stand alone vs integrated

[zebra26]

I am looking at a new computer purchase and I am a little confused
regarding the graphics.

The unit is an HP desktop 1330 which has an integrated ATI radeon
xpress 200 graphics with 256k shared video memory.

I am assuming this memory is shared with the memory installed in the
computer which comes with 1 GB but is expandable to 4GB?

I intend to expand to 3 or 4GB on this machine. What would the graphics
capability be like compared to a seperate graphics card of say 256 or
128 meg?
There is 1 PCI express slot available in the machine.
Z.

 

[vellu]

Depends on the separate graphics card, of course, but most likely almost
any current card will outperform the integrated X200 chip by a very
large margin indeed. The amount of graphics memory isn't a very big
factor in graphics performance, it is the chip used which makes all the
difference. And simply increasing your RAM amount doesn't do anything to
graphics performance.

On a side note, what an earth are you going to do with 3 or 4 GB's of
memory anyway? There are very few applications (or games) that will
benefit from that much memory (besides server use).

(e-mail address removed) kirjoitti:

 

[abc]

I am looking at a new computer purchase and I am a little confused
regarding the graphics.

The unit is an HP desktop 1330 which has an integrated ATI radeon
xpress 200 graphics with 256k shared video memory.

I am assuming this memory is shared with the memory installed in the
computer which comes with 1 GB but is expandable to 4GB?

I intend to expand to 3 or 4GB on this machine. What would the graphics
capability be like compared to a seperate graphics card of say 256 or
128 meg?

Read the specs again, you onboard VGA will use up to 256 MB of system RAM
(never more), probably adjustable in the BIOS.
Also the ATI radeon xpress 200 is actually the chipset, which means it
controls the entire motherboard, not just the video.

Any amount of VGA memory will depend on your task. Using a desktop of
1600*1200@32 bpp, you will use about 16 MB, having more won't help your
video performance. Large amounts of memory on VGA cards are used by 3D
applications, and to date there are very few programs (only 1 game I am
aware of) that benefit from having more than 256 MB of memory available.

You would be better off doing this...
http://www.google.com/search?source...=ATI+Radeon+Xpress+200+performance+comparison
and reading some reviews, but don't forget most of these test machines have
very fast CPUs, so depending on your CPU you will most likely have to scale
the results down a bit.

Having a quick look, most of these comparisons are with other chipsets, so
to compare the results to add on VGA cards you will probably need to look at
those test results separately then do the comparison.

If you have a specific task in mind for you PC it might be best to state it.

HTH

P.S. I'm inclined to think people in this newsgroup most likely would not
consider onboard VGA as an option, so have never done the comparison.

 

[John Doe]

I am looking at a new computer purchase and I am a little confused
regarding the graphics.

The unit is an HP desktop 1330 which has an integrated ATI radeon
xpress 200 graphics with 256k shared video memory.

I am assuming this memory is shared with the memory installed in
the computer which comes with 1 GB but is expandable to 4GB?

I intend to expand to 3 or 4GB on this machine. What would the
graphics capability be like compared to a seperate graphics card
of say 256 or 128 meg? There is 1 PCI express slot available in
the machine. Z.

Built-in video is notorious for being slow compared to a video card.
Its graphics capability depends on your application. If you
are a gamer or a graphics artist, you don't want to use built-in
video.

The built-in video probably won't hurt since you can add a video
card, but it's a waste of money and mainboard resources if you want
performance.

All of the cool stuff on a high-performance video card aren't on
your mainboard.

Good luck.

 

[abc]

Built-in video is notorious for being slow compared to a video card.
Its graphics capability depends on your application. If you
are a gamer or a graphics artist, you don't want to use built-in
video.

The built-in video probably won't hurt since you can add a video
card, but it's a waste of money and mainboard resources if you want
performance.

All of the cool stuff on a high-performance video card aren't on
your mainboard.

Good luck.

Check out the reviews for the chipset, it runs surprisingly well, just gets
outdated too quickly that's all.

 

[John Doe]

Check out the reviews for the chipset, it runs surprisingly well,
just gets outdated too quickly that's all.

For what applications?

The user is talking about the idea that increasing mainboard/system
memory will increase the performance of the built-in video. He
hasn't specified an application, but we can assume he wants fast
video.

I replace my mainboard more frequently than my video card. I spent
more on my last video card than I spent on my last mainboard.

Please pick any mainboard with built-in video and point
to comparisons to video cards. I have never seen or even heard of a
review like that.

It might be an interesting subject, IMO, if it made sense. If it
were true that mainboard video compares with videocard video, that's
what I would base my mainboard choices on. They don't make them that
way probably because the vast majority of users (wordprocessing,
financing, and Internet browsing) don't need high-end graphics.

 

[vellu]

And isn't cost effective either. There is just no sense what so ever to
add 300-400$ worth of graphics capabilities to a motherboard (which is
about the average price for a high-end gfx, not the most high-end
though). Who in their right mind would buy one...

 

[zebra26]

For what applications?

The user is talking about the idea that increasing mainboard/system
memory will increase the performance of the built-in video. He
hasn't specified an application, but we can assume he wants fast
video.

I replace my mainboard more frequently than my video card. I spent
more on my last video card than I spent on my last mainboard.

Please pick any mainboard with built-in video and point
to comparisons to video cards. I have never seen or even heard of a
review like that.

It might be an interesting subject, IMO, if it made sense. If it
were true that mainboard video compares with videocard video, that's
what I would base my mainboard choices on. They don't make them that
way probably because the vast majority of users (wordprocessing,
financing, and Internet browsing) don't need high-end graphics.

Ok then how about this. The MB has a built in video and it isn't up to
snuff with gaming, not the latest 3D stuff.
There is a free PCI express slot. What would be a good choice for a
plug in videocard?
The vendor told me that once a seperate video card is installed the
built it video capability is rendered redundant, although it might have
to be shut down in the BIOS.

 

[John Doe]

Ok then how about this. The MB has a built in video and it isn't
up to snuff with gaming, not the latest 3D stuff.
There is a free PCI express slot. What would be a good choice for
a plug in videocard?
The vendor told me that once a seperate video card is installed
the built it video capability is rendered redundant, although it
might have to be shut down in the BIOS.

A fast video card.

The only likely use I would have for built-in video is dual
monitors. Then again, I would have to know whether or not games can
be forced to play in the video card driven monitor. Then again,
apparently most modern video cards like the one I just bought come
with dual output.

I think it's fairly well resolved that if you want fast video, don't
buy a mainboard with built-in video. Shutting it down in the BIOS
should be simple if you know what you're doing.

Good luck.

 

[MB]

Ok then how about this. The MB has a built in video and it isn't up to
snuff with gaming, not the latest 3D stuff.
There is a free PCI express slot. What would be a good choice for a
plug in videocard?
The vendor told me that once a seperate video card is installed the
built it video capability is rendered redundant, although it might have
to be shut down in the BIOS.

Um.... x1900xtx. That's about $600. But it's very fast! Now, if you
can better define your needs and what kind of system it might be
easier to make a recommendation for a dedicated video card.... you
know, what games you might want to play, how much you can spend....
how long you would like to keep it....