CPU Integrated Graphics

[MajorM]

I debated on where to put this post but I want to build a new computer for my office that will work as a semi backup server for 2 other computers. It will basically be backing up reports and procedures (both low volume small files), running office software like quickbooks/microsoft office and editing thermal images to make reports. I plan to have most likely one 24" or 27" monitor at 1920x1080. There will be no gaming in the computer either.

My issue is I have never used CPU integrated graphics and really didnt plan to this time until I just noticed it in the specs of the i5 6600K. That kind of took me back for a second and made me wonder if I really needed to spend the extra money on a video card for this application.

Im a little out of sorts with all these new processors and dont know much about them. I am still using a Xeon 5670 upgrade from my i7 930 on my gaming pc. From what ive read the i5 6600K seems like a pretty good all around processor so that's why I was looking at it. If any of you want to recommend anything else for that side of the build feel free and ill read up on it.

So how well can I expect the integrated graphics to work and is there any e CPU that would be something I should look into more for this application?

 

[zaniix]

You should be fine with the integrated graphics.

 

[Mr. Bluntman]

You'll be good. Intel integrated parts have come a long way in the last 5 years and are perfectly fine for basic usage and general productivity software.

 

[4330thgink]

For general usage, like email, webpages, Youtube type videos - integrated will suffice.

Any sort of 3d type gaming - integrated sucks dirty buttholes. ...although, the latest integrated stuff may be able to handle really old games.

 

[dragonstongue]

"basic" productivity related stuff, Intel does well at, for more "advanced" graphics they are still lagging behind AMD APU line though said APU lag behind for Intel CPU grunt, those A10 7k chips are quite nice especially the newest ones that are quite hard to find excavator based. Intel can do more advanced stuff but is sporadic on how well unless you have their very top end CPU for the Iris Pro graphics, the R7 ones built into AMD mid-high end APU are actually quite potent for what they are and can play high end stuff at 1080p with low-mid settings, though certainly not neck breaking speeds

 

[PGHammer]

Compared to a discrete GPU, maybe. However, integrated GPUs (and especially with LGA115x) no longer biteth in general. The floor iGPU (for Sandy Bridge forward) is the Intel HD4400, which is fully DX11-compliant. In fact, the selfsame HD4400 will wax some likewise-DX11-compliant (though notebook) discrete parts (such as the original Frankenpart Mobility GPU in discrete clothes - HD5450); I have one in PCI-E x16 clothes, and compared it heads-up to the HD4400 driving my G3258. The hardest test is, in fact, ANNO 2205; HD4400 passed - however, HD5450 failed, and failed badly. Did I expect that? Not only no, but HECK no. There are older discrete GPUs that can still beat it (I've mentioned GTX550Ti as an example) - however, not many notebooks have a discrete GPU option, and even fewer tablets and slates do.

Still, the OP specifically mentioned server usage - there, the HD4400 will hold its own.

 

[Trimlock]

Shit even a GMA900 will suffice for server usage, all you need is something to run a GUI which requires almost no GPU power whatsoever. Unless you have effects like Aero running, even the HD4400 will handle fine.

 

[Ultima99]

Skylake graphics will be more than enough!

 

[darkeen]

I run the talos principle on my haswell graphics and does ok. Some hitching and everything on low settings, but the game is still enjoyable. Basic desktop stuff should be cake.

 

[athenian200]

Well, I have an Intel Celeron N2808 with Integrated Graphics that can apparently play Half-Life 2 at 1024x768 reasonably well. From my experience, the integrated graphics work fine for anything 2D, it's only when you hit 3D that you start getting problems. But even then, older stuff is playable at low resolutions. So if by some chance you have an old Windows XP Gaming machine that croaked and you're worried about whether the cheap replacement machine can play the games you got for it in 2005... you're probably covered.

I noticed you mentioned images, and I think you could probably even run Photoshop on integrated graphics, honestly. I haven't tried it, but GIMP works fine on this machine, and it's fairly similar to Photoshop.

When people say the IG isn't suitable for gaming, they mean modern PC gaming. As the technology progresses, functionality that was once expensive becomes the bare minimum. Games with primitive 3D or any kind of 2D graphics are right up its alley, just to give you an idea of the power level we're talking about here. To sum it up, don't be one of those people who thinks they need a graphics card to play Solitaire or Tetris. I've seen people buy high-end graphics card because someone asked them if they were going to play games on their PC, and they said yes not knowing that there's a difference between Solitaire and Crysis 3.

 

[echter]

So are the Skylake HD530s suitable for running multiple monitors for non-gaming purposes? For ex: two 1920x1200 displays that would be used for photoshop and video editing/playing? If so, it's just a matter of finding a mobo with the correct video ports, right?

 

[melk]

So are the Skylake HD530s suitable for running multiple monitors for non-gaming purposes? For ex: two 1920x1200 displays that would be used for photoshop and video editing/playing? If so, it's just a matter of finding a mobo with the correct video ports, right?

Multiple monitors are no problem at all. Pick a board with whatever particular outputs you want.

 

[RazorWind]

So are the Skylake HD530s suitable for running multiple monitors for non-gaming purposes? For ex: two 1920x1200 displays that would be used for photoshop and video editing/playing? If so, it's just a matter of finding a mobo with the correct video ports, right?

The iGPUs on the Core i series are surprisingly good. The one in my Surface Pro 2 (Ivy bridge generation, I think?) does just fine with two monitors in ordinary desktop applications, and that's an unusually slow CPU.

In fact, it even does OK with some less demanding 3D games. I've played quite a bit of Civilization 5 with it, on modest settings.

Unless you somehow get a motherboard with no PCI-Express ports, I see no reason not to at least try out the iGPU. You can always add a real graphics card later, if you feel the need.

 

[PGHammer]

The iGPUs on the Core i series are surprisingly good. The one in my Surface Pro 2 (Ivy bridge generation, I think?) does just fine with two monitors in ordinary desktop applications, and that's an unusually slow CPU.

In fact, it even does OK with some less demanding 3D games. I've played quite a bit of Civilization 5 with it, on modest settings.

Unless you somehow get a motherboard with no PCI-Express ports, I see no reason not to at least try out the iGPU. You can always add a real graphics card later, if you feel the need.

The iGPUs on all the LGA115x Core i-series (and Pentium and Celeron G-series as well) are all based on - at minimum - the HD4400 (Intel) iGPU core; unlike previous iGPUs from Chipzilla, they lack little compared to their discrete counterparts as far as feature support goes; Civ V was, in fact, designed with the HD4400 in particular in mind; another game that makes surprising use of it is (don't laugh) ANNO 2205 - who would have thought that the first x64-only ANNO series game would also be the first ANNO game that is actually playable on mainstream notebooks and AIOs? (Mom's AIO - which has an IB-series Core i3 with that same iGPU, was, in fact, my original ANNO 2205 testbed; in a surprise to me, the iGPU actually cut the ketchup. I'm all too used to iGPUs failing in that arena - AMD HD4200 (Baby Pavilion), nV 7100/630i (the original home to the refurb Q6600), and G41 (the successor to nV7100/630i) all failed miserably; note that the latter two appeared primarily in HTPC mATX motherboards. (The middle of the three chipsets DID have a notebook relation - the nV PV7050/630a chipset for AMD Vista-era notebooks; like the Intel-chipset version, support for the chipset came to an abrupt halt with Windows 7.)

There is, in fact, little reason to purchase a motherboard for a desktop that lacks a PCI Express x16 slot - even in mATX; every mATX motherboard I have every owned has had one. (That includes the MSI H81-E33 I'm driving today - which is, in fact, the smallest mATX board I have ever owned. It only lacks PCI slots - the only slot OTHER than PCI-E x16 is a single PCI-E x1 - which is occupado by my Recon3D Fata1ity Pro refurb, soldiering on proudly still.) While discrete GPUs (as far back as HD5xxx from AMD or GTX5xx from nVidia) will wax it, HD44xx is amazingly capable for a bottom-end iGPU, and far more capable than the bottom was merely an iGPU generation ago.