• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Which Graphics card would be an improvement over Intel Motherboard graphics please?

Mel_P

Mel_P

Mel_P

Soldato
Joined
27 Feb 2004
Posts
2,572
Location
Kent
Hello, I have this:

• Intel Core i5-6400 quad-core 2.7GHz (3.3GHz boost speed), 6MB cache CPU
• Corsair Vengeance LPX 8GB (2 x 4GB) DDR4, 2400MHz, CL14 (14-16-16-31)
• ASUS Z170-P Intel Socket LGA 1151 ATX motherboard with HDMI, DVI-D.

What graphics card would I need to give me improved performance over the built in motherboard Intel graphics? E.g. for Photoshop and for simple games like "Train Simulator" please.

I would prefer a quiet (e.g. fanless) variant if possible. How about 2 choices - budget say <£100 and also <£150.

Thanks, Mel
 
Depends on your budget really. I totally agree with MattyFez on this, unless you want to go a little higher and get either a 1060 or a RX480 or 580. Bang a cheap 1080P Freesync monitor on it and it will be a nice little HD gaming rig. :)
 
I wouldn't get to hooked up with the idea of a fan less card, someone else might confirm, but most cards these days don't even spin up the fans unless the gpu reaches a certain temperature, my rx480 8gb for example, does not spin its fans when I'm browsing the Web or watching a film or just doing general stuff.
The fans spin up incrementally when gaming or doing some other intensive tasks, but then I've got the speakers on so I can't hear the fans anyway.

It's not really an issue.

Edit; also standard gpu fans and cooling set up seem to be better than they were a few years back.
 
Last edited:
Well I nearly bought this:

ASUS GeForce GTX 1050Ti ROG STRIX 4GB GDDR5 Graphics Card (£175 + delivery)

But chickened out - there are several at slightly higher price on OCUK, e.g.

GeForce GTX 1060 Twin X2 3072MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card (£199.99. no delivery as forum member)
OR
GeForce GTX 1060 Mini 3072MB GDDR5 PCI-Express Graphics Card

Don't know which way to go? Will I notice the difference please?

Any advice please £200 is the tops! Thanks, Mel
(and £50 more than I was thinking of!)

Want graphics card for grandson to play "train simulator" and other not-too-complex games. train simulator only runs jumpily on a reduced size window on intel on-board graphics.

Thanks, Mel
 
For simple games as you mentioned even the base 1050 would be enough. Look at the £100 price bracket. The Asus 1050 expedition for example will keep its fans off until it reaches a certain load (ie outside of games)
 
Gt1030 is a rubbish card, as I said in my first reply, the sensible upgrade option is the 1050ti or the AMD equivalent.

Anything lower is not worth buying if you want improvements.
 
Mel_P said:
That's what I bought for my existing PC and the 1030 will not run those games at full screen. Mel
Click to expand...

It should be able to:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cVnO7lVvdM

That is the 2017 version of Train Simulator on a GTX750TI which is not massively faster.


Quartz said:
The GT 1030 is only a smidge better than Intel's iGPU.
Click to expand...

It trades blows with the GTX750 and sometimes the GTX750TI:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/nvidia-geforce-gt-1030-2gb,review-33949-4.html

The Intel IGPs are nowhere near that level,and not even the AMD Bristol Ridge series,which are significantly faster than the Intel IGPs,is faster than a GT1030.

I wish enthusiast on forums would actually do some research before suggesting £100+ cards for "simple games".

Considering unlike some of you I actually have owned a GTX960 4GB,RX470 4GB and a GTX1080 8GB I do think I have a clue of what cards are required for some of these games.
 
Quartz said:
According to Tom's chart the GT 1030 in the same bracket as Intel's Iris Pro Graphics 6200 iGPU and a bracket below the GTX 750 and five brackets below the GTX 1050 Ti.
Click to expand...

According to the Toms Hardware review I actually posted it actually trades blows with the GTX750 and GTX750TI:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/nvidia-geforce-gt-1030-2gb,review-33949-4.html

Thats another thing - the passively cooled GT1030 and GTX1050 cards tend to be slower than the active cooled ones,so show lower numbers so I would avoid them. TH tested an actively cooled one,and OcUK had a decent one for as low as £50 a few days ago,which is not noisy.

Also last time I checked Iris Pro IGPs had a huge amount of L4 cache,and were laptop chips.

I mean you do realise Iris Pro IGPs for socketed desktop were last sold during the Broadwell era right,and they were much faster than the normal Intel IGPs?? The L4 cache has huge bandwidth.

The HD520/HD530 are the standard IGPs found in Intel Skylake chips which have 24 EUs - the HD Graphics 4600 in the Core i5 4690K the OP has 20 EUs and is slower.

Look at the scores of a GT1030 over a HD520/HD530 - it utterly destroys it.

Its the cheapest card out there which is an appreciable upgrade over IGPs,even the ones AMD has on the BR CPUs,and since it only has a 30W TDP,it can actually work on even low powered PSUs.

Yes,a GTX1050TI is faster or even a secondhand GTX960,but I think people forget how dire Intel IGPs are especially the desktop ones.
 
Last edited:
1030 It's a crap card, hardly any better than the Intel integrated graphics. his budget is £100 to £150.
The £130 gtx 1050ti is the obvious choice here.

Stop trying to confuse him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom