Graphic Card Or Onboard Graphics

I am thinking of getting a new computer with on board graphics. The MB is Asus H170 Plus D3 Intel H170 (Socket 1151) DDR3 ATX. I have a Radeon HD 4870 graphics card in my current computer. Is it worth installing the card into my new PC or is it a bucket job as the on board graphics will be better. I have no idea how to do a comparison.

Axelbrora

 

Much depends on what you plan on doing with this computer. I also note there are several versions of that graphics card, some with 512MB of on-board RAM, others with 1GB.

Typically a card is better than integrated. But over-all performance depends on many factors, include amount of system RAM, CPU horsepower and more.

I say try the integrated and see what you think. If not impressed, try the card and see if any better then go from there.

 

The (best) HD 4870 is better than the Intel HD 530 included in most of the better CPUs for that chipset, though it's not a huge difference and, if you're not interested in gaming/video editing or Photoshop, going with the HD 530 will save heat and noise* (though not much with the rather noisy standard Intel cooler/settings) and will allow a lower wattage PSU to be used (but do get a good quality PSU).

The Radeon is getting long in the tooth (released mid -2012), it might not be the best choice if it's been worked hard as a better, more modern version/alternative might stand you in better stead in the long term.

 

Not sure if it helps or if I have the "best" but DXdiag below. My new computer will have an Intel Core i5-6600 3.30GHz (Skylake) Socket LGA1151 Processor and at least 8GB of DDR3 Ram, probably 16GB for future proofing, a 250GB SSD and Windows 10. I do not do gaming but use Flight Simulator X sometimes. PSU is "be quiet! System Power 7 450w '80 Plus Silver' Power Supply"

This is the current configuration but can be changed. I take it that the "Intel HD 530" is the on board graphics chip?




Axel

 

Graphic card appears to be 512MB.

Axel

 

FSX on a 1680x1050 would probably need one of the recent GPUs to get close to the best out of it*.

* See the Fri Sep 04, 2015 6:55 pm reply by RadarMan regarding a similar PC here.

The PSU should be fine for up to a 150W TDP GPU (a single 6 or 8 pin PSU connector on the GPU) in that rig.

Yes, Intel HD 530 is the graphics component on most of the better i -series CPUs, including the i5-660, for that 'board.

 

OK thanks for that. So it looks as if there will be no benefit in using my old card and I should use the on board?

 

I would certainly test out the onboard, the benchmark results suggest that it's close and, especially if you use W10, it might be less trouble to get working correctly first time.

Once you have a feel for the performance, you'll know better than us whether you need an add-in GPU.

 

I'll throw a monkey wrench in the works!
First and foremost, what matters is what you are going to use the video for. Games and "rendered graphics" use thousands of triangles that are then filled with shaders to form the picture on your display. Video GPU's (Graphics Processing Units) on separate cards are explicitly designed to do this at a rate that can be thousands of times faster than using a CPU and onboard graphics to do the same; but, all of that goes completely out the window when we talk about photo editing or streaming video where we are then displaying rows of dots and no triangles.
With streaming video, for example, the intensive part is in separating the audio from the video so we can send each to its respective destination and here, ironically, having the GPU incorporated into the CPU chip gives us a huge performance boost as the data transfer doesn't have to travel down the slower bus.
If you want to play games, a graphics card will help and the HD4870 is about 60% faster than the HD530; though, its quite slow by todays standards. For Youtube, Hulu, Netflix, or photo editing, the HD530 will be far superior.

 

Many thanks for your very comprehensive reply.

The ideal scenario would therefore be to have both options which I would have if I were to install the GPU as well. I do not suppose however that there is any way to auto switch or even do a pre-set switch per programme depending on what you are doing?

Axel

 

The manual for your system board does not say that the onboard will be automatically disabled if you add a graphics card; but, set it up and see it work before you plug the ATI card in and be sensitive to the fact that many system boards will automatically disable the onboard.
If it works, which it might, you can either use two monitors or, on some, you can use two cables and then switch which input the monitor is using.
Getting a particular game to use a second display (card) is game specific so we'll have to cross that bridge when we get there.

 

No. This is because the graphics solution is set during the initial boot stages before the boot disk (and then operating system) is even touched.

Yes it does - sort of.

Virtually all, if not all motherboards today do automatically disable on-board graphics when you install a card. This is for several reasons, not least of which is to free up any system RAM that was stolen... err... "shared" for integrated/on-board graphics processing - which in your case, is up to 1024MB (1GB) of your system RAM. On-board is also typically automatically disabled to prevent wasting power. No need to power up one of the most power hungry systems of a computer if not using it.

While your manual does not specifically say your integrated will be disabled if you install a card, it does imply that on page 2-31, under, "iGPU Multi-Monitor (Disabled)". The "disabled" is the default setting which means you must manually change it to "Enabled" if you want to run both a card and the integrated graphics (iGPU) at the same time. And that makes total sense.

Frankly, since you have already stated you are not a gamer (and Flight Simulator is more taxing on the CPU than GPU), I would not even bother with the graphics card. If this were 10 years ago, I would automatically say to use the card. But in recent years, there have been HUGE advances in integrated graphics. This is due to many reasons, including huge advances in notebooks and AiO (all-in-one) computers which typically use integrated graphics. But also iGPU processors have become more powerful on their own. And, today's computers tend to come with a decent chunk of system RAM installed so even if 1GB is stolen for graphics use, there is still plenty left for the OS and other programs. And finally, Windows itself is much better at memory management and task management.

So if me, I would definitely just use the on-board integrated graphics. Then, if sometime down the road I want to "upgrade" my computer, I would look at buying a new, and modern graphics card to put in there. Yes, I know you already have this card, but retiring old hardware before it dies - especially in an industry with a rapidly advancing state-of-the-art like IT - is just a fact of life.