Windows 7: Planning my next upgrade with IVY bridge, mobos and memory

I'm sure many of us are watching for information about the release of the new IVY bridge CPUs and supporting hardware like Mobo's and memory.

I'm wondering if in their travels anyone has come across an ASROCK or GIGABYTE motherboard that does NOT have onboard graphics.


Specifically, I'm looking to

• Upgrade my 8gb ram to 16GB @ 2133 MHZ (actually running at 2133, not 1600, like what the Gigabyte seems to want to do). Probably will use G.Skill memory.
• Add a IB 3770K CPU
• Add a Z77 chipset mobo with all the new features, UEFI and so on.
• With NO onboard graphics.
• Maybe upgrade my GTX 460 to a GTX 580 (depending on funds)

Will not touch ASUS mobo;s. Had 7 of them, all died within first 12 months. ASUS refused to repair or replace 2 of them. Also wont touch rubbish like MSI.

Not asking anyone to go and do the research for me, I can do that for myself, but just wondering if anyone is already aware of a graphics-less mobo.

Isn't the graphics built into the CPU and not the motherboard?

the onboard graphics are integrated onto the mobo not the cpu

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but search for GPU in these

Intel Ivy Bridge CPU Names and Features Revealed - Softpedia

AnandTech - Intel's Ivy Bridge Architecture Exposed

Ivy Bridge (microarchitecture) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It looks like the 3770 series i7's have graphics on the CPU.

The 3960, 3930, and 3820 do not have graphics on the CPU.

It's not the graphics on the CPU I'm concerned about. It's the graphics integrated onto the motherboard.

My concern is the shared and dedicated system memory that is used for graphics, and when you have a discreet graphics card, as would must enthusiasts, grahpics professionals and gamers, then onboard graphics is undesirable.

Some motherboards "appropriate" system memory, the worst I've seen being an ASUS which appropriated 640mb of system memory that you just could not get back. The XP system that it ran suddenly went from 4gb to 3.2gb (because of 32 bit limitations), then to 2.5gb because of the dedicated grapihcs memory.

Typically motherboards will appropriate as much as almost 2gb of system memory (albeit, shared), even when onboard graphics is disabled on the motherboard.

Of the 25 or so asrock and gigabyte boards I've checked out all of them have onboard graphics..

What is your specific objection to onboard graphics ?
Sure you have a dedicated graphics card, so it's not doing anything apart from possibly providing a fall back position in case your card goes west, at least you can use the onboard for surfin' and such until you get a repair or replace.

1. Paying for technology I don't want or need. I will be upgrading at least 6 machines, so whatever the price incrememnt is for graphics on board is multiplied by 6.

2. Losing a percentage of my system memory and not being able to get it back. If I buy and pay for 16gb of RAM, then I don't want my motherboard taking part of that away, regardless of whether you use the "memory is cheap" point of view.

I always have a spare graphics card on hand. I have never had to fall back to using onboard graphics. Actually, I think I have 4 spare graphics cards, but that's just because I'm a tinkerer and I've always had spares of everything lying around.

It's disappointing that motherboard manufacturers have gone this way. I believe there are many, many people who don't want or need on board graphics, and like MIcrosoft, these companies have stopped listening to their customers, and in many ways have a adopted a "one size fits all" approach, possibly for purely economic reasons, and to hell with customers satisfaction.

Anyway, we are getting off topic. It appears that "graphics-less" motherboards have gone the same way as IDE connectors on motherboards... they just don't exist.

So, now it looks like it's going to be a matter of what motherboard will steal zero mb of system RAM when onboard grahics is disabled. That is; I should be rephrasing my original question.

"What Gigabyte or ASrock motherboard allows the onboard graphics to be disabled and gives back all the system memory it would have otherwise appropriated when it is disabled?"

It may be early to ask about that series of boards, as they haven't become available yet.

AnandTech - A Brief Look at Some Upcoming 7-Series Motherboards

Looks like all of the chipsets will support CPU graphics. I guess you should be complaining about Intel, rather than the motherboard makers.

I suppose that Intel may make some IB CPUs that do not include the graphics circuitry (as they did for SB), but that may not be soon, and it may not include the high end CPUs.

Yes, perhaps you're right.

Thanks for the link. I've spent a couple of months now reading reviews, and product specifications on the various manufacturers website. They are of course, notoriously vague on features and behaviours of boards, in favour of pushing their new technoloigies.


With all due respect, I disagree. Motherboards with graphics ports have been around for many years. Way longer than the graphics integration with the CPUs. The requirement for dedicated and shared memory has been a requirement of the motherboards - NOT the CPUs. It has little or nothing to do with the CPUs.

Also, I apologise if I come accross as complaining. I was actually asking if anyone was aware of a motherboard in the Z77 chipset that didn't have graphics ports.

Whether or not they make Graphics-less CPUs is largely irrelevant. It's not the integrated graphics on the CPU that I'm concerned about. It's the motherboard requirement for dedicated and shared system memory that's a pain.

In 10 years this wont be an issue, because (maybe) the onboard graphics will be as good as that as a discrete card (although, I remain skeptical). Lol, I can hear ATI and nVidia groan...