Go Back   Wireless and Wifi Forums > News > Newsgroups > alt.comp.hardware
Register FAQ Forum Rules Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Advertise Mark Forums Read

 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-14-2006, 10:43 PM
bluetreetop
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Is UMA grahics OK?

Looking to buy a PC which may be used to do some basic video editing.

Is is necessary to have a specifi graphic card with onboard memory or will
we be OK with UMA that can use up to 256MB.

The PC we are considering is the HP T3529 2gigs RAM and onboard ATI Radeon
XPRESS 200.

Don't want to spend 400 then find that it grinds to a halt as soon as we
try our hand at video editing.

Thanks in anticipation of any advice.



Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2006, 12:14 AM
Sleepy
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?


"bluetreetop" <salenospamming@nospammingmarcb.co.uk> wrote in message
news:HWkOg.65364$a9.20115@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
> Looking to buy a PC which may be used to do some basic video editing.
>
> Is is necessary to have a specifi graphic card with onboard memory or will
> we be OK with UMA that can use up to 256MB.
>
> The PC we are considering is the HP T3529 2gigs RAM and onboard ATI Radeon
> XPRESS 200.
>
> Don't want to spend 400 then find that it grinds to a halt as soon as we
> try our hand at video editing.
>
> Thanks in anticipation of any advice.
>
>


That'll be fine for that application - CPU power and plenty of RAM is the
important thing for Video editing. Make sure the motherboard has a
PCI-Express slot though - for adding a better graphics card at a later date
if your needs change - that graphics chip is no good for games for example
.....



Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2006, 02:22 AM
kony
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?

On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 22:43:51 GMT, "bluetreetop"
<salenospamming@nospammingmarcb.co.uk> wrote:

>Looking to buy a PC which may be used to do some basic video editing.
>
>Is is necessary to have a specifi graphic card with onboard memory or will
>we be OK with UMA that can use up to 256MB.


Not "necessary" but integrated video is slower... not only
at gaming, but it eats up a little of the total memory
bandwidth available to other things.


>The PC we are considering is the HP T3529 2gigs RAM and onboard ATI Radeon
>XPRESS 200.



On a low-end system, integrated video is a reasonable way to
cut costs. Since above system already has 2GB memory, it
seems not so low-end, probably a reasonably expensive CPU
too? In this case, it is more appropriate to get at least a
low-midrange video card, not the cheapest thing out there
(which may have limitations later) but $200 is not necessary
either.


>
>Don't want to spend 400 then find that it grinds to a halt as soon as we
>try our hand at video editing.


Video editing itself doesn't directly require a good video
card, but one will make the system better balanced, slightly
faster at things that use a lot of memory bandwidth like
video editing, and may help with hardware accelerated
playback of MPEG also, in addition to providing video I/O
ports making it a more versatile video editing system.

Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2006, 02:56 AM
Rod Speed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?

kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
> bluetreetop <salenospamming@nospammingmarcb.co.uk> wrote


>> Looking to buy a PC which may be used to do some basic video editing.


>> Is is necessary to have a specifi graphic card with onboard
>> memory or will we be OK with UMA that can use up to 256MB.


> Not "necessary" but integrated video is slower...
> not only at gaming, but it eats up a little of the
> total memory bandwidth available to other things.


And with this particular system, its got plenty of memory.

>> The PC we are considering is the HP T3529 2gigs
>> RAM and onboard ATI Radeon XPRESS 200.


> On a low-end system, integrated video is a reasonable way to
> cut costs. Since above system already has 2GB memory, it
> seems not so low-end, probably a reasonably expensive CPU
> too? In this case, it is more appropriate to get at least a
> low-midrange video card, not the cheapest thing out there
> (which may have limitations later) but $200 is not necessary either.


Mindlessly silly if one can be added later if its actually required.

>> Don't want to spend 400 then find that it grinds
>> to a halt as soon as we try our hand at video editing.


> Video editing itself doesn't directly require a good video
> card, but one will make the system better balanced,


Wota ******.

> slightly faster at things that use a lot of
> memory bandwidth like video editing,


Wrong again.

> and may help with hardware accelerated playback of MPEG also,


Nope.

> in addition to providing video I/O ports making
> it a more versatile video editing system.


Pathetic, really.



Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-15-2006, 11:08 PM
DaveW
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?

ANY onboard video chip is going to be MUCH to slow and underpowered to do
video editting. You need a high powered dedicated video card installed for
video editting.

--
DaveW

----------------
"bluetreetop" <salenospamming@nospammingmarcb.co.uk> wrote in message
news:HWkOg.65364$a9.20115@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
> Looking to buy a PC which may be used to do some basic video editing.
>
> Is is necessary to have a specifi graphic card with onboard memory or will
> we be OK with UMA that can use up to 256MB.
>
> The PC we are considering is the HP T3529 2gigs RAM and onboard ATI Radeon
> XPRESS 200.
>
> Don't want to spend 400 then find that it grinds to a halt as soon as we
> try our hand at video editing.
>
> Thanks in anticipation of any advice.
>
>




Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-16-2006, 12:47 AM
kony
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?

On Fri, 15 Sep 2006 12:56:42 +1000, "Rod Speed"
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

>kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
>> bluetreetop <salenospamming@nospammingmarcb.co.uk> wrote

>
>>> Looking to buy a PC which may be used to do some basic video editing.

>
>>> Is is necessary to have a specifi graphic card with onboard
>>> memory or will we be OK with UMA that can use up to 256MB.

>
>> Not "necessary" but integrated video is slower...
>> not only at gaming, but it eats up a little of the
>> total memory bandwidth available to other things.

>
>And with this particular system, its got plenty of memory.



I didn't write quantity, I wrote (available) bandwidth.
It could be that the particular jobs the OP does, are not
(will not be) bottlenecked by the memory much, or at all,
but it should still be considered.


>
>>> The PC we are considering is the HP T3529 2gigs
>>> RAM and onboard ATI Radeon XPRESS 200.

>
>> On a low-end system, integrated video is a reasonable way to
>> cut costs. Since above system already has 2GB memory, it
>> seems not so low-end, probably a reasonably expensive CPU
>> too? In this case, it is more appropriate to get at least a
>> low-midrange video card, not the cheapest thing out there
>> (which may have limitations later) but $200 is not necessary either.

>
>Mindlessly silly if one can be added later if its actually required.


What can't be added later? "Required" is often arbitrary,
the 2GB of memory isn't required either, nor a fast HDD or
anything else that will make it a better video editing
station.



>
>>> Don't want to spend 400 then find that it grinds
>>> to a halt as soon as we try our hand at video editing.

>
>> Video editing itself doesn't directly require a good video
>> card, but one will make the system better balanced,

>
>Wota ******.


Do you put leather seats in a Chevy Cavalier too?


>> slightly faster at things that use a lot of
>> memory bandwidth like video editing,

>
>Wrong again.


Thanks for trolling by?


>> and may help with hardware accelerated playback of MPEG also,

>
>Nope.


Do you still pretend to do video editing/playback?

>
>> in addition to providing video I/O ports making
>> it a more versatile video editing system.

>
>Pathetic, really.


.... that you spend so much time trolling to have never
noticed video cards have little sockets on the back for
*mysterious* purposes?


Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 09-16-2006, 12:53 AM
Rod Speed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?

kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> kony <spam@spam.com> wrote
>>> bluetreetop <salenospamming@nospammingmarcb.co.uk> wrote


>>>> Looking to buy a PC which may be used to do some basic video editing.


>>>> Is is necessary to have a specifi graphic card with onboard
>>>> memory or will we be OK with UMA that can use up to 256MB.


>>> Not "necessary" but integrated video is slower...
>>> not only at gaming, but it eats up a little of the
>>> total memory bandwidth available to other things.


>> And with this particular system, its got plenty of memory.


> I didn't write quantity, I wrote (available) bandwidth.


Still completely mindless.

> It could be that the particular jobs the OP does, are not
> (will not be) bottlenecked by the memory much, or at all,
> but it should still be considered.


Nope.

>>>> The PC we are considering is the HP T3529 2gigs
>>>> RAM and onboard ATI Radeon XPRESS 200.


>>> On a low-end system, integrated video is a reasonable way to
>>> cut costs. Since above system already has 2GB memory, it
>>> seems not so low-end, probably a reasonably expensive CPU
>>> too? In this case, it is more appropriate to get at least a
>>> low-midrange video card, not the cheapest thing out there
>>> (which may have limitations later) but $200 is not necessary either.


>> Mindlessly silly if one can be added later if its actually required.


> What can't be added later?


An AGP or PCIe video card if it has no AGP or PCIe slot.

> "Required" is often arbitrary, the 2GB of memory
> isn't required either, nor a fast HDD or anything
> else that will make it a better video editing station.


You'll end up blind if you dont watch out.

>>>> Don't want to spend 400 then find that it grinds
>>>> to a halt as soon as we try our hand at video editing.


>>> Video editing itself doesn't directly require a good video
>>> card, but one will make the system better balanced,


>> Wota ******.


> Do you put leather seats in a Chevy Cavalier too?


I might if I used it much and prefer the comfort.

>>> slightly faster at things that use a lot of
>>> memory bandwidth like video editing,


>> Wrong again.


> Thanks for trolling by?


Never ever could ******** its way out of a wet paper bag.

>>> and may help with hardware accelerated playback of MPEG also,


>> Nope.


> Do you still pretend to do video editing/playback?


Never ever could ******** its way out of a wet paper bag.

>>> in addition to providing video I/O ports making
>>> it a more versatile video editing system.


>> Pathetic, really.


> ... that you spend so much time trolling to have never
> noticed video cards have little sockets on the back for
> *mysterious* purposes?


Never ever could ******** its way out of a wet paper bag.



Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 09-17-2006, 12:19 PM
Andrew Kenneth Knoll
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?

My take on the situation is, don't go for UMA graphics, get a dedicated
graphics card. UMA graphics are no good for demanding applications or games.



Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 09-17-2006, 05:27 PM
Rod Speed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?

Andrew Kenneth Knoll <ak263@kent.ac.uk> wrote:

> My take on the situation is, don't go for UMA graphics, get a dedicated graphics card. UMA
> graphics are no good for demanding applications or games.


He doesnt have any demanding applications or demanding games.



Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 09-27-2006, 10:08 AM
Rod Speed
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Is UMA grahics OK?

DaveW <somewhere@zero.org> wrote

> ANY onboard video chip is going to be MUCH to slow and underpowered to do video editting.


Wrong, as always.

> You need a high powered dedicated video card installed for video editting.


Wrong, as always.


> ----------------
> "bluetreetop" <salenospamming@nospammingmarcb.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:HWkOg.65364$a9.20115@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
>> Looking to buy a PC which may be used to do some basic video editing.
>>
>> Is is necessary to have a specifi graphic card with onboard memory
>> or will we be OK with UMA that can use up to 256MB.
>>
>> The PC we are considering is the HP T3529 2gigs RAM and onboard ATI
>> Radeon XPRESS 200.
>>
>> Don't want to spend 400 then find that it grinds to a halt as soon
>> as we try our hand at video editing.
>>
>> Thanks in anticipation of any advice.




Reply With Quote
Reply


« USB2 Extension Cable Problem | better ddr2:mhz o mb? »
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30 AM.



Powered by vBulletin® Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45