AMD or INTEL On-Board Graphics

[doopydug]

Guys - I am looking at buying a couple of rigs and they come with onboard graphics - does anyone know if there is much performance difference between Ati Radeon 3000 and Intel GMA4500 ?

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The HD3000 will be much faster but unless your get the HD3200 or HD3300 it will lack UVD.

 

[doopydug]

UVD ?

 

[Confused Stu]

UVD = Universal Video Decoder (I think). It's the chip that means it can output up to Full HD video output without really bothering the processor at all. This is why my HTPC can handle Blu-Rays, DVDs, live TV and video files when only running a 2.5GHz dual core Athlon.

EDIT - Unified Video Decoder, I was close! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Video_Decoder

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

UVD ?

UVD:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Video_Decoder

 

[Culinia]

UVD ?

Video decoding - hardware accelerated afaik

edit: beaten lol?

 

[scrlk]

AMD all the way, Intel is just plain crap.

 

[doopydug]

Nice one guys - thanks for all the help

 

[TALON1973]

if your going to go onboard go thw ati route and the 4200

 

[Confused Stu]

Just found a couple of reviews:
HD3200 - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-780g-chipset,1785-10.html
GMA4500 - http://pcgamingcorner.com/wordpress/?p=820

Feel free to read and compare but the 3D Mark 06 score told the story for me, HD3200 @ 1552, GMA4500 @ 745.

The HD4200 is another good choice, but the only difference between the HD3200 and the HD4200 is DX10.1 support - http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-785g-chipset,2381-4.html Performance wise, they're identical.