The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
An integrated GPU is very poor at best but for a Desktop replacement it is a no no. A big screen need decent GPU acceleration especially for things you would do with a desktop such as HD video, editing, gaming etc
Windows Aero is also a good example of why a dedicated GPU is better.
Whats the point of a fast CPU, lots of RAM and a big screen when at the last hurdle you fall. The fact you have a decent amount of RAM is good because your onboard integrated GPU will suck it nice and dry. Not to mention the CPU will be used more because you don't have a dedicated GPU. That results in system slowdown and you don't really want that now do you.
You need a decent dedicated GPU.
Anything 3D will be very poor indeed.
I would cry if I had to use anything with onboard graphics. Hell even my phone has a dedicated GPU LOL.
I disagree(bolded parts). You would not notice the difference between my desktop's HD3850 and my HTPC's 6150le if you were not gaming. The CPU handles HD just fine on it's own(neither GPU accelerates x264 except with very specific and buggy filters)s. Aero does not need a super beefy GPU - it runs perfect on my mother's laptop with an X3100 IGP.
You do have a point with the RAM - an IGP without a dedicated framebuffer will grab a chunk of main memory and expand that chuck when it needs to, but even with the most intensive of desktop apps (non-gaming), you likely won't need more than ~256mb of framebuffer(1920x1200x32 resolution requires about ~9mb of video ram). Opening more windows will raise the memory requirement, but it's pretty negligible when you're just texturing flat, 2d polygons.
I would like to know how "editing" (pretty vague there, I'm "editing" right now just by typing this message) would use the GPU? I don't know of any sort of "editing" app that loads up VRAM.
Indeed, but "3D" is not a requirement everybody needs for a DTR. To overuse an example, my mother went from a desktop I built for her that used an AMD XP3200, 2gb ram and a 6800u AGP to an HP laptop with a 17" screen, 1.7ghz dual-core Intel, 3gb and an X3100. Of course the new laptop is faster, it has a better CPU and more ram. But, for the things my mother does with her computer (browsing, chatting, web developing, image editing, casual gaming), there's basically no difference. The only thing she'd notice going from her DTR to one with a dedicated GPU would be more heat and the ability to play games she doesn't have an interest in anyway.
Only for gaming. A fast enough CPU can handle everything else (unless you want to get into GPGPU, then of course you need a good GPU, but that's not something I'd be doing on a laptop anyway, even a DTR). Naturally, it also depends on the IGP, as well. Some are really crappy (anything pre-X3000 from Intel), some are really good (AMD 780g/HD3200).
There is absolutely nothing wrong with buying a Desktop Replacement laptop without a dedicated GPU. If you don't need one (gaming), why spend the extra money for it?
Hi there. Yes, everything you have said is true. But why invest in something that is good but at the last configuration step you cheap out on it.
Future proofing is a must unless you want to fork out for $ in the long run.
You never know, you might need it in the future, some people only think short-term.
3D is very big at the moment. It is coming to our PC's / Laptops soon..well it has already ... but I am talking in the masses.
But then, these guys with there integrated don't think about things like this.
If you were buying a Mercedes S-Class. You spec it up. Have all the optional extras, but then comes the choice...
-Halogen Lights [Standard lighting]
-Xenon Lights [More lighting, good for dark country roads etc] $1500 Extra
Someone who thinks in the short term would say... "I don't need brighter lights, I can see well enough already. Also, I never drive on really dark roads"...
Then a few weeks later they need to go somewhere and there are no lights... they then say "Oh, I wish I had thought about the future instead of trying to save a few pennies"...
The guy with the Xenon lights is laughing.
All I am saying is a Desktop replacement needs to be able to be as capable as a Desktop PC. So having an integrated chip (even if you don't use it is a big FAIL).
A dedicated GPU helps (like mentioned) save on RAM and CPU usage, so why buy a laptop with a fast processor and lots of RAM only to waste it as it is preoccupied. Furthermore the colour difference between 2 monitors displaying the same image, one with an integrated GPU and one with a dedicated is immense! The integrated has a 'grainer' more 'dull' image whereas the dedicated has a more 'vivid' and more 'colourful' (like real life) picture... this applies to video too.
Anyway it is not the configurators fault, I blame manufacturers for even having that option. It should be dedicated all the way.
The manufacturers count on people not having knowledge about computers and opt for the cheap ones without telling the custom that purchasing it will / could have an overall effect on performance.
Try editing HD video using an integrated GPU.
New applications are more and more utilising GPU acceleration. Even new browsers are using GPU acceleration. I would love to see an integrated chip handle that.
Edit: OP, I'm really sorry that just2exy and I have jacked your thread. I apologize.
I re-iterate that there's no reason to pay extra for something that a user isn't going to utilize. If a computer is never going to run a game or GPGPU app, what need is there to spend an extra $80-100 for a dedicated GPU?
You're quite right, most people only think in the short term - but a DTR of any kind is only going to last so many year before general use outpaces it's performance. I stand by my convictions that a dedicated GPU is not necessary for general usage. By the time a DTR is replaced, the IGP in the new one will more than keep up with general usage scenarios.
What type of "3D" are you talking about. Are you talking about a 3D environment User Interface, such as that XGI spinny-cube thingy on Linux? Those types of environments are years away from being useful, or usable really.
If you're referring to that gimmicky BS 3D that's currently all the rage in theaters, well you need expensive shutter glasses, or irritating polarized lens glasses, but either way you'll need a GPU capable of rendering double-resolution, so you'd need a "Gaming" laptop moreso than a "DTR" laptop, for games. For movies, all you need is the stupid glasses - if a laptop can play a regular DVD of a movie, it can play a "3D" DVD of a movie.
Halogen vs Xenon is a safety issue, not a performance one. Xenon is a nicer, less harsh light that lets you see more of the road without either messing up your night vision, or blinding other drivers on the road (if setup correctly). It's also a completely irrelevant analogy.
I disagree (bolded). A DTR laptop only needs to be as capable as a Desktop PC tailored to a specific users need. If a users desktop only has an IGP, but is still more than adequate for their use, would a DTR with an IGP that is at least on-par with the desktop be a bad option for them (assume the CPU or motherboard died and the user wants a laptop instead of a new desktop)? I argue no - because the user can get everything done that they need to without the dedicated GPU.
RAM usage of an IGP (which, as I mentioned, will likely never exceed 256mb, and more of them now come with their own framebuffer) is still negligible when PCs now come with 4,096mb or more of ram.
As for the italicized point, I'm going to flat out call "BS" on this. The image quality of the X3100 in my mothers laptop actually exceeds that of my Studio 17 (HD3650) on the same LCD (32" LD HDTV, 1366x768) with the same color/contrast/brightness settings. Both laptops produce a beautiful, vibrant picture on their own LCDs. Believe me when I say, I have been involved with computers for a very long time and used a multitude of graphics adapters and monitor combinations and only on the cheapest, most garbage of IGPs from the early 2000s and late 90s has there been a difference of the magnitude you're describing.
I quite agree. Especially when computer manufacturers use descriptors like "Experience High Definition gaming with INTEL EXTREME GRAPHICS!". That should be false advertising. Consumers do need to be more informed.
But, would you be okay with everything going up in price? Price-conscious consumers wouldn't be purchasing as many computers if they all had expensive dedicated GPUs. IGPs are dirt-cheap, GPU cores are not.
I do. My friends encoding machine (which I use) is an overclocked Quadcore 3.9ghz with 8gb of ram - and a G965 chipset (IGP). It edits and encodes High Definition video fine. It had a 9800GT at one time, but he swapped it into his second gaming PC. The encoding PC didn't suffer any performance loss.
I use HTML5 in Chrome on a CeleronM 1.4ghz with a GMA900 and 2gb ram running Windows7. It plays videos fine. I'm asking honestly here: Can you provide a link to a browser (IE8, FF, Chrome, Opera?) using the GPU for, well, anything?
If somebody asks me to recommend a computer, and that users needs can be met by a PC with an IGP, I will recommend something with an IGP. I think we should simply agree to disagree. You have your opinion, and I have mine, and neither of us is going to convince the other, it appears.
Oh and before it's brought up, yes I realize all my example are anecdotals. It still doesn't diminish my argument.
I was going to replace my 4-year old, 15.6" Compaq Preserio which started having issues with this Dell studio. The Dell Studio is like a Rolls Royce compared to the Compaq Presario for sure. I like the Dell but its big, very big actually. Almost to big to be considered a laptop..IMO
I have like 2 days to decide to keep it or return to Best Buy and that would mean fixxing the Compaq. I havent seen a better deal on a laptop then this Studio. Anything decent is way more in price.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.
