Graphics card vs. SSD?

By Nightwind Hawk
in Hardware Hangout

 Share

Recommended Posts

Mentor

Nightwind Hawk

Posted
Posted

Hi guys,

I am about to purchase an Asus UX32VD... now I have two choices (for some odd reason). Both of these are the same price.

Both include:

  • 1.9GHz Intel Core i7-3517U Dual-Core
  • 4GB of 1600MHz DDR3 RAM (I plan to upgrade to 10GB)
  • 13.3" Full HD LED-Backlit IPS Display
  • 1920 x 1080 Native Resolution

And for the same price of $1229, I can choose between:

Option A - video card

  • 500GB 5400rpm HDD + 24GB SSD
  • nVIDIA GeForce GT 620M Graphics (1GB)

or Option B - SSD

  • 2 x 128GB Solid State Drives
  • Integrated Intel HD Graphics 4000

What would you go for?? Dedicated graphics or SSD?

Thanks.

Link to actual products: http://www.bhphotovi...EG%3B924673-REG

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1154478-graphics-card-vs-ssd/
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Roger H. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

I'd take option A with 24GB for the OS which is the only place you'll really need it. Loading games/apps surely will benefit too but I guess I should have first ask about your intentions with the system. You gaming or just using it for Facebook and Microsoft Office? :p

Proficient

Tuishimi

Posted
Posted

Does option A use caching to help with disk access speed?

I don't know... If you don't plan on gaming option B might be better. I think the 4000 handles movies and such well. Also, if you plan on keeping photos and music and video on it, you would probably want a more spacious hard drive, so option A would be better in that case.

I don't know... Sorry. :/

Grand Master

Andre S. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

That's a tough one. The IGP + SSD will give an all-around faster, lighter and longer-lasting notebook (on battery), but will be terrible in games. The GT 620M should do significantly better in games (I couldn't easily find benchmarks, but you should try finding one anyway). If this is your only gaming machine then I'd say go with the GT 620M, otherwise the IGP makes more sense IMHO.

Grand Master

Jason S. Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted

my wife's laptop (Samsung) has a 1TB hd + an 8GB SSD. 8GB doesnt sound like much, but it makes a world of difference. it strikes a nice balance between a traditional hd and a full SSD.

her laptop also has a 630m. it's not very powerful, but does the job. So, that 620m would only be marginally better than the HD4000.

in the end, between those 2 choices, i'd choose A.

Grand Master

Andre S. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

I'd take option A with 24GB for the OS which is the only place you'll really need it. Loading games/apps surely will benefit too but I guess I should have first ask about your intentions with the system. You gaming or just using it for Facebook and Microsoft Office? :p

I wouldn't put my system partition on a 24GB drive. Too many programs dump stuff there outside of your control, it fills up quickly.
Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted

Option A, you get the ssd for the OS installation and the graphics card too

The question will be how important gaming is - if not very, go for the SSD; otherwise, go for the discrete GPU.

I've got a similar decision staring me in the face (desktop build) and it concerns purchase order (as in the OP's case, GPU or SSD).

In my case, the GPU is the higher-priced component - not the SSD (despite the SSD being 256GB)

Gaming is a secondary use - the primary is virtualization.

SSD - http://www.microcenter.com/product/402604/840_Series_MZ-7TD250BW_250GB_SATA_60Gb-s_25_Internal_Solid_State_Drive_(SSD)

GPU - http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0397023

Mentor

Nightwind Hawk

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I watch HD movies etc. but I do not game at all.

The 500 GB HD + 24GB SSD = 24 GB iSSD soldiered onto the motherboard. It is set up as a hybrid drive - caching what you need automatically. It is possible to format that SSD portion and use it to install Windows on it, but they say it is not true SSD speed and not reliable? (some report the SSD failing so I'm not sure...)

SSD. 5400RPM hard drives are incredibly slow and 24GB caching possibly won't cover all your often used data system files.

The 620M is pretty pathetic so neither system would be good for gaming.

That said, neither machine seems particularly great for that price.

I haven't been able to find any other laptops in this price range (or size range) that have such an amazing screen (1080p) and good specs (i7). Can you recommend something to me?

Grand Master

Andre S. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

The question will be how important gaming is - if not very, go for the SSD; otherwise, go for the discrete GPU.

I've got a similar decision staring me in the face (desktop build) and it concerns purchase order (as in the OP's case, GPU or SSD).

In my case, the GPU is the higher-priced component - not the SSD (despite the SSD being 256GB)

Gaming is a secondary use - the primary is virtualization.

SSD - http://www.microcent...tate_Drive_(SSD)

GPU - http://www.microcent...duct_id=0397023

Consider the HD 7790 (ASUS also makes a DirectCU II version). It's usually priced 50$ below the HD 7850 and performs only slightly worse.
I watch HD movies etc. but I do not game at all.
Why didn't you say so right away? In that case the choice is obvious, take the HD 4000 + 2 SSDs.
Grand Master

Astra.Xtreme

Posted
Posted

Source? On notebookcheck (page 1 of the thread) the GT 620M was 50-80% faster.

HD 4000: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4000

GT 620: http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu.php?gpu=GeForce+GT+620&id=1429

Unless the mobile version is faster than the desktop version (which usually isn't the case).

The 620M does have more shaders than the HD 4000, so gaming might be a little better on it.

Grand Master

LaP

Posted
Posted

The question will be how important gaming is - if not very, go for the SSD; otherwise, go for the discrete GPU.

If gaming actually matters option A AND option B are really bad options.

Personally i would not buy something with a 620M inside. Specially something with a 1080p screen. You'll have to play games on low most of the time and using a non native resolution.

If the HD 4000 is strong enough to watch HD movies and gaming doesn't matter then option B is a good option.

Grand Master

Andre S. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

HD 4000: http://www.videocard...u=Intel+HD+4000

GT 620: http://www.videocard...+GT+620&id=1429

Unless the mobile version is faster than the desktop version (which usually isn't the case).

The 620M does have more shaders than the HD 4000, so gaming might be a little better on it.

The HD 4000 also varies quite a bit depending on the CPU (clocks are usually lower on mobile), so I wouldn't read much into that.
Proficient

srbeen

Posted
Posted

You can always add SSD later, 24GB barely enough for windows tho... Can you add dedicated video? If not, and you wanna game, Answer is pretty clear.

on an Intel 3rd gen i5 dual core, the Intel 4000 will do BF3/MW3 on medium settings around 40FPS if that helps your decision. Assuming a 3rd gen i7 dual core would do a bit better. Tech Specs aren't always everything. I really don't think preformance-wise either graphics card will be much better than the other one.

The 4000 is on-die too, so if you are getting the i7, it'd technically be dual video card system. the 4000 to save power, 620 for dedicated for gaming. This is presuming Asus allows it, I know Apples with dedicated have onboard 4000 completely hardware disabled. For your reference, I had to install the ATI intel 4000 driver, so the ATI software could enable/disable it on-the-fly. Else the 4000 is always used for everything unless you change the setting in the bios, which i have yet to discover.

Grand Master

primexx

Posted
Posted

Hard drive is so easy to replace that it shouldn't factor into your equation. The most important thing is which graphics you want. The HD4k is very good, it looks like the 620m is only marginally better, but it does have more gaming-oriented features. If at all possible I'd suggest that you spec the hard drive and RAM to the cheapest options you can, then replace them yourself, you can get higher quality parts and it should still come out cheaper.

Proficient

UseLess

Posted
Posted

I'll add my $0.02.

No choice for me. Option B. If you don't play HIGH END games, then you won't notice not having dedicated graphics. The SSDs will be much faster, and the improved battery life will be nice. Even if you do want to play a game, the HD4000 CAN! Hey I mean, crank up SC2 on medium graphics - but don't expect to be playing Crysis 3!

A few other people are saying "you can swap the HDD later, but you can't swap the graphics!" - they are right...but think about it...will you?

Oh, if you DO get the 2xSSD...please, please don't RAID-0 them (I would be more inclined to use RAID-1 if anything!). Also, back-up whenever using SSDs. They brick without mercy.

Good luck - either way, its a slim, light, beast you're looking at =D

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.