PC Hardware forum

General discussion

Intel desktop 2nd gen +a GPU VS 3rd gen + it's built-in GPU?

by slow235comp / November 24, 2012 5:22 AM PST

I read the main difference between 3rd and 2nd gens are that the gfx in the 3rd are about 40% better, but besides that, performance is about the same. Some 2nd gens can actualy OC better than 3rd gens. There's a new technology like multithread/hyperthread/something I forgot, that 3rd gens can do that 2nd can't but is only found in high-end programs/games/VSTs, and I don't need that.

All I want for now is a PC for moderate DAW use, HD video editing with no problem, play low-end games like counter strike global with no problem, super fast internet surfing and so I can actually research things cause this PC's ancient, and I'll read up on how to build a PC if needed and sell the one I get.

So, If I get a 2nd gen intel would I need to add gfx? I don't suppose you can tell me which the least expensive one I should get it? I'm hoping to get just a tower for about $400. Will a 2nd gen i3 be okay, or get an i5? How much better is a desktop 2nd gen i3 with no GPU than a laptop 3rd gen i7 with it's HD4000 gfx?
I apolagize for asking so many basic questions, my computer's bascially scrap metal.

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Intel desktop 2nd gen +a GPU VS 3rd gen + it's built-in GPU?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Intel desktop 2nd gen +a GPU VS 3rd gen + it's built-in GPU?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Because you mentioned the game and DAW,
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / November 24, 2012 7:21 AM PST

I would never consider a GMA or UMA video system. You will encounter folk that are trying to talk themselves into some Intel UMA/GMA but gamers, even with Intel's latest are not happy.

But if you want to try it again, go right ahead. I will not do more than this as the topic is well worn and all I can do is warn folk off when they want to play a game.

Even the entry level Nvidia 630 or such is a step up.
Bob

Collapse -
situation solved
by slow235comp / November 24, 2012 4:32 PM PST

thanks for all your help.

Collapse -
solved
by slow235comp / November 24, 2012 4:55 PM PST
In reply to: situation solved

thanks for helping

Collapse -
re
by slow235comp / November 29, 2012 10:12 AM PST
In reply to: solved

solves most everything:
games playable with with built-in Intel HD4000/25000 graphics:
http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/in...033387.htm

HD video play/editing depends on CPU more than GPU.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/common_cpus.html
DAW music production software benchmarks:
http://www.adkproaudio.com/benchmarks.cfm

"Those are PassMark benchmark scores. PassMark is a benchmarking software which runs the CPU through many stress tests like
read/write operations, math calculations, and graphics processing. People who run PassMark can submit the score they got with
their processor so those charts are showing the average submitted scores for each processor. I wouldn't read into the overclocked processor charts much because they include mild overclocks as well as extreme overclocks, and there's no way to know how overclocked the processor was when it got the given score. If you really want to see specific scores, you can click a processor from the list and it will show the last 5 submitted scores along with information like RAM, measured speed, hard drive, graphics card, etc."

Collapse -
I've seen that before.
by R. Proffitt Forum moderator / November 29, 2012 10:25 AM PST
In reply to: re

And later the gamer is still upset by UMA/GMA.

Let me comment about video editing. We started to get great HD playback way back in the Core2Duo days. Anything past that is gravy. And speeds up our editing. Does little for the gamer.

I'm sure you read the following.
"Our tests demonstrate fairly little difference between a $225 LGA 1155 Core i5-2500K and a $1000 LGA 2011 Core i7-3960X, even when three-way graphics card configurations are involved. It turns out that memory bandwidth and PCIe throughput don't hold back the performance of existing Sandy Bridge-based machines. "
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-cpu-review-overclock,3106-4.html

As I may have noted you will encounter folk that want to learn this one first hand. You can't help them.
Bob

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Help 47,885 discussions
icon
Computer Newbies 10,322 discussions
icon
iPhones, iPods, & iPads 3,188 discussions
icon
Security 30,333 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 20,177 discussions
icon
HDTV Picture Setting 1,932 discussions
icon
Phones 15,713 discussions
icon
Windows 7 6,210 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 14,510 discussions

Big stars on small screens

Smosh tells CNET what it took to make it big online

Internet sensations Ian Hecox and Anthony Padilla discuss how YouTube has changed and why among all their goals, "real TV" isn't an ambition.