I learned 2 new words today. Integrated graphics aka "on board" from the old school. And Discrete, or what I call sticking a video card in a slot. I'm 6 months out (or less) from buying a new PC. I don't "game", but I had the idea of making it expandable as a PC/media center. Someone(on another site)made the argument that integrated is just as good if not better. The integrated graphics (he said) is made to match or "marry" the board it's on. So it's often a better way. Most graphics cards use too many system resources. Just like my power strip with about 12 plugs going into a 110 outlet. Ironically the same reason I always used a AGP card with a PIII or IV setup. For my needs, a good mainboard (motherboard)was all I needed for A/V. Is there any creedence to these new names and the graphics source? Or just some guys assumption... He may of just overheard it from another conversation. IDK... Thanks! @Waldo1967
First option. AMD fusion (e350 zacate) and shove it in a teeny case. This setup will do HD video (up to 1080p) but only just! AMD fusion gets you a motherboard and "fused" CPU and fan. Intel do something similar, but the atom chips suck @ HD video. Fusion setups use less than 90 watts.
Second option AMD llano. These are quad core chips with a lot better integrated graphics than zacate that require a compatible motherboard (socket FM1).
Third option Intel I5 2500K. Quad core CPU from intel with integrated graphics. High overclock potential.
I'd go with llano as it's better than zacate and cheaper than intel, but (probably) not quite as powerful.
Where you spend your cash is up to you. You have to balance Price VS Performance VS actual use VS value for money then make a decision and disregard people who say you've made the wrong one because what's right for me is not right for you.
P.S If intel pentium 4 is fine for everyday now then AMD fusion will serve just as well.
answered Oct 21 '11 at 20:16