2011 is recent, and no it isn't exclusive to mobile devices. The current highest-end desktop CPU (i7-6700K) has an integrated GPU. http://ark.intel.com/products/53480/Intel-Pentium-Processor-G620-3M-Cache-2_60-GHz Not the best bang for your buck, and OP is on a budget. Of course it can, unless it's a Raspberry Pi (which it isn't, because Pentium G620). Evidently.
I'm sorry, the CPU has been around since the 1970's if not before. So Multiple Core Processors and GPUs are a relatively recent development. The Graphics Specs make no mention of a GPU. Plus you don't normally find a GPU on a Dual-Core Processor outside of a mobile device. Then again, Intel do not call their equivalent of a GPU a 'GPU'. Edit: Just found this... You do know what Megahurtz mean on a CPU, don't you? Well then he can get a boost from just getting a Graphics Card. Better than you. Evidently.
Completely irrelevant. With the exception of server CPUs (Xeon) and those based on the LGA 2011 and LGA 2011-3 sockets, all CPUs since 2010 have featured integrated GPUs Surely, it can't be this difficult? The whole reason there is a "graphics specifications" section is because it contains an integrated Graphics Processing Unit. A CPU, without integrated GPU, does not have video output. See here for a CPU without integrated GPU. It doesn't matter what Intel decides to call it, it's a GPU. You took more effort than necessary, could've just looked up what "Intel HD graphics" stands for (hint: integrated GPU). Clock speed, which is a misleading specification to focus your purchase around. If you're going to base your purchase off the clock speed you're in for a rude awakening when you decide to purchase an AMD FX-9590 at 5GHz, only for it to be destroyed by an Intel i5-6600K at 3,9GHz. If you want to cause a horrendous bottleneck, sure. Besides, OP wanted a PC that could run EC. There's no way in hell that's going to happen if you leave the CPU as is. Sure.
Funny, as from what I can tell the AMD FX 4130 I bought earlier this year has no GPU. Though it can process graphics, it does not seem to have a dedicated core for it. A GPU is a dedicated chip or core for Graphics Processing, hence the name. Current CPU's can process Graphics without needing a dedicated core, it's just better if they do. Except, for reason, Intel does not call it a GPU! The clock speed indicates how many processes it does per second, measured in Hertz. The higher the Hertz a CPU is rated, the faster it processes without being overclocked. Hertz and Bits indicate how powerful a Processor is. That is fundamental. It is always a good idea to get as powerful a CPU as you can afford. I'm sorry what? If you use a Graphics Card you are not putting a strain on the CPU by having it run graphics. If it is running Graphics, then it is producing heat from that which adds to the thermal load it is under. Plus it is using power that can be used elsewhere on the CPU for other tasks. It is also easier, and more cost effective, to replace a Graphics Card than a CPU. Yes. And you do understand that between us we have hijacked this thread. And I am still trying to help the OP.
Apologies, an oversight of mine. I forgot to mention the largely obsolete AMD CPUs. Does it have video output though? Because I somehow doubt it can output graphics if it doesn't have an integrated GPU on board. Try taking your discrete GPU out and see if you can get video output. No, that's a discrete GPU; a processor dedicated to processing graphics. Integrated GPUs are still GPUs. By the way, I use an i7-3820 (LGA 2011, no integrated GPU) and it can't output video without a discrete GPU. You're just grasping at straws. If I were to create my own mayonnaise brand, but don't call it mayonnaise on the packaging, it's still mayonnaise. Also, look up GPU market share. You'll find Intel. Yes, but a higher clock speed does not equate a more powerful CPU. Yes, but if I were to throw a GTX 970 in a rig with a Pentium G620, the card wouldn't be able to run at full load because the CPU isn't powerful enough. A bottleneck.
That's your opinion. Not everyone agrees. I'm sorry. But you seem to misunderstand. I am talking about a multicore CPU where one of the cores is a dedicated GPU. That means you can't remove it and still have the CPU running. What you seem to be talking about is a GPU built into the Motherboard. Sounds like it relies on Motherboard Graphics or a Graphics Card. No. I am just pointing out that Intel don't use the term GPU, so if you want to confirm that one of their CPUs has a GPU core you may have to hunt around for someone using that terminology. Which can lead to confusion. That's like saying terms like Horsepower and Torque don't equate to how powerful an engine is! But it will still run faster than relying on an in-built GPU, either on the Motherboard or on the CPU.
Benchmarks do. I said remove the discrete GPU, the one you have plugged into a PCIe slot, and try getting video output. Also, integrated GPUs are on the same die as the CPU, but don't use cores of the CPU. It's also not what I'd consider a "dedicated" GPU. No, I am not. Modern motherboards do not have integrated GPUs. They do have video output ports (VGA, HDMI, DVI, etc.) to connect monitors to the integrated GPU on the CPU. A discrete graphics card, yes. It's complete toast without one. So? It performs the tasks of a GPU and has similar specs to low-end GPUs, just because Intel uses "graphics solution" terminology instead of calling it a GPU directly doesn't make it not a GPU. That's the same as saying that ATI did not produce GPUs, because they used the term VPU. https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html Doesn't seem like the top tier CPUs have all that impressive clock speeds. Certainly. But it still won't run EC, which was the point.
You're talking about the Graphics Card? Why be so obtuse? Being on the same Die as the CPU means it is a core on the CPU. But they can also be on the motherboard or a Graphics Card. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processing_unit Yes they do. With the benchmarks I suggest you look again. There are more differences between those CPUs than just the clockspeed. But if you have two nearly identical CPUs but one has a higher clockspeed than the other the one with greater clockspeed will be faster/more powerful. There are a number of upgrades that can improve a PC performance. There's the CPU, RAM, Graphics Card, PSU, and cooling systems that can be part of a comprehensive performance upgrade. Your focus seems to be only on the CPU.
Of course I'm talking about the Graphics Card; that's what a discrete GPU is. Not really. A quad core with an integrated GPU isn't suddenly a pentacore with one core dedicated to video output; the integrated GPU is on a distinct area. Point me to one, haven't seen one in ages. Yes, thanks for agreeing. I agree, but there aren't many nearly identical CPUs. AMD CPUs usually have a higher clockspeed and more cores, but get crushed by the Intel equivalent at a lower clockspeed and less cores. Because you seem to be under the impression that upgrading just the GPU is sufficient, it is not. At the end of the day, my point still remains. He doesn't have a video card plugged into a PCIe slot and is using the integrated GPU.
I mentioned a Graphics Card, and so did others. You started going on about a discrete GPU, what made you think anyone else made the connection? That may be how Intel has done it on that Processor, but it's not necessarilly how all other processors are designed. Especially if each of the cores are of a similar size to the GPU. https://www.asus.com/uk/Motherboards/MAXIMUS_VII_HERO/specifications/ Can't comment as I haven't heard that. No. I was suggesting alongside your suggested CPU upgrade. Plus a reasonable Graphics Card is usually cheaper than a new CPU. I also mentioned upgrading items like the PSU. And I hope you know why. Well that was one of the things I was trying to ascertain, as the OP seemed to e lacking in knowledge of his own PC.
