Graphics power consumption

Is an on-board graphics motherboard solution more energy efficient than
having a separate PCI-e graphics card instead. Say comparing a GeForce6150
MB with a passive cool capable 7300GS based graphics card.

TIA

Rog.

Roger wrote:
> Is an on-board graphics motherboard solution more energy efficient than
> having a separate PCI-e graphics card instead. Say comparing a GeForce6150
> MB with a passive cool capable 7300GS based graphics card.
>
> TIA
>
> Rog.
>

Onboard graphics solutions, have half the peak graphics power of the cheapest
add-in video cards. They also use less power. If you aren't gaming, the
built-in graphics might be sufficient for email and web surfing. The built-in
is also sufficient for older 3D games that don't place heavy demands on the GPU.

In purchasing a pre-built computer, or in building a DIY computer,
what you want is the option of a video card slot for future expansion.
If the built-in graphics in a Northbridge are not sufficient for your
needs, you can then install a graphics card to fix it.

In looking at the latest Intel chipsets, the graphics version uses
about 4.5 watts or so for the graphics function at idle and 6W at peak
(test conditions unstated). In idle or 2D modes, the 7300GS uses 8.7 to 10.3W,
part of which is the power to run the memory chips on the graphics card.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...r-noise_7.html

Paul

You have to remember that the onboard video chip uses the main CPU cycles
and the system RAM to process the video signal. So it's rather hard to
answer your question.. Certainly you get FAR better video images under load
with the separate PCI-E card.

--
---------------------
DaveW
"Roger" <enquiries@rwconcepts.co.uk> wrote in message
news:13clhplgfku3f2a@corp.supernews.com...
> Is an on-board graphics motherboard solution more energy efficient than
> having a separate PCI-e graphics card instead. Say comparing a GeForce6150
> MB with a passive cool capable 7300GS based graphics card.
>
> TIA
>
> Rog.
>