted, because it was testing 3d?

Na, that 3DMark score is for the CPU test which doesn't use the GPU. And the first is for PCMark which is CPU/Memory.

 

[BladeVenom]

I don't think you're reading the benchmarks right. The only real difference in PCMark was the overall score, which includes graphics. If you just look at the CPU and memory score they are almost equal.

The 3DMark is a graphics test, that's all it does. Its CPU test is testing how much graphics performance in contributed by the CPU. It's more for comparing different CPUs with the same graphics card.

Just look at the encoding benchmarks. Your overall performance isn't taking that much of a hit.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Could be. I don't know much about PCMark. Would definitely be good news. I'll try to find corroborating benchmarks.

 

[HeroOfPellinor]

Okay, here's another link at PC Stats.

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=1939&page=5

In the CPU and HDD benchmarks, there's a negligible difference as you'd expect, but in the memory benchmark dedicated-graphics systems scored 15-20% higher.