1. Is less expensive
2. Runs cooler
3. Is more energy-efficient (cheaper to run and better for the environment)
4. Is quieter (fewer fans) - better for media center PC's
5. Is more compact (not all desktop machines are the traditional tower form factor)
These days, on-chip graphics are good enough for most non-gamers, and are typically better than the (obsolete) graphics built in to motherboards.
my 550 TI does 30FPS on High at 1600x900
so it has about 50% the performance of a $100 GPU
my laptop does 6FPS at 1366x768 and it does not look correct
Intel's i3's are 65w (sandy bridge) and 55W (ivy bridge)
the only way you are right is if a GPU on the i3 is not good enough for you and you need a discrete GPU
Last edited by pqwoerituytrueiwoq; January 15th, 2013 at 04:33 PM.
Just ran the bechmark on my Mac Mini, remind me to never play a MMO on this system LOL..
With Shaders: Med, Anistropy:4x, Stereoisabled, AA:2x, Res:1024x768(windowed) I got 16-17FPS.. Pretty bad all in all. HD4000 iGPU could use a serious performance bump.
I know on my gaming rig, mind you I have dual 560 Ti's in SLI. Max settings with med Tes, AA and Ani set to 8x and Res set to 1920x1280 full or windowed. I would rock out well over 70FPS most the time, sometimes hitting 50ish but never dropping below. That and it looks breath taking.. Mind you I spend almost 3K on my gaming rig, Almost 1k was on the CPU and GPU's. My Mac Mini was only $999 full system with 8GB RAM. You gota pay for performance it seems.
Like someone else posted, yea the AMD A8 chips DO have better GPUs. The Intel ones are better if your not a gamer. The Intel Ivy Cores are just OMG faster even in RL performance. But other things can factor in over all system performance. Like saving on CPU to buy a SSD. So each to their own. There is no real easy answer, but it boils down to how much do you want to spend now and what do you want to do with this system in the future.
Mac Mini: OSX 10.9 Mavericks, i7-3720QM 2.6Ghz, 8GB RAM, 256GB Samsung 830 Series SSD, Intel HD4000 iGPU, 2x Samsung Series3 LED Monitors.
Photography Homepage: exodistphotography.blogspot.com
Linux User: 380654
Generally, an APU would be most beneficial in something where you cannot fit a CPU and a an entire graphics card on the motherboard (laptops & smaller) It saves space, saves power consumption, etc. In the realm of APU's, AMD has the price advantage -- Intel has the speed advantage. In other words, if price is more of a consideration than raw power (and in this economy, when is it not) then AMD is probably the best bet. You can build a mobile gaming rig for under a grand. If money is no object, then you are better off going with an Intel third generation (Ivy Bridge) processor ... because they are faster, and more energy efficient (for triple the price).
As far as the desktop issue -- if you have the physical space to include an insane processor and incredible graphics card, then go for it. Onboard graphics processing is only really necessary where space is a problem -- so go for the gusto and keep the CPU separate from the GPU. This, of course, is predicated on having unlimited money again. If your finances are limited, you could go with an APU of the correct socket type to build your desktop, and upgrade later to a faster processor of the same socket type.
If your plan is to build a hydra, but you are on a budget here's how I would go about it. Start with Newegg.com and grab just what you need to make it work as a desktop, but with the right base to improve upon. For example, spend a bit more on your motherboard to get something that will support your final desired chipset, and scrimp on the processor and ram. You'll start with a system that is slower than you want, but it will have the upgradeability you need to eventually build the system you want. Every month or two buy an upgrade (an extra ram chip, or a massive hard drive, or whatever is in your budget) ... eventually you will have the system you want.
Another thing that may be muddling the discussion is the term "APU". All of the AMD Fusion and Intel Ivy Bridge processors discussed in this thread include on-chip graphics. However, only AMD uses the term APU to describe this class of processor.
That's all very useful information. Thank you!