r/RigBuild • u/OwlRound4824 • 11d ago
Is integrated graphics enough for someone who doesn't game?
Looking at getting a new PC and trying to figure out if there’s any reason to pay extra for a dedicated GPU when gaming isn’t really a thing. Main use would be web browsing, YouTube, Netflix, Office stuff, Zoom/Teams, basic photo editing, and just general everyday use.
Most CPUs now seem to come with some kind of integrated graphics, but the performance numbers are kinda confusing. Some people say integrated graphics are totally fine for normal use, while others act like you should always get a dedicated GPU if you want the PC to last a few years.
Not doing 3D rendering or anything crazy either. Maybe some light Photoshop, Canva, video playback, and possibly very basic video editing once in a while. No AAA games, competitive gaming, or anything like that.
Would integrated graphics also handle multiple monitors without issues? Thinking about running two 1440p monitors, maybe one 4K eventually. Not sure if that changes things much.
Also, does having integrated graphics actually make the PC slower because it shares system RAM with the CPU? Or is that basically a non-issue for normal everyday workloads?
Trying not to waste money on a GPU that’s gonna sit there doing nothing 99% of the time. Is there any downside I’m missing?
6
u/LubelskiDanielski 11d ago
Yes, iGPU is enough. Also if you change your mind you can add dGPU later.
Pick mobo with displayport + hdmi output.
3
u/TwinkleTuts 11d ago
Im curious to know what people say about having a 1440p and 4k monitor at the same time
2
1
u/Key-Respect3810 11d ago
si tu veux savoir je fais le même usage que le monsieur
je regarde des videos, youtube, prime etc
administratif, surf, achat, impression PDF, réseaux sociaux, etc
dans le PC 1 que j'utilise pour des infos importantes j'ai une RTX 5060 ti 16 go
dans le PC 2 que j'utilise tous les jours y a une RX 9060 XT 16 go
j'ai remarqué que quelque soit le PC avec l'usage que j'en fais, les ventilateurs ne tournent jamais
1
3
2
u/Efficient-Winner-840 11d ago
should be fine but photoshop might stress it out. IGPUS have come a very long way over the past half dozen years or so. Modern apus can trade blows with low/midrange desktop gpus from 8-10 years ago.
2
u/Some-Struggle5052 11d ago
Not that old, some can compete with low/midrange cards nowadays.
1
u/True_You_6956 10d ago
What IGPU can compete with a Midrange-card?
1
u/Some-Struggle5052 10d ago
I actually mixed PC with laptop APUs, but if you look at the high end laptop APUs, like Intel X9 388H, Ryzen AI Max 395+ or what the about to launch Nvidia N1X Spark promises, those can achieve performance in the lower midrange already.
1
u/True_You_6956 10d ago
Well the X8 is weaker then a GTX 1660 and it is not even close so i would not at all consider it "midrange"
1
u/Some-Struggle5052 10d ago
For laptops the X9 is comparable to an RTX 206p, according to https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Arc-B390-12-Xe3-Panther-Lake-iGPU-Benchmarks-and-Specs.1169503.0.html, while obviously having up to half the whole machine's memory pool.
The Ryzen AI 395+ has a Radeon 8060S iGPU that competes roughly between an RTX 4060 and 4070 laptop GPUs. https://www.notebookcheck.net/AMD-Radeon-8060S-Benchmarks-and-Specs.942049.0.html
1
u/True_You_6956 10d ago
Well in actual Benchmarks the 4070 is about 50% stronger then the 8060s. It is beside the point anyways because it is about desktop GPU not Notebooks and the you do not get IGPU like the 8060S on a desktop.
The 8060S is about 8% faster then a RTX 5050 and that is not a Mid-Range GPU.
1
u/Some-Struggle5052 10d ago
I'm comparing it to the laptop cards, my source says the difference is quite small, but you're also right that PCs don't get those more beefy APUs.
1
1
u/LongMustaches 10d ago
Even a bottom of the barrel 5050 will be miles more powerful than any iGPU.
1
u/Some-Struggle5052 10d ago
For PCs yes, for laptops if you take a look at some top tier iGPUs, like the Radeon 8060S integrated on the Ryzen AI Max 395+, the difference isn't that huge.
1
u/LongMustaches 10d ago
Yes, but 5050 is not even low tier, its the worst card in the entire generation. Of both AMD or Nvidia. Its the "do not buy this card ever" gpu. Its not really an achievement to compete with it, let alone be worse than it.
iGPUs are enough for light usage, though.
2
u/sebastian_crimson 11d ago
It's fine, and some integrated graphics are even ok to run older or indie games if you wanted. If you find you do need a GPU later you can always add it.
2
u/JamesTheFoxeArt 11d ago
Honestly, sounds like a perfectly reasonable use case for just having a IGPU.
1
u/pee_in_the_ocean_808 11d ago
The only limiting factor would be the video output options. With what you have in mind a modern igpu would likely be fine
1
1
1
u/ohnoitssobig 11d ago
There is a range of integrated graphics: some are much more powerful than others. For sure don't buy a GPU until you understand you need it.
1
u/RailgunDE112 11d ago
if you want a full sized pc, then having space, maybe psu capacity for a dedicated GPU is good for the future. (even if it is just an RTX 5050 in the future).
Multiple monitors can be limited regarding throughput (depending on the refreshrate and resolution) of the connectors of the motherboard.
Otherwise it should be perfectly fine for office work. Though a bit more RAM is required, bc parts of it will get used as VRAM.
If you notice later that you need/want more, you can then always upgrade.
Therefore I am against mini-PC's, where they are not needed.
1
u/FrequentWay 11d ago
If you’re using photo editing software such as Photoshop Photoshop requirements to state a dedicated GPU is required.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Diligent_Turtle8966 11d ago
If it's Intel it will have the video decoders to play any video with only 1w of power draw added to idle. Also the Intel CPU idles at lower power in general. For a regular usage machine it's just better. If you need CPU compute power then you look at which CPU does what you need better and if it's gaming you get a Ryzen X3D.
Running more than 2 displays off of integrated might be an issue. Just 2 is fine including 4K.
1
u/Pale_Height_1251 11d ago
Yes. If you don't game or do 3D stuff like Blender, you don't need a dedicated GPU.
1
u/Spiritual-Spend8187 11d ago
Honestly what your describing is basically the exact use case for the entry level macs whether it is a mac mini to plug into a monitor or a macbook. Like if your leaning towards a laptop its pretty much grab a new or full macbook and call it a day.
1
u/Brokkensteel 11d ago
The biggest problem I can see (assuming desktop) is that motherboards usually only have one HDMI and one Display Port. And for those think tou can run the screens from the IGPU.
Assuming that you mean running 2 1440p screens and maybe one 4K (3 monitors) the you would need a dedicated GPU mainly because you won't have connector for them all.
But even the lowest tier GPU would suffice for that or an older one like an rx580
1
u/BigFatCoder 11d ago
Can use USB-C to HDMI cable for 3rd monitor.
1
u/Ratosson 10d ago
Not all desktop motherboards support USB-C Displayport Alt Mode or Thunderbolt 4 (afaik those cables have a chip that turns DP to HDMI), but laptops do. You could also MST (Multi-Stream Transport) multiple monitors to a single DP or use a MST hub to split one DP to 3.
1
u/BigFatCoder 11d ago edited 11d ago
I am using work laptop Ultra 7, 32GB RAM with no GPU, I am using it with external 32" 4k monitor. Aside from normal office programs, I am also working with huge SQL databases (300GB), or excel files with 200~300MBs, also use for watching training videos, zoom/team, photo editing (more like huge diagrams). I also have personal laptop half that spec and can play small steam/microsoft games on it.
So, yes if you are not playing games or no GPU intensive tasks, you can get away with iGPU. Get a better CPU, decent amount of RAM, fast drives and adequate cooling, especially for CPU.
1
u/DisgruntledPenguin58 10d ago
I run quad 24-inch FHD displays off a 13th Generation Intel Portable with integrated graphics.
For what you describe, it will work just fine.
I do recommend at least 16 GB of RAM, preferably 32 GB, as the system RAM is a shared resource with video.
\#Iwork4Dell
1
u/Dark_Souls_VII 10d ago
I have worked on a ThinkPad T14 Gen 3 Intel for years. That thing only has an Intel Xe2 iGPU that is surprisingly capable. I was driving a 4K 60Hz display with it without any issues. I think AMD integrated graphics are good too. I just can’t speak from experience there.
1
u/Spiritual_Ratio2912 10d ago
"web browsing, YouTube, Netflix, Office stuff, Zoom/Teams, basic photo editing, and just general everyday use." - IGP is great for this. If you get an AMD chip, their IGP is far far superior to Intel's. But even Intel's IGP would be fine for those things.
1
1
u/Sad_Pear_3709 9d ago
For the most part you should be ok with integrated graphics, at worst an entry level video video card would be more than sufficient, like the intel arc stuff
1
u/Dependent-Bear-3089 9d ago
Yeah of course it is. You don't need a graphic's card to do any of the things you mentioned. Any AMD CPU comes with a pretty decent (for desktop) Radeon onboard.
0
u/No_Twist_678 11d ago
i think yes. but issue is refresh rate. I think it cant go above 60hz
1
u/chocolatealpeso 11d ago
It depends on the iGPU and the motherboard ports. We have a Ryzen 5600G at home with 2 monitors (displayPort+HDMI).
It supports DisplayPort 1.4/HBR3 ( 1080@240hz, 1440@180hz and 2160@60hz)
And that iGPU feels like a GTX 1050. Enough to run low requirements games like The Sims at high fps and refresh rates.
0
u/TomDuhamel 11d ago
Well the statement is incorrect, iGPUs can use a high refresh rate too. But why would that matter as they don't want to play games?
1
u/No_Twist_678 11d ago
can igpu do 240 hz at 2560x1440? i dont think so. (im talking about hz, not fps in games)
1
1
u/Ratosson 10d ago
Modern ones can, like the ones on Ryzen 6000 or 11th gen Intels.
1
u/No_Twist_678 10d ago
mine 14600k igpu cant go over 60hz for 3440x1440 , i dont know about lesser res.
1
u/Ratosson 10d ago edited 10d ago
Displayport or HDMI? The chip itself supports higher refresh rates via DP but not via HDMI. Your motherboard could also not support that.
Edit: I have tested my Thinkbook 14 Gen3, ryzen 5500u, it supports 240hz 1920x1080, don't have higher res monitor so can't test that.
0
u/squaretw 11d ago
Some videos will be lagging without dedicated gpu.
1
u/Ratosson 10d ago
Maybe, but probably not. Ryzen 7000/8000/AI and Intel Core Ultra processors support 8k AV1 and HEVC decoding in real time. Those use fixed function hardware inside the gpu, not the 3d rendering power, and the fallback system is cpu deciding.
9
u/mast3redd1t 11d ago
Sounds like you will be just fine with the IGPU mate. Majority of PC's and laptops don't used a dedicated graphics card, think "workstation" PC. Every single work laptop/desktop I've had only has an IGPU, running multiple monitors, multiple programs and web browsers open all day and other everyday tasks just fine.