i7 2600k and its integrated graphics?

[Marshall Moore]

I don't quite understand how to take advantage of Intel® HD Graphics 3000 built into the i7 2600k processor. I know mine is inactive. I wonder if it is because my motherboard is H67 or because I have a graphics card installed? I also wish to know the purpose of the Intel® HD Graphics 3000. Is it to replace the need of a graphics card or to work in conjunction with a graphics card or is it for better performance if there is no graphics card. I have searched the web and haven't found a definitive answer.

Replies will be appreciated. Thank you

 

[Sardonicus]

My guess it that you have to enable the HD 3000 graphics in the H67 BIOS.
You probably should remove the dedicated graphics card you installed, first.
Hook up your monitor to the available H67 ports.

 

[Marshall Moore]

Thank You

Thank you I will try that

 

[carwiz]

One item to consider is that you'll lose your Direct-X 11 support going back to the integrated graphics. But, you can certainly pick up some speed over that 5570. I'm not sure how it will affect overall performance though. You might want to get a WEI score before and after the change to see. The on-board graphics can be tweaked also.

 

[stormy13]

But, you can certainly pick up some speed over that 5570.

Not even if it tried real hard would the integrated Intel graphics be better than the HD 5570,

AnandTech - The Sandy Bridge Review: Intel Core i7-2600K, i5-2500K and Core i3-2100 Tested

It isn't even faster than the HD 5450.

 

[carwiz]

The SPs run at 650MHz and the DDR3 memory interface has a 1600MHz data rate. That’s more compute power than the Intel HD Graphics 3000 but less memory bandwidth than a Sandy Bridge if you assume the CPU cores aren’t consuming more than half of the available memory bandwidth.

How is that faster? They compare it to 1/2 of a Sandy Bridge. I'm running my HD 2000 at 1800Mhz right now. It's capable of 2150Mhz.

The higher end HD Graphics 3000 is also 26% faster than a Radeon HD 5450.

From your own link.

Not to mention that the test was done with early drivers and an ASUS board. You can sway reviews to make them say anything you want. Especially when it pays the bills.

 

[stormy13]

You can read into it anything you want but it doesn't change the fact that if you want to play anything much more than solitaire at anything resembling decent settings and frame rate, Intel graphics are not going to do it.

 

[GeneO]

I think the Dell alienware is a better deal. Though Dell computers seem like a good deal, I have found them under speced especially in the power supply and cooling department, not top rated brand components, and proprietary cases, etc. If you have the patience, you can build a higher quality computer for less. The alienware is a step above the mainstream dell.

 

[carwiz]

I think the Dell alienware is a better deal. Though Dell computers seem like a good deal, I have found them under speced especially in the power supply and cooling department, not top rated brand components, and proprietary cases, etc. If you have the patience, you can build a higher quality computer for less. The alienware is a step above the mainstream dell.

Hey Gene, ya got too many tabs open.

 

[Marshall Moore]

Should I remove the graphics card. I bought all the parts cpu, mobo. graphics card, case, everything and put it together. I've never seen it perform without the card. I may need to get a better card or a Z68 board. Maybe just remove the card. What do you think. Also I would like to thank all of you for responding.

 

[carwiz]

If you already have it, use it. What's your WEI scores for Aero and Graphics with the card?

 

[GeneO]

I think the Dell alienware is a better deal. Though Dell computers seem like a good deal, I have found them under speced especially in the power supply and cooling department, not top rated brand components, and proprietary cases, etc. If you have the patience, you can build a higher quality computer for less. The alienware is a step above the mainstream dell.

Hey Gene, ya got too many tabs open.

Not really, that was from my cell phone. I don't know how my reply got to the wrong thread!

 

[Marshall Moore]

This is it.

 

[TVeblen]

Should I remove the graphics card. I bought all the parts cpu, mobo. graphics card, case, everything and put it together. I've never seen it perform without the card. I may need to get a better card or a Z68 board. Maybe just remove the card. What do you think. Also I would like to thank all of you for responding.

Should you remove the graphics card? I would say: No.

The PC works with the graphics card, right?

So your question is really: "Why won't my rig run on only the i7 integrated graphics?"

I would check in the BIOS settings. If the board is capable of using integrated graphics you should have a setting for it.

However on many boards the switching is automatic. If you install a graphics card the on-board graphics chip is automatically switched to disabled. I don't know if that would apply to the i7 graphics yet.

 

[DeaconFrost]

But, you can certainly pick up some speed over that 5570.

Are you suggesting the onboard graphics would outperform the 5570?

I'm not sure how it will affect overall performance though.

I'm at a loss as to why you'd suggest it would "pick up speed" over the 5570. You are looking at one small spec when comparing these two graphics solutions instead of overall performance.

 

[Marshall Moore]

You are absolutely right about the H67. I didn't do enough homework before I decided on the motherboard. This is my first build. I did buy the 2600k because it was unlocked. I focused on price and 1155 socket. This motherboard works perfectly but will not do what I want. I have since decided also that I wish I had purchased 4 ram slots instead of 2 because 4 gig ram chips are cheaper than 8 gig chips significantly. I may purchase a Z68 with 4 slots and add 2 more 4gig chips. I don't have a very high end card. I know the graphics on the chip are disabled because I ran ADPI64 test. I have a wireless adapter on order that should arrive tomorrow. While I am installing that I will take the graphics card out and run WEI. WEI reports 6.7 rating now. If the rating goes down I will know my performance is better with the card. If it goes up its better without the card. I do play a lot of games. I may also upgrade for a little higher end card priced between 100-200 dollars.

 

[stormy13]

WEI is the last thing you should base any performance difference on.

 

[Marshall Moore]

I can download 3D Mark and test with that then, thank you.

 

[DeaconFrost]

WEI is the last thing you should base any performance difference on.

Thank you! WEI is not a benchmark....glad to see it written out.

 

[rchris]

I can download 3D Mark and test with that then, thank you.

I'd suggest that you also consider what tasks you're using your computer for. The Intel graphics has the Quick Sync technology which is supposed to be exceptional for things like video transcoding. For most other tasks, a reasonably good graphics card would probably easily surpass the on board video.

Could a high-end discrete graphics card beat the Quick Sync technology in video transcoding? I don't know, but there is probably some data out there somewhere to answer that.
Edit: Here's an opinion on that from the AnandTech article referenced above:
"Quick Sync is just awesome. It's simply the best way to get videos onto your smartphone or tablet. Not only do you get most if not all of the quality of a software based transcode, you get performance that's better than what high-end discrete GPUs are able to offer. If you do a lot of video transcoding onto portable devices, Sandy Bridge will be worth the upgrade for Quick Sync alone."