Intel Extreme Graphics 2 VS PCI graphics card

Status
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Doomsday123

Thread Starter
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Messages
505
I just picked up an HP dx2000 desktop computer that has the "Intel Extreme Graphics 2" onboard video card. Im trying to play World of Warcraft on the machine and it is a bit jumpy due to what I assume is the graphics card. The system has 1Gb of RAM so I dont believe it has anything to do with the RAM.

My question is, will my system benifit from a PCI graphics card or is the bus too slow for PCI to show any type of improvement? The only reason I say PCI is because the system does not have an AGP slot.

Thanks!
 

Doomsday123

Thread Starter
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Messages
505
Thanks, I just wanted to make sure that the PCI card would out perform the onboard video so that I was not waisting my money. I will probably go with a 128MB GeForce 5200 for about $35 or maybe the step up for just a bit more.

Thanks again!
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Messages
2,291
Thanks, I just wanted to make sure that the PCI card would out perform the onboard video so that I was not waisting my money. I will probably go with a 128MB GeForce 5200 for about $35 or maybe the step up for just a bit more.

Thanks again!
No prob.

The thing about on-board video is that it drains power from other areas in your computer to produce things that can be more effectively done by an add-in card, and therefore both the graphics capability and the general system capability both suffer as a result.

Onboard video uses system RAM in order to work, which takes your 1gb of RAM down to 768 or less, depending on how much is assigned to graphics.

By using an add-in video card with it's own GPU and on-card memory, all the graphics work is unloaded from your system RAM and processor, so everything works just that much better.
 

Doomsday123

Thread Starter
Joined
Jul 1, 2002
Messages
505
One more question.

FX 5200

VS

FX 5500

Will I see a improvment over the 5200 for the extra $5? I see that the 5500 has a bit faster core clock speed but what does the 400Mhz(effective) vs the 400Mhz mean on the memory clock?

HERE is the comparison

Thanks.
 
Joined
Jul 28, 2005
Messages
2,291
One more question.

FX 5200

VS

FX 5500

Will I see a improvment over the 5200 for the extra $5? I see that the 5500 has a bit faster core clock speed but what does the 400Mhz(effective) vs the 400Mhz mean on the memory clock?

HERE is the comparison

Thanks.
For an extra $5, get the 5500. It will be ever-so-slightly better, but for $5 it's worth it.

The 'effective' basically means that it's DDR memory at 200mhz. DDR = dual data rate = 200mhz x 2 = 400mhz effective data rate. This applies to the 5500 as well, even though it doesn't say 'effective' in the description.
 
Status
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 807,865 other people just like you!

Latest posts

Members online

Top