Which is better? Intel hd4000 vs GT640m

[paulcheung]

Hi guys,

How is the intel hd 4000 compare to nVidia gt640m on Notebooks? with i3 or i5 cpus? is it colse or far away.
Thanks.

 

[ShintaiDK]

640m is better for performance. HD4000 is better for battery. I assume any with 640m will support optimus.

 

[lehtv]

GT640M - 1730 3DMarks
Intel HD 4000 - 580 3DMarks
http://community.futuremark.com/hardware/gpu

 

[paulcheung]

Thank you.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I forgot to precise it. You will still have HD4000 if you get a 640m btw. And you can use switchable graphics with optimus. And switch graphics depending on needs and power conservation.

 

[paulcheung]

Someone is looking on a laptop. One come with hd4000 i3 cpu and other come with gt640m and i5 cpu, the price tag is $150 more. so the question is if the gt640m is far better than the hd4000 to justify the differents.
Thanks again

 

[Zodiark1593]

Yes, the GT 640M is much better than the Intel HD-anything.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Someone is looking on a laptop. One come with hd4000 i3 cpu and other come with gt640m and i5 cpu, the price tag is $150 more. so the question is if the gt640m is far better than the hd4000 to justify the differents.
Thanks again

That depends alot on what its gonna be used for.

 

[MrK6]

That depends alot on what its gonna be used for.

I disagree. Nvidia's Optimus has pretty much no drawbacks. The graphical horsepower is there when you need it, and when you don't the card completely shuts off so you don't waste any power. Pretty much the only reasons not to get it are budget or physical (laptop size) constraints.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I disagree. Nvidia's Optimus has pretty much no drawbacks. The graphical horsepower is there when you need it, and when you don't the card completely shuts off so you don't waste any power. Pretty much the only reasons not to get it are budget or physical (laptop size) constraints.

That doesnt make the 640m worth 150$ more per default as he asked for.

 

[JS17]

If you plan to use the computer to game with (or use strongly GPU accelerated programs), the $150 is probably worth it.
If you plan to office/Internet/watch movies, without gaming, might be worth saving the $150.

You did mention the cheaper laptop comes with an i3 whereas the more expensive one comes with an i5. The i5 should be faster, but without specific models, hard to say if it would be noticeable.

 

[frozentundra123456]

If you plan to use the computer to game with (or use strongly GPU accelerated programs), the $150 is probably worth it.
If you plan to office/Internet/watch movies, without gaming, might be worth saving the $150.

You did mention the cheaper laptop comes with an i3 whereas the more expensive one comes with an i5. The i5 should be faster, but without specific models, hard to say if it would be noticeable.

Pretty much this. For basic use the i3 will be fine. Unless you want to game or do some cpu heavy task it is not worth it to me to pay 150.00 extra.

 

[Obsoleet]

I personally don't want any of Nvidia's crap in my laptop. I have an i5 with HD4000 and it's slick. A nice, efficient i3 is a decent setup for a laptop. While Intel's drivers are only OK, I like to keep it nice and pure Intel, in case you want to install a Linux distro there's just less to deal with. The HD4000 does gaming in a pinch, I use it when on vacation.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Anyway, if you're gaming, there is no question the Nvidia GT 640M will utterly beat the spit out of the HD 4000, then proceed to T-bag it repeatedly.

If gaming isn't your thing, then go HD 4000.

 

[Obsoleet]

Anyway, if you're gaming, there is no question the Nvidia GT 640M will utterly beat the spit out of the HD 4000, then proceed to T-bag it repeatedly.

If gaming isn't your thing, then go HD 4000.

It works well on a laptop. I play League of Legends (an average game) at native res 1366x768, high detail. Also Killing Floor at native res. Not sure I'd use it in my desktop rig at this point.. but I appreciate how efficient and cool running it is compared to previous and other laptops.

Now my Arrandale Intel HD graphics (2010) was not usable, these games worked but it took all the fun out of them.

 

[Zodiark1593]

It works well on a laptop. I play League of Legends (an average game) at native res 1366x768, high detail. Also Killing Floor at native res. Not sure I'd use it in my desktop rig at this point.. but I appreciate how efficient and cool running it is compared to previous and other laptops.

Now my Arrandale Intel HD graphics (2010) was not usable, these games worked but it took all the fun out of them.

Ehh, maybe if gaming isn't the primary goal. If the OP has an intent to play even remotely demanding games though, and he has the extra $$$, there is no reason whatsoever to not get the GT 640M. You get Optimus, so you get the battery life if the dGPU is not in use, and of course, actually decent performance when it's needed.

 

[Obsoleet]

I'm not going to disagree with that, other than I disagree the HD4000 isn't decent (depending on your standards but I think anyone who tries it will say its not bad). I just appreciate having 1 solution, and all from Intel. And best Linux driver support, if he chooses to put his toes in that water someday.