Onboard vs Low end card

osaddictosaddict London, UK
edited March 2009 in Hardware
If a Dell desktop comes with Integrated Intel® Graphic Media Accelerator X4500 as standard then how much of a benefit would one get from 256MB ATI® Radeon™ HD 3450 graphics card?

The PC is just an office PC, but for someone who does some basic publishing - just text mainly, not graphic design type publishing - think more books or newsletters with the odd graph being as fancy as it's likely to get.

So, is the ATI worth £40 more, or does it make very little difference as it's a low end card?

Comments

  • BuddyJBuddyJ Dept. of Propaganda OKC Icrontian
    edited March 2009
    Onboard graphics rely on system memory and fight for their share of the RAM. Your desktop publishing applications all want a piece of that memory too. I'd opt for a dedicated video card over Intel graphics for that alone.
  • QCHQCH Ancient Guru Chicago Area - USA Icrontian
    edited March 2009
    The integrated GPU will only drive one monitor while the ATI should be able to. Also realize the maximum resolution the integrate can drive verses the ATI. So, if the office person has or might have dual monitor or a big 30" 2560 x 1600 display... ATI.

    If the person only has one 19" monitor and 2 GB of RAM, go with the integrated.
  • osaddictosaddict London, UK
    edited March 2009
    Likely to be a 19" or perhaps sligthtly bigger, certainly not a 30" - they wish! hehe.
  • Cliff_ForsterCliff_Forster Icrontian
    edited March 2009
    http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?p=13691005

    Perhaps consider the 4350? It adds HDMI which will offer you some future flexablity should you decide to hook it up somewhere for a presentation on a large monitor.

    This way, your not only adding some performance, your also adding a potential valueable feature for future benefit.
Sign In or Register to comment.