Do I need a dedicated graphics card?

[Neil]

Hi all,


just about to order a new desktop computer - will be doing everything on it except gaming.
So, designing in Signlab, some Photoshop, ripping big files... as well as the normal daily stuff.


The build will be Intel Core i7 4770, 16GB RAM, 250GB SSD, 2TB HDD.


Will the Intel HD 4600 onboard graphics processor be okay for what we do?
I'm thinking it's better than what I curently use (Dell XPS 420 with 256MB Radeon HD 2600 XT).


Do we benefit from beefy GPU's for what we do?


Signlab certainly isn't slow on my current computer, only when I get sent huge files does it get bogged down. But some of the big files blow out to around 8 gig or so in the rip which can take a bit of time to spool (up to half an hour in Signlab's VPM for really big files). This seems to be handled by the CPU and Hard Drive moreso than the graphics card.


So, is the onboard graphics good enough nowadays for 2d design and photo editing, or do I still need a dedicated graphics card?

 

[CanuckSigns]

I wouldn't bother, nothing we do requires anything more than a basic on board card can offer.

 

[player]

I would. I would get a 2 gig card with no fan.

Probably $50 to $70 for the card. That way your 2 monitors won't be taxing your system.

 

[Christian @ 2CT Media]

In some software, heavy CPU load can be dumped on to the GPU for faster processing. CPU/GPU co-processing is becoming the standard and until Intel starts building split chips a discrete graphics card is the only cost effective way to accomplish that.

ADOBE is starting to heavily swing in to the co-processing environment and so are a few RIPs that use the ADOBE engines.

 

[royster13]

Thanks....This is looking like a great topic.....

 

[Neil]

I was thinking of adding a Geforce GTX 750 2GB. I do use 2 monitors and this has 2x dual dvi output.

It's $169 here which is okay, but if I don't need that extra power draw and noise then I won't bother if it doesn't speed up anything appreciably.

 

[AF]

Look at the 4930k processor before you pull the trigger:

http://ark.intel.com/products/77780?ui=BIG

It is very fast, 6 cores and over double the memory bandwidth of the 4770. It runs cool and can rip 4 huge files while you edit in CC and have a few other things going on without breaking a sweat. You would want at least a 400 series Nividia GeForce with it since no intel graphics.

 

[Neil]

Look at the 4930k processor before you pull the trigger:

http://ark.intel.com/products/77780?ui=BIG

It is very fast, 6 cores and over double the memory bandwidth of the 4770. It runs cool and can rip 4 huge files while you edit in CC and have a few other things going on without breaking a sweat. You would want at least a 400 series Nividia GeForce with it since no intel graphics.

At $670 here it's a bit rich. I wondered about Nvidia Quadro cards as they are recommended for graphics work, but I wonder if it's all a bit redundant now compared to the now excellent gaming cards or indeed onboard...

 

[Techman]

those I 7 CPU's have a very good on board graphics section. Used with a good motherboard and you will be fine. I ran my 3D machine without a dedicated graphics card for a while. Obtained an 89.00 graphics card and tested that instead of the on board CPU graphics system. It only raised the experience level one point. I noticed no noticeable increase in speed. Those I7 chips are very fast and most of the have a turbo boost that will come one line when needed. I feel it would take a higher end graphics card to make any noticeable difference.

 

[Snydo]

I think a graphics card in the $150 to $200 range would be worthwhile, photoshop with larger files should perform better with a dedicated card.

 

[Neil]

So far that's no, yes, yes...yes, no, yes. Seems like the ayes have it.

Probably worth me trying it without one at first and find out myself if needed...
Still undecided and unsure.

 

[Neil]

There's a good comparison between different cards using Photoshop actions here:
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CS6-GPU-Acceleration-161/

Shows a big difference between the Intel HD 4000 and say GTX 650 - for those things that use GPU acceleration...

 

[SignBurst PCs]

If you are doing any decent work in Adobe, a good Nvidia card will be worth while. While it doesn't speed up everything, the software does unload a number of tasks onto the GPU.

For what we do, a Quadro is not really necessary. Not a lot of gain there.

 

[AF]

Now you have done your due diligence. Intel graphics are not ideal for an Adobe workstation under Windows. I have one workstation with Intel graphics and a discrete GTX. Having tested our various software, including Autocad, we found there to be anomalies in the output with the Intel graphics enabled that simply never happened with the dedicated card. The anomalies were verified on other machines we gained access to that had various generations of Intel HD graphics. This observation does not hold true if running Mavericks because Apple wrote custom drivers to enable parallel processing on Intel HD chips, but it would be wise to test your software on one of these systems before going that direction.

 

[player]

I was thinking about this one:

http://www.canadacomputers.com/product_info.php?cPath=43_1200_557_559&item_id=053654

I don't like fans on my video cards because I have had them seize from dust or die of old age, and the cards die. Replacement fans were not available. So here I get 2 gigs, no fan.

Good idea?

 

[Neil]

I put this original question to the gurus on a local tech forum.

It seems if I'm going to go with a dedicated graphics card, then I don't need the i4770 CPU which has on board graphics which will go unused.
So the recommendation is for Xeon E3 1230 v3 as it's basically the same chip without the graphics.

Looks like I'll probably go that way and add the Nvidia Geforce GTX750.

Here's a link to the build parts if you're interested.
http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=wish_lists&wlcId=301114&action=wish_lists

 

[2B]

short answer, Yes

takes stress off of the CPU and allows for multiple monitors

 

[AF]

I put this original question to the gurus on a local tech forum.

It seems if I'm going to go with a dedicated graphics card, then I don't need the i4770 CPU which has on board graphics which will go unused.
So the recommendation is for Xeon E3 1230 v3 as it's basically the same chip without the graphics.

Looks like I'll probably go that way and add the Nvidia Geforce GTX750.

Here's a link to the build parts if you're interested.
http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=wish_lists&wlcId=301114&action=wish_lists

You have selected a Xeon processor which supports ECC memory (it's primary advantage over the i7 version) but your MB and Ram are not ECC compliant. It is also capped at 16 PCI lanes which limits your future expansion capabilities. I would suggest researching the CPU and chipset some more so you don't waste money. Since this is to be a workstation, give yourself some room for improvement down the line if / when you need more from the machine.

 

[Christian @ 2CT Media]

ECC memory is not required by that cpu... I have a IvyBridge Xeon with non ECC memory and motherboard and it works just fine.

That processor also supports PCIe x16 3.0 that is the best available currently and matches the Core series processors so there is no loss there.

 

[Baz]

I've got almost the same system as you.

I also have a Radeon HD 7700 series card installed.

I can say I am pretty impressed with how nice working in Photoshop CC 64 is. I can see in Photoshop's settings that it is using Radeon's GPU. What exactly for I don't know but just the zooming and panning/scrolling left/right and up/down is pretty smooth!!!