TR Forums

Hello,

I don't know much so I'm coming to the experts for advice. I bought this pair
GIGABYTE GA-Z97-HD3 LGA 1150 Intel Z97 HDMI SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 ATX Intel Motherboard
Intel Core i3-4130 Haswell Dual-Core 3.4GHz LGA 1150 54W

and I'm looking for a graphics card that is better than the onboard video but nothing pricey. I'm not a gamer but I do use two 24" monitors. I watch a lot of youtube or webinars that usually run the whole day and sometimes both monitors are watching separate vids at the same so I need something that decodes fast. I want to cap the price at $75 (or $100 if it's a good deal).

I'm asking here because I don't want to replace the onboard video with a card that is worst.

Current PSU is 750 watts but will be dropped to 600-500 watts. This PSU was a backup.

Thanks for all your inputs.
(had to edit the post because just found out I can't post URL to the egg)

Have you tried the onboard video (IGP) from the CPU and determined that it was insufficient? Given your uses, it should be just fine.

I have to agree - for those uses the Intel IGP will be plenty capable. Though you might have to check your BIOS settings and make sure it has enough memory allocated.

If you use it and decide it isn't, you'd probably want an R7 240 or a GeForce GT 730 - you ought to be able to find those for within your price range. Also, if you're buying a new power supply, even 500W would be overkill with a setup like that. You'd be perfectly fine with 300W or less, as long as it's from a decent brand.

I would look for something used. Say a GTX460 or 560 Ti.

Looks like a fellow Gerbil is selling a GTX 560ti for $80 shipped in this thread:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=94406

deruberhanyok wrote:

I have to agree - for those uses the Intel IGP will be plenty capable. Though you might have to check your BIOS settings and make sure it has enough memory allocated.

If you use it and decide it isn't, you'd probably want an R7 240 or a GeForce GT 730 - you ought to be able to find those for within your price range. Also, if you're buying a new power supply, even 500W would be overkill with a setup like that. You'd be perfectly fine with 300W or less, as long as it's from a decent brand.

That's great. I can look for a 400-500 watt CPU instead. The reason I'm looking for a separate video card is that the video sometimes gets a hiccup. Also thanks for suggesting the memory allocation in the BIOS. I forgot about that till now and that could be the problem.

The i3-4130 has Intel HD graphics 4400 so should do what you want without a additional GPU.

But I would suggest upping your price range just a tad and look at the GTX 750. The GTX 750 can be found for around $110. It has a low power draw so should work fine with a 400W PSU in your system.

You say you don't game but if you ever want to game the 750 can run most of today's games in 1080p on mid to low settings.

Khali wrote:

The i3-4130 has Intel HD graphics 4400 so should do what you want without a additional GPU.

[...]

Thanks for that suggestion as well. The box right now is being tested on using a single monitor. According to Gigabytes web site, this board is able to run 3 monitors at the same time using the integrated graphics which surprised me and sealed the deal for this build at that time. Within the next week or two it will be switched over to two monitors and see how it flies or fries. The stock cooler likely needs to be changed to after market because the fan can be heard spinning hard by the afternoon. Memory is currently at 4 and as someone mentioned above that I need to allocate memory for the video so this will likely need to be increased. Thinking no more than 8 because I've decided that eventually this build will be using a separate card in the future.

The real big reason for looking for a separate card is that I want something that can decode video as fast as possible (without breaking the budget) and be able to be replaced as video technology changes. But for now I'll run using it using the integrated graphics since this technology is current and several have mentioned that this is more than enough for what I need.

The ideas that have come from here have been great. Keep em coming and thank you.

ThatStupidCat wrote:

The real big reason for looking for a separate card is that I want something that can decode video as fast as possible (without breaking the budget) and be able to be replaced as video technology changes. But for now I'll run using it using the integrated graphics since this technology is current and several have mentioned that this is more than enough for what I need.

Those web-based videos may be doing Flash (which is evil) or may be you are hitting browser bugs that end up not doing GPU acceleration. That may be the reason you are seeing hiccups. Not much you can do about that.

ThatStupidCat wrote:

The real big reason for looking for a separate card is that I want something that can decode video as fast as possible (without breaking the budget) and be able to be replaced as video technology changes.

I'd strongly suggest you read this article/review on Haswell for HTPC use

Flying Fox wrote:

Those web-based videos may be doing Flash (which is evil) or may be you are hitting browser bugs that end up not doing GPU acceleration. That may be the reason you are seeing hiccups. Not much you can do about that.

I think you're right but hoping it isn't so. Nothing against you. Just saying... I hope the hiccups disappear after some tweaks. If not then I'll just have to accept it.

Zalman CNPS9500A LED just came in and this sucker is huge and the egg is FAST on free shipping. Already regretting getting this thing. Looks complicated and having another LED lighting up inside the computer makes me one morose cat.

Ok, a question. If I bump the system ram to 8 gigs then should I use 1 gig or 2 gigs for the video? I should have played with it before but didn't so not sure what to expect in the BIOS. Thanks ahead of time for all replies.

I think the max I've seen BIOS settings for it is 1GB, which should be plenty enough frame buffer to drive your displays.

ThatStupidCat wrote:

Flying Fox wrote:

Those web-based videos may be doing Flash (which is evil) or may be you are hitting browser bugs that end up not doing GPU acceleration. That may be the reason you are seeing hiccups. Not much you can do about that.

I think you're right but hoping it isn't so. Nothing against you. Just saying... I hope the hiccups disappear after some tweaks. If not then I'll just have to accept it.

Zalman CNPS9500A LED just came in and this sucker is huge and the egg is FAST on free shipping. Already regretting getting this thing. Looks complicated and having another LED lighting up inside the computer makes me one morose cat.

Ok, a question. If I bump the system ram to 8 gigs then should I use 1 gig or 2 gigs for the video? I should have played with it before but didn't so not sure what to expect in the BIOS. Thanks ahead of time for all replies.

Set DVMT to max and forget about it. Let the driver figure out how memory it needs. It probably will never be anywhere near a gig, as largely it will only be used as a framebuffer.

Thanks for the suggestion on the RAM. Will do that.

Installed the Zalman this weekend. Was not happy that it rocked left to right when clamping down the bar and was afraid the thermal paste got spread uneven so installed the temp monitor. My fault really because I didn't pull the motherboard out of the case. Currently breaking in the thermal compound with an all day webinar on a single monitor. All weekend the temp stayed 24C and this morning it had a brief spike to 32C. Now it's running stable at 25C-26C. Very pleased because the main reason for this build was to drop the temperature coming out of the exhaust.

As I write this I am a bit concerned. The DRAM voltage is 1.668. It wasn't running at the rated 1866Mhz so I upped it but I do know XMP is not enabled. Will it be better to enable XMP and let the system figure it out or is the 1.668V safe? I think this should be 1.5V. This is a Crucial brand with tall fins that is no longer sold by the egg.

As usual, thank you for all the replies.

Just finished a quick read on XMP and I definitely need to turn this on.

Looks like I won't be adding a graphics card to this thing after all. Thanks for all the advice. Very helpful.

The hiccups disappeared once the RAM was running at 1866 vs 1333. The thermal paste looks broken in and today the temp was running at a steady 22-23C. RAM on bios was dropped to 1333 then XMP was enabled and this boosted the RAM up to 1866. The voltage is still showing 1.668 and holding steady so I guess I'll just leave it there. I was hoping it would drop to 1.5V. System is stable so I'm not gonna complain.

Well, it's that time of the year and I wonder what anyone's thoughts on this

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6814161461 currently priced at $99.99 with a $20 rebate.

I wish it was just $80 and without the games and no rebate but it is what it is. I've had bad luck with HIS rebates and as a result I've avoided them for a very long time. No other options this time around though. Other suggestions are welcome.

I don't believe that you should spend $100 -20MIR on a Radeon R7-260X 1GiB (previously known as HD7790). It's just not enough of an upgrade from your integrated graphics to make it a good value. Radeon R9-270(X) 2GiB (formerly known as HD7870 GHz Ed.) provides much better gaming performance for only $130 -30MIR.

Radeon R9-280 3GiB (formerly known as HD7950 Boost) is a smoking hot deal at $160 -30MIR.

Get the Radeon R9-280. Play games. Have fun.

Are you definitely a non-gamer?

I can't see any reason to buy a graphics card unless you're gaming or using OpenCL-enabled applications like video encoders or Adobe CC2014 suite. That being said, OMG the R9 280 is the bargain of the moment for any kind of 3D power.

Yeah, for non-gaming or GPU compute I don't see the point of a discrete graphics card. If the integrated is limited in terms of multi-monitor support, I'd look for a passively cooled card.

I have to say when it comes to performance per dollar nothing can touch the R9 280 3GB card right now...amazing amount of card for the money.

They must have a big stockpile of chips that could not make the 280x specs or something.

This computer is used mainly for webinars (runs 8-10 hrs each weekday), watching some online movies, looking things up, and tweetdeck but I plan on playing Witcher 3 in the spring. The first four usually happening at the same time during weekdays. Now that you've asked the questions, it led me to think of what new vid cards might come out and make prices drop some more. I no longer plan on being the first adopter of Witcher 3 and will wait to see how others review it. So it might be May before I order Witcher 3. Wow, that's at least 6 months away. Thanks for the inputs and questions because now I want to think this over. Anyone that has bought technology knows how fast things can change and I've paid for my fair share of barely used things before they became obsolete.

I'm so glad I asked questions here. I did some more research on Saturday and found out the 2GB version of the 260x uses the Bonaire chip but this is a 1GB version and uses the Curacao running at 1000 MHz. These GPU companies have owned me with all their rebrandingfor for so long. Not this time. I didn't get any GPU this time around and will wait for when I need it.

I can't believe it's almost 2 years since this thread was started. Anyway, I just upgraded the video card to this (not yet installed)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127763&cm_re=msi_r7_250-_-14-127-763-_-Product

It has direct X12. Research suggest it was 4x better than built in GPU. I would not have bothered to upgrade this except I'm getting ready to move to Win 10.
Also I wanted to move graphics processing from the CPU to the GPU. I have to watch a lot of video/webinars so hoping this will help with that.

The CPU handles the videos just fine but there is a certain blurriness with videos on the left monitor (D-sub input) vs the right.

Also picked up a copy of XCOM Enemy Unknown. Yeah it's old but really enjoyed the very first XCom from way back.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832205189&cm_re=xcom_enemy_unknown-_-32-205-189-_-Product

So I'm posting this to ask if any of you gerbils have a better suggestion. I just can't figure out video cards with all the rebadging that's going on. Thanks!

Just did a quick look through at Newegg seen this: Refurbished Sapphire Radeon HD 7770 the only thing about that card I don't like is the 1 GB. I would suggest at the very least which ever GPU you decide on has GDDR5, and I recommend 2 GB on the board. I'm assuming price point was a factor from link to the R7 250 in your post?

I checked off the cards I would suggest if you want to have a look.
GPU : Radeon HD 7870 GHz Edition, Radeon R9 270X, GeForce GTX 750, GeForce GTX 750 Ti, GeForce GTX 950, Radeon R7 360, Memory Type : GDDR5

ThatStupidCat wrote:

Also picked up a copy of XCOM Enemy Unknown. Yeah it's old but really enjoyed the very first XCom from way back.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832205189

It's a great game. It does a good job at capturing the spooky unknown feeling of the original X-COM, while providing a modern graphical experience.

ThatStupidCat wrote:

I can't believe it's almost 2 years since this thread was started. Anyway, I just upgraded the video card to this (not yet installed)
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814127763

The Radeon R7-250 that you linked uses the tiny Oland XT GPU with DDR3 memory. It is not adequate for many games. I would have suggested stepping up to at least a Radeon R7-360 2GB, which uses a faster-clocked version of the Bonaire GPU from Radeon R7-260(X) and HD7790. The more powerful GPU is also paired with much faster GDDR5 memory.

ThatStupidCat wrote:

I just can't figure out video cards with all the rebadging that's going on.

Here's an AMD GPU decoder ring for you:

GCN 2? Polaris: Coming mid-2016.

GCN 1.2:
Fiji XT: Radeon R9 Fury X, Radeon R9 Nano
Fiji Pro: Radeon R9 Fury
Antigua/Tonga XT: Radeon R9-380X
Antigua/Tonga Pro: Radeon R9-380, R9-285

GCN 1.1:
Grenada/Hawaii XT: Radeon R9-390X, R9-290X, R9-295x2
Grenada/Hawaii Pro: Radeon R9-390, R9-290
Tobago/Bonaire XT: Radeon R7-260X, HD7790
Tobago/Bonaire Pro: Radeon R7-360, R7-260

GCN 1.0:
Tahiti XT: Radeon R9-280X, HD7970
Tahiti Pro: Radeon R9-280, HD7950
Trinidad/Curaçao/Pitcairn XT: Radeon R9-270X, HD7870
Trinidad/Curaçao/Pitcairn Pro: Radeon R7-370, R9-270, HD7850

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_AM ... sing_units

ThatStupidCat wrote:

It has direct X12. Research suggest it was 4x better than built in GPU. I would not have bothered to upgrade this except I'm getting ready to move to Win 10.

Can you link to those benchmarks?

I don't know whether you're talking about video decoding specifically but I wouldn't expect general performance to be anything like 4x the speed. The 250 GDDR5 compared to the HD 4600 is around 50% to 150% faster depending on usage. The much slower DDR3 on the 250 you've bought is going to be a bigger limitation than the loss of 20% of the compute units on the 4400 so I'd expect a smaller improvement.

If it was general performance then I wonder if you were comparing the wrong card. AMD did a HD4000 series a few years ago, or there's the 250X which is a much faster card than the 250.

In terms of the capability of the dedicated video decoding hardware it's difficult to tell. Hardware sites mostly have the head in the clouds these days and don't test commonly used features like that. What testing I have seen suggests it's generally unrelated to the power of the general purpose graphics processor and that newer chips tend to be better.

All that is moot unless your playback software supports it. Flash and web browsers haven't generally been at the cutting edge of hardware support so you might want to try and find out what that best supports first.

ThatStupidCat wrote:

So I'm posting this to ask if any of you gerbils have a better suggestion. I just can't figure out video cards with all the rebadging that's going on. Thanks!

I'm confused. You "just upgraded" to a R7 250 but you're asking if we have a better suggestion? If you're okay with returning or repurposing the R7 250 and buying something else, then you should definitely do that because XCOM is a cracking game, possibly the only single-player game in recent memory that has kept me indoors for 48 hours straight.

For a 24" monitor (assuming it's 1080p or 1200p) the sweet spot both in terms of performance/$ and performance/Watt is going to be a 2GB GTX 950 for about $150; AMD has nothing sensible to compete as they're re-using the woefully outdated Pitcairn chip from the 7850 still. Not only is it low performance/Watt - it's also lacking in some useful features and support for current technologies.

If you have a little more cash, the 4GB 380, 380X or 960 are decent options for a smidge over $200 but unless you start playing intensive, current-gen AAA titles at ultra settings you won't really see any difference. They'll also need 2x6-pin power connectors at least, don't know what PSU you ended up with but I'd be suggesting a decent 450W at least for the 380 variants.

Likewise, if you have a little less cash, the lowest point of entry is the R7 360 that JAE suggested, but it's outside the sweet spot - meaning that you'll get lower performance/$ than you would if you spent another 50-60 bucks on a GTX 950.

As for the fuzzy output using D-Sub, that could be anything; D-Sub outputs tends to get ignored by manufacturers these days so the quality is a bit of a crapshoot. As rules of thumb:
If the D-Sub connector on the backplate is connected by a short internal cable to the card, try to switch your connections around so that you're using a DVI port on the back of the card through a little platic adapter block.
Check you are using a decent-quality VGA cable, not a super-cheap thin one
Make sure your VGA cable is as short as you can get away with, and that it's not running alongside other high-noise cables like a bundle of AC mains cables or wall-wart converters.

I'm going to agree with Chrispy_. GeForce GTX950 2GB is down to $140 -20MIR this week. The better gaming performance is worth the 50% price premium over the $100 -20MIR Radeon R7-360 2GB.

Thank you all for the suggestions and especially the decoder ring from Just and Engineer.

The reason I jumped on this particular card was that it was on sale. When I got it I found it had a 74 watt idle and that made me frown a bit. Not sure if this is good, bad, or average. I could not put words into what I wanted to say but Crispy hit it with performance/wattage.

The benchmarks were from passmark http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/directCompute.html
While visiting the page, hit ctrl-f then search for hd 4400 then r7 250 and compare numbers.

Will come back tonight and take a closer look at the comments. Just passing glance right now but very much appreciate the input from all you gerbils.