Maximum PC

Are those 65W parts?

n0b0dykn0ws

I'm waiting for the 44W part with HD 4000 graphics. Would be nice to ditch the 65W X2 + Radeon 5670 for my kids' HTPC and go with a Mini ITX solution.

n0b0dykn0ws

Send Intel a note ooooing and awwwwwing over the new socket FM2 APUs and asking why Intel can't compete with an i3 running decent graphics. At the very least maybe one of their lawyers could threaten to sue ya. Keep poking.

Why can't Intel bring an i3 to compete with an i3? It was a hasty post or just posted in haste (aka, "hate"). The i3 HD200 iGPU in the 2120 competes very well with the AMD 6750 and the HD3000 did better IMO. The HD4K is now out on the i3 3225 and I'm really not seeing how the iGPU is any worse than any nVidia/AMD dedicated card under the $120 mark. You can buy a really fucking good CPU and a iGPU that'll do basically everything you need, or you can purchase a really shitty CPU from AMD and get an iGPU that's in the $90 range if you did it separately.

This is integrated graphics bro and this is MaximumPC forums. How awesome is my integrated graphics you ask? Well, it's pretty fucking good either way you go. Will I run that and be fine? Not at all. You're dug into a trench that only has graphics as a key note, and the processing part is a Pentium 4. Meanwhile, the CPU on the i3 smokes any AMD CPU and has a pretty fucking good iGPU. It's an Xbox mentality...and dare I say FanBoi/ignorant. It's fact, not flaming.

It's biased politics IMO. You have a side. Will you overclock an AMD CPU to 6Ghz on ice? Sure...will it score anything close to what conventionally cooled Intel's pull at 5Ghz? No. So who really wins? If you say AMD, then you're on the Pentium 4 side (that we killed) and not really an AMD boi as they preached something different back in the day. But surely, there is nothing out there, at all, that says AMD has a winner at any price point. If it dives below $100, then you're better off with a tablet and ruled out quickly as a power user.

I've got a shitload of both Intel w/ HT and AMD cores for work. In my world, 12 beats 16 day in and day out. If I were to debate graphics on chip and proclaim to be a gamer, I'd say both are shit and run a dedicated card that'll run 3 big screens and STFU. But for sure wouldn't brag about on-chip graphics in this situation and call a winner on CPU/GPU alone. It's the tallest midget solution you're making, and only in one aspect.

I'm trying to decipher if that was aimed at me.

If it was I'm waiting on the low(er) power parts with HD4000 for video playback only.

The kids aren't old enough to game, or to care what the game looks like.

They love watching movies in HD, so that's why the HTPC is there. No discs to scratch up. No VCR hole to put peanut butter in.

If I could make it that much smaller it would be that much sweeter.

n0b0dykn0ws

Chumly is being Chumly, I wouldn't worry about the post too much. Though I may ask, why are you waiting for the HD4000 just to play video? Intel's iGPU direction has been media since they started the HD series. Besides that, all it really does is offload the work from the CPU, which just playing HD content without filtering, you have to go all the way down to a dual core Atom before it starts choking. And even then, the latest Atom systems do just fine with 1080p video.

It doesn't take much to play video these days. Hell, I believe NVIDIA's Tegra 3 offloads a lot of the decoding work on the companion processor (which tops at 500MHz) so the main cores can go to sleep.

Well then, good news.

Newegg

Eggcelent!

n0b0dykn0ws

Yup. Me being me, no offense meant and none taken

The power is lowered on the T's by simply fusing a higher end part at a locked/lowered cycle count and charging more for them. The rating they give is worse case scenario and something we may never face in reality. If it's a 45W part, they mean the COOLER must be able to collect 45W's of heat, not that it sucks that much juice. Keep in mind that Watt's is a measure of work for both ends and not just a measure of electrical power. The point being is that if you want a 22W CPU, it's more than likely slapping you in the face right now and asking you to buy it. The 2120 I have shoved in an iTX case isn't pulling 65W or even near my calculations of needing more than a 18W HS/F cooler in order to deal with the heat. Yes, if I pulled that CPU out and put it in the validation oven-of-hell back at Intel, it wouldn't pass with my expectations as the log tells me...but it passes in real live day after day as a consumer.

Me being me, I ramble...so the point is that if you want a low power CPU, you pick a board it's to go in that will let you undervolt and underclock it without spending more money on that very same unit with ratings that somehow seem more appealing. If we're here in a forum talking about it, then we have the open conversation available that will tell you to clock it down for the same thing you actually desire instead of waiting on Intel to do this for you. That's Mac mentality IMO. Every update for those type were due to one CPU upgrade (Ivy) and claimed it's a whole new world. As a PC builder, we can call bullshit.

It's worth noting that Ivy sucks when it comes to real thermal qualities though. It may be 22nm, but it's hotter than Sandy due to the selection of non-sliver TIM inside the nickle and copper cap. Silver is expensive, but I'm very sorry to see them move from it for the direct contact material from the core to the cap in order to cut manufacturing costs. It's a known issue but further clouds this "wattage" issue.

i.g. The 2120T with the current compound would be thermally equal to the 2120 using the silver, not lesser, and would hold a lower processing CPU for a lot more money. Add in actual iGPU usage and I see a real problem with this move.

If there were a part with the HD4000 that used silver, but with a higher watt rating, I would grab it, but the HD4000 is only available in the Ivy Bridge line.

If I knew for sure the Popcorn Hour A300 met my needs I would just get one of those.

n0b0dykn0ws

I use an i3 3225 w/ the HD4000 iGPU in an Antec ISK300-150 in a couple builds and plan on planting more around the house based on that CPU, so I'm not knocking Ivy. I just don't like the "T" models for the obvious underclock we can do for free and are charged a premium for it since it's a fused speed bin that use to be something better.

I don't use the HD4000 iGPU in my little iTX work/gaming box (HD6670), but it is a spectacular CPU all around to me and is flawless for the other general builds using the iGPU with more general uses in mind. Thermally, I really don't ever see it getting hot until it's about 20 minutes into a render, and it's a very confined case and an OEM cooler. I don't like that Intel went with compound vise silver, but the power savings and the added horsepower equal out IMO (Six in one hand, half a dozen in the other) in general builds.

I had to re-read my own reply a couple times to get inside my own thought process...but I think I was just attempting to state the 2120T got flagged for the short bus, was neutered, and is now a G620 w/ Hyperthreading since it's downclocked. Where I missed is that the 2120 is Sandy still and in deed uses silver. Doh! With Speedstep and all that, I think the 3225 is just awesome and shouldn't be a concern even if it (IB) doesn't use Silver.

Sorry for the confusion! I think the number system still trips me up here and there and, well, I just type w/ a part number in my head and run with it. For all, what I stated in that quote is incorrect. I intended to use a 3xxxx IB counterpart...I think; who knows.