Onboard Grpahics

You could increase the amount of RAM it uses, but the benefits will probably be marginal and will take away from system RAM of course, which isn't good.

If you want to play games, then yeah, you pretty much need a dedicated graphics card...or it would be definitely preferable in most cases.

Just find out what slots your motherboard has, like AGP or PCI-e, and then you can find a card.
 
Jayj2k1 said:
I just got a Celeron (2.9 Ghz, 256 ram, 80 gb hard drive) for like $150 with a 17" flat CRT from black friday sales.

I actually upgraded the integrated graphics to a GeForce MX4000 128MB PCI Card just to free up the processor. I see a difference in that alone and I'm not doing any gaming just to let ya know.

However, I am going to upgrade the 256MB RAM to 1.25 GB. That should definitely make it run much faster when it comes to DVD Burning and stuff.

I would say just get a PCI card and upgrade the memory man.
do u know the L2 cache of the celeron jay?
 
ati005 said:
wots better - a pci graphics card or an agp?

If you're referring to normal PCI, then AGP no doubt, but if you're referring to PCI-Express, then PCI-Express is the better one.
 
MooseMan said:
do u know the L2 cache of the celeron jay?

Its only 256K L2 Cache which is horrible, but then again you are looking at a Celeron processor of course.


wots better - a pci graphics card or an agp??

If you are just looking at regular PCI card compared to AGP, AGP wins with hardly no competition. However like Mike said, PCI Express kills AGP. You have so much more pipelines and abilities to add 2 PCI Express to give you killer gaming. The only reason I answered this twice because I mentioned that I put a PCI card in my pc and I didn't want you get PCI and PCI Express confused.
 
Jayj2k1 said:
Its only 256K L2 Cache which is horrible, but then again you are looking at a Celeron processor of course.

But when you consider how cheap the processor is and how much power it has, it's actually really damn good.

For the price you pay for a celeronD, i'm impressed.
 
Yes, but K8 Semprons are usually cheaper yet better performing, so I'd go with a Sempron over a Celeron any day.
 
Jayj2k1 said:
Its only 256K L2 Cache which is horrible, but then again you are looking at a Celeron processor of course.

yes you are right about looking at the celeron. but really at that point there isn't much of a way around it. get a new processor. ur onboard graphics will probably play alot better with more L2 cache because the onboard takes up CPU power. so plain and simple get a new celeron or a p4. just make sure the L2 cache is 1mb, or thats at least my recommened ammount. i would have gone with 2MB if the price wasn't so high.
 
No, if you're going to get a new CPU and you're a gamer, then it's a no-brainer; get an Athlon 64. L2 Cache doesn't matter much in most cases, believe me, but since you're a gamer, I'd say minimum 512KB.
 
well it really depends on what u like. the reason i went with intel is because of faster clock speeds and they do have good L cache sizes. i have nothing agenst AMD i just think that intel seems 2 be more round fitted instead of focusing on a main thing, or thats how it appears in my POV, i may be wrong.
 
Back
Top Bottom