Page 1 of 1

Integrated Graphics vs Budget ATI and Nvidia Video Cards

Posted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 8:40 am
by Apoptosis
Integrated Graphics vs Budget ATI and Nvidia Video Cards

Here at Legit Reviews we usually review computer hardware directed at the gaming/enthusiast market. A quick trip to your local Walmart's electronics isle will put things into perspective for many as the shelves are lined with GeForce 6200TC video cards. With the bulk of America shopping at Walmart on a weekly bassis I feel it is time we stop and take a look at something everyone can buy. Today we compare integrated graphics to the ATI X300 and NVIDIA 6200TC budget graphics cards.

Image
So what we did learn here? That integrated video is slower compared to even the least expensive cards on the market including an add-in board with the same name. The X300 was much faster while the 6200TC was easily capable of doubling the performance of the integrated video in all but one situation. It's really important to point out that the integrated video and the ATI card in this test are using the same GPU, but they are clocked at different speeds and have much different ways of accessing the memory, which is why there is such a difference in our tests. This should illustrate just how much more efficient an add-in board is.
Article Title: Integrated Graphics vs Budget ATI and Nvidia Video Cards
Article Link: http://www.legitreviews.com/article/360/1/

Posted: Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:23 pm
by HONkUS
Great article, also ive built several computers for my office with Biostar Tforce6100 754's and Semprons its a great budget board with integrated graphics and it can run quake 3 and it handles an 800mhz oc on the Semprons (2.4ghz up from 1.6ghz) wonderfully lol