Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey 1 edit |
[Parts Check] Video or no?Hi Guys, I like this mb but can't tell about the video. » www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 13157271It has the ports but the details say no onboard video chipset. How does this work? The rest: i5 » www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 19115074ram » www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· 20226178I already have the rest of the parts - SATA hds, SATA dvdrw, power supply, case, etc. I'll mainly be doing photo editing but I figure I'd just get a decent machine that will last several years. |
|
|
Scroll down for more details =D |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
I edited to add the rest. |
|
|
» ark.intel.com/products/52207Processor Graphics IntelĀ® HD Graphics 2000 |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
Ok, so no extra video card "needed" for now?
And what do you think about the retail heatsink/fan? |
|
|
If you are not going to play any games.. Just videos.. Yea, that build in video card should be fine.
If you are not going to overclock. The retail HSF should be fine. |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
Thanks So this is a good basic build that will carry me for the next few years? |
|
|
as for the ram you should just get DDR3 1333 |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
I already have that, got it on sale. |
|
|
ok. Not sure do you want to get the i5-2500k instead, you get more speed, a better gpu, and you could overclock it. » ark.intel.com/products/5 ··· _30-GHz)» www.newegg.com/Product/P ··· %202500k |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
I might. Just did a power supply calculator and it claims 501w. I know the core is 95w, but how can one optical and one SATA hd raise it that much? |
|
|
Shouldn't it be around 230watts - 265watts..
Physical CPU is 1.. not 4. |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
Ok, I read it wrong |
|
|
to Sweet Witch
The reason they say that is because the motherboard has no integrated graphics chipset.
The integrated graphics are part of the cpu with these, provided you are using a chipset that supports it, such as the z68. |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
So, will these work? |
|
|
asdfdfdfdfdf
Anon
2012-Feb-23 7:34 pm
yes, the 3 items linked to in your first post should work together and provide you with the cpu's integrated graphics. |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
Good, thanks |
|
Ben Premium Member join:2007-06-17 Fort Worth, TX |
to Sweet Witch
Regardless of one's needs, I never recommend onboard/integrated video, unless it has it's own RAM (which I've only seen on a few motherboards intended for server use).
Awhile ago, both Intel and AMD decided to switch over to using an integrated memory controller on the CPU. While ultimately better for performance, it's really bad for integrated video (that uses system RAM) because now it has to "cross" the CPU to get to the RAM, hurting performance all around.
That and well, it uses your system RAM, leaving less available.
Even if your video needs are very modest, get a regular video card. Even a cheap video card with it's own RAM that's not integrated is better than integrated. |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
I can't afford a video card right now on top of the new hardware. I only have AGP cards on hand so that will have to wait for a bit. |
|
BlitzenZeusBurnt Out Cynic Premium Member join:2000-01-13 1 edit |
to Ben
You have to spend generally over $100 to beat the performance of an onboard intel gpu, otherwise it will perform worse. This wasn't a secondary thought, they knew they had to keep up with at least basic performance, and can even run some games decently. Ram is generally cheaper than a video card, if you feel it's necessary bump yourself up to 8GB, but these onboard gpus don't tend to use more than 512 to my knowledge.
The onboard on the amd boards/processors is similar also, but their onboards vary more than the intels do, either way, old gaming cards are generally becoming the equvalent of more recent onboard video. If you don't need gaming performance onboard is still more cost effective even if you upgrade the ram.
I should also add the way the intel cpu/gpu processes video editing it's far faster than your standard dedicated video card, without reading exactly how it does it again, the reasoning for it is because it shares the same bus as the cpu. |
|
Sweet WitchBe the flame, not the moth. MVM join:2003-07-15 Gallifrey |
I've got 2x4gb ram already. Enough? |
|
BlitzenZeusBurnt Out Cynic Premium Member join:2000-01-13 |
For the average user that is more than enough, and gives you room for extra. For what the prices are now might as well go 8GB. |
|
|
to Sweet Witch
I've got 2x4gb ram already. Enough?
yes |
|
pnjunctionTeksavvy Extreme Premium Member join:2008-01-24 Toronto, ON |
to Sweet Witch
The video on these Sandy Bridge CPUs (2xxx series) is decent for non-gaming stuff.
My laptop has an older i5 540M that while it delivers good battery life (4+ hours on the 6-cell) leaves something to be desired for performance. Some of it is probably bad software but plain office-type tasks can have sluggish video performance at times.
On the other hand I built my HTPC with an i5-2300 and have the option to add a (half-height) video card. I haven't seen the need, it has handled everything I've thrown at it quite smoothly. |
|