Which is better Gt 7600 or integrated G3258?

Discussion in 'Video Cards' started by Sprtfan, Jul 9, 2016.

  1. Sprtfan

    Sprtfan Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    313
    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    I'm throwing together some old parts to make another computer for the kids to play Minecraft. I think the Gigabyte GT 7600 is better than the G3258 but I'm not sure. I'm having trouble tracking down what version of Intel graphics is on the chip. If it is just Intel HD then the GT 7600 would be a step up I think. The integrated worked ok for Minecraft but a racing game she was trying to play was lagging. If they GT 7600 is not much of an improvement, any recommended cheap video cards? Thanks
     
  2. Warrior

    Warrior [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,655
    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    I'm pretty sure the support for 3D advancements alone makes the Intel chip a better platform.

    BTW I got a 560Ti laying around. PM and offer I can't refuse and I'll mail it to you.
     
  3. RamonGTP

    RamonGTP [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,449
    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2005
    Run the game with integrated, run again with the 7600. If FPS is lower on the 2nd run, remove the 7600.
     
  4. defaultluser

    defaultluser [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,247
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    7600 should be faster, but not a ton.
     
  5. misterbobby

    misterbobby 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,677
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Even HD 2500 graphics would be faster than the 7600 GT and I am pretty sure the G3258 has faster graphics than HD 2500. Also a 7600 GT only has 256 mb of vram where as the Intel graphics can borrow much more system ram than that to use as vram.
     
  6. Joseph F

    Joseph F Gawd

    Messages:
    733
    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    The integrated graphics will be faster. Recently, I threw a Geforce 9800GT in my main rig (Core i5 4690K/HD Graphics 4600), and the performance was only slightly in favor of the dedicated card. Now, the Pentium G3258 has about half the graphics performance as the Core i5 4690K, but it will nonetheless be faster than a Geforce 7600GT.
     
  7. defaultluser

    defaultluser [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,247
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    No, I disagree. I just recently ran hd 4000 on my htpc (before I updated to Gtx 750 ti

    The hd 4000 can barely handle half life 2 at the same settings my old 6600gt could, and it sucked with aa turned on. The 6600gt could handle those same settings with 2xaa cranked

    This is not surprising because hd 4000 has exactly half the hardware the 6600gt does (4tmus 2 rops), and is clocked twice as fast.

    So no you need something faster than hd 4000 to exceed the power of a 7600gt. Probably hd 530
     
  8. misterbobby

    misterbobby 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,677
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Sorry but that is not true. HD 4000 will blow a 6600 GT away and that is a FACT. Even HD 2500 would be faster than the 6600 GT. HD 4000 is even much faster than an 8600 GT.

    Intel Core i5 3470 Review: HD 2500 Graphics Tested

    HD4000 is much faster than the GT 520 which itself is already several times faster than the old 6600 GT. The GT 520 is faster than an 8600 GT.
     
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2016
  9. TBH, not sure. But I do have a GT 610 1GB that I'm looking to sell cheap, or trade for an SSD. Let me know. Hope I'm not violating any rules here. If so, mod delete.
     
  10. defaultluser

    defaultluser [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,247
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    For older games that are much more texture/DX9 pipeline heavy, the 7600 GT will blow the 10 EUs Haswell HD Graphics out of the water.

    For more modern games (think anything after Skyrim) that require more compute than textures, the 10 pipe Haswell part is faster.

    And I felt putting the 7600GT on a platform was appropriate, because nobody would be asking about using a 7600GT if their game was DX10 :D
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016
  11. misterbobby

    misterbobby 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,677
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Well there is not a single review that would back up your opinion. They all show that even the dinky HD 3000 will beat faster cards than the 7600 GT.
     
  12. defaultluser

    defaultluser [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,247
    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2006
    Your original assertion that GT 520 is faster than an 8600 GT is wrong:

    HD 520 = 58% the speed of HD 430.

    ZOTAC GeForce GT 520 1 GB Review

    GT 430 = 125% the speed of a GT 220.

    ZOTAC GeForce GT 430 1 GB Review

    So the difference between HD 520 and GT 220 =

    HD 520 versus HD 430 = 100/171 = 0.58.

    HD 430 versus GT 220 = 100/80 = 1.25

    HD 520 versus GT 220 = 0.58 * 1.25 = 0.725

    GT220 = same speed as 9500GT:

    Inno3D GeForce GT 220 1 GB Review

    9500GT = 8600GT rebrand.

    I have shown my work. The 8600GT is 35% faster than an GT 520.

    HD 4000 = GT 520, which is slower than the 8600GT.

    So HD 4000 = around 7600GT performance level. My estimates were more in the neighborhood of 6600GT, but they're not too far off.
     
  13. misterbobby

    misterbobby 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,677
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Depends on the review but a GT 520 and 8600 GT are fairly close and at this point they both suck nearly the same. The 9500 GT was technically NOT just a rebrand and was a tiny bit faster than the 8600 GT. Your ridiculous claim that the 6600 GT was as fast or faster than HD 4000 is 100% BS. The HD 4000 blows past cards that are over twice as fast as the 6600 GT in that Anandtech review. Open your eyes as HD 4000 is FASTER than the GT 520 and would also be faster than the 8600 GT. This is not worth wasting any more time on.

    HD 4000 is potentially over 75% faster than the 8600 GT PassMark - Intel HD 4000 - Price performance comparison

    PassMark - GeForce 8600 GT - Price performance comparison
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2016
  14. I once had a 256 MB 8600 GTS. Can't we all just get along?
     
  15. chameleoneel

    chameleoneel 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,821
    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2005
    The G3258 does not have the HD4600 graphcs, which you see in the regular Haswell products. It has a severly cut down graphics core, known simply as "HD" graphics. It does not even compete with older graphics from Ivy Bridge. the 7600gt will be exponentially better. A 7600 would even be better in most games, than Ivy or Haswell, due to much more robust shader architecture. Dedicated Vram helps a lot, too.

    I have an Ivy bridge laptop with HD4000 graphics which seems to perform much better than what I've known to expect, based on reviews and youtuber videos. In games which are not shader intensive (older games), it does quite well. But anything stressing shaders, it will choke very quickly. I can't run Grow Home or Cloudbuilt. But I can Run Dark Souls 2: Scholar of the First Sin edition, no problem (with no shadows. as the lighting model hits the shaders pretty hard).
     
    Last edited: Jul 15, 2016