Will a lower end GPU be of any benefit over my i7 integrated HD 4000?

[philmar]

APPROXIMATE PURCHASE DATE: today
BUDGET RANGE: USD $100

USAGE FROM MOST TO LEAST IMPORTANT: Photo-editting only with Lightroom 5.7 Absolutely no 3D or gaming

CPU: Intel Core i7-3770K 3.5GHz
CPU Cooler: Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO
Motherboard: Asus P8Z77-V PRO/THUNDERBOLT
Memory: G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 32GB
Storage: Samsung 850 EVO-Series 250GB
Storage: Samsung 840 Pro Series 256GB
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 3TB 3.5" 7200RPM
Storage: Western Digital Red Pro 6TB 3.5" 7200RPM
Power Supply: Antec High Current Gamer 620W 80+ Bronze

I recently bought a BenQ SW2700PT QHD 2560x1440 monitor and run a 2 monitor set up along with a 20inch NEC 20WMGX2 1680 x 1050. I do NOT game. I use it solely for photo editing. No 3D requirements. I use predominately Lightroom 5.7 and Photoshop CS4. NEITHER programs make use of the GPU acceleration potential so I have NO interest or need of an expensive GPU as it will not aid my editing. Photo editing is a CPU intensive activity. I find that Lightroom slows down considerably on occasion now that, in addition to the pixel moving calculations it does in Lightroom, it (I assume) is now assigned the task of mapping them on a larger and higher resolution monitor. I am wondering if a cheap GPU would represent a good value upgrade to my system. Would a discrete GPU take any load off of the onboard Intel HD 4000 graphics (which I assume is now working harder to update my monitors) and free up the CPU to do more photo pixel pushing and process my photo edits faster? Note my Z77 mobo has a feature called LucidLogix Virtu MVP which claims to integrate well with a discrete GPU. My build is 3 years old and as I plan to do a complete new rebuild in another 2 years, I would only like to do a small incremental upgrade now (max $100). Would a low end GPU help my system better drive my 2 monitors and free up CPU processing power for photo editing....and would it have both a displayport and DVI outlet for 2 monitor support. Sincerest thanks for all help!

 

[Melvis]

A dedicated GPU would do alot better I think then using the intel on board IGP especially at that res with 2 monitors. RX 460 or GTX 950/1050

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I'd go with RX 460. They go for around $100.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01J9FFV14/?tag=tec06d-20

That one has DisplayPort, DVI-D and HDMI:

http://www.powercolor.com/Global/products_features.asp?id=616#Specification
DVI 2560x1600
DisplayPort 4096x2160
HDMI 4096x2160

The power supply you have should be able to handle it too.

 

[philmar]

Thanks for replies thus far...
As I plan to do a complete rebuild in 2 years I would prefer to not spend a lot of a discrete GPU.
So the GPU should be about $100 AND have a DVI-DL+ HDMI 1.4 + DP1.2
AND I need to worry about frying my Antec High Current Gamer 620W
Have a big quiet case, so quiet would be nice.

 

[Xzibit]

Intel HD4000 can only allocate 1024M max. You will notice a difference if your working with large and multiple photos with a dedicated GPU

$9 above your spending but you do get 4GB instead of 2GB.

GIGABYTE Radeon RX 460 WINDFORCE OC 4GB GV-RX460WF2OC-4GD

 

[FordGT90Concept]

I'd recommend the 4 GiB over 2 GiB. Doesn't take much to fill up 2 GiB these days.

The RX 460 is a lot of bang for the buck. It will be a huge step up from HD4000.

You don't need to worry about anything. RX 460 has the two connectors you requested and they both exceed the display capabilities of your monitors. AMD recommends a 400 watt power supply and you have a 620 watt so that's more than sufficient. It's not a very large card so it shouldn't be any problem at all to make it fit. The only way it would get loud is if you strain it but 2D work isn't likely to do that. It should be running idle most of the time so you're not likely to hear it over the CPU fan/hard drives.

 

[philmar]

Thanks for the help everyone!!

While I am familiar with the component parts of a pc I have never put one together. I guess I'll give you a better idea of who you are dealing with here. I get the impression everyone here is comfortable building rigs and upgrading. That isn't me. While I can take the time to learn about pc components in order to design a good photo processing rig, I don't do the building. 2 weeks ago I bought another SSD with the intention to install it myself. Had no idea I had to connect it to the PSU or a sata port. Thought it would be simple lpug and play as it was solid state...I didn't even know what cables were needed. So I paid the local PC repair guy to install it.


I'm assuming the RX 460 will require I get cables with pins to hook it up to the PSU. Would it need only to be pushed in to a slot or does it also require other cables to connect it to the mobo - like a HD does? Yeah, I'm a photographer, not a pc enthusiast.
Another reason I wanted a low end card as I think there are real cheap ones (and probably under powered ones) that only need be plugged in to the mobo - don't need to be separately hooked up to the PSU. I assume I only need a GPU that is going to help my system run the dual monitors (one in qhd 1440p). It is the introduction of the new qhd monitor that has slowed the system down. I am hoping that even a modest boost from a GPU would help.
So to please help me better understand GPUs, would I notice any real world difference on my 3 year old rig while web browsing, netflixing and 2D photo manipulation in adobe Lightroom between a Radeon R7 250 and a RX 460?
At the risk of sounding cheap, I was hoping something like a Radeon R7 250 would be all that I need and that anything better than that would be overkill resulting in no perceptible difference on my rig given what I do with it. Also I like the idea of a plug and play. I get nervous anytime I open up my pc and have to do 'surgery' on it.
Price actually ISN'T an issue but I don't want to buy overkill....and also of importance as I will start to OC the CPU soon . I bought decent components - even cooling - with the plan to start OC'ing it in the last 2 years of this build's life.
So if there is a plug and play GPU that would be a discernible improvement over my integrated HD 4000 running my dual monitors then that is easiest for me. If the RX 460 is what I need then so be it.
I've noticed that the cheaper GPUs don't have displayport. They support the resolution of my 1440p monitor with either HDMI or DVI. Does it matter whether I run my qhd 1440p monitor with HDMI, DP or DVI as long as the resolution is supported?

 

[therealmeep]

Thanks for the help everyone!!

While I am familiar with the component parts of a pc I have never put one together. I guess I'll give you a better idea of who you are dealing with here. I get the impression everyone here is comfortable building rigs and upgrading. That isn't me. While I can take the time to learn about pc components in order to design a good photo processing rig, I don't do the building. 2 weeks ago I bought another SSD with the intention to install it myself. Had no idea I had to connect it to the PSU or a sata port. Thought it would be simple lpug and play as it was solid state...I didn't even know what cables were needed. So I paid the local PC repair guy to install it.


I'm assuming the RX 460 will require I get cables with pins to hook it up to the PSU. Would it need only to be pushed in to a slot or does it also require other cables to connect it to the mobo - like a HD does? Yeah, I'm a photographer, not a pc enthusiast.
Another reason I wanted a low end card as I think there are real cheap ones (and probably under powered ones) that only need be plugged in to the mobo - don't need to be separately hooked up to the PSU. I assume I only need a GPU that is going to help my system run the dual monitors (one in qhd 1440p). It is the introduction of the new qhd monitor that has slowed the system down. I am hoping that even a modest boost from a GPU would help.
So to please help me better understand GPUs, would I notice any real world difference on my 3 year old rig while web browsing, netflixing and 2D photo manipulation in adobe Lightroom between a Radeon R7 250 and a RX 460?
At the risk of sounding cheap, I was hoping something like a Radeon R7 250 would be all that I need and that anything better than that would be overkill resulting in no perceptible difference on my rig given what I do with it. Also I like the idea of a plug and play. I get nervous anytime I open up my pc and have to do 'surgery' on it.
Price actually ISN'T an issue but I don't want to buy overkill....and also of importance as I will start to OC the CPU soon . I bought decent components - even cooling - with the plan to start OC'ing it in the last 2 years of this build's life.
So if there is a plug and play GPU that would be a discernible improvement over my integrated HD 4000 running my dual monitors then that is easiest for me. If the RX 460 is what I need then so be it.
I've noticed that the cheaper GPUs don't have displayport. They support the resolution of my 1440p monitor with either HDMI or DVI. Does it matter whether I run my qhd 1440p monitor with HDMI, DP or DVI as long as the resolution is supported?

A lot of the "low end" GPUs you see like the 250 are workstation display adapters and are designed to be used in machines that are fairly old and need to stay the same (stuff like PC's that contol electron microscopes, etc.) I would go for the 460 as it's got what you want right now and you can probably fit one in whatever your next PC will be without worrying.

 

[eidairaman1]

Grab a 250X or 260 and call it a day.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

RX 460 gets all the power it requires through the motherboard.

When you get the card, all you'll need to do is turn off the computer, unplug the computer from the wall, remove one or two brackets at the rear of the computer, insert the card into the slot, fasten the card to where you removed the bracket(s), plug both monitors into the video card's respective ports, plug the computer back into the mains, and turn it on. You should see video on the screens which tells you the card is functioning as it should.

Once you reach the Windows desktop, you'll need to go to AMD's website and download the drivers for your RX 460. I'm not sure what operating system you're running but this is where you'll get those:
http://support.amd.com/en-us/download


There's a huge jump between R7 250 and RX 460. It's two generations difference and the 460 itself is quite a large step up. I'd guess the RX 460 is about twice as powerful as the R7 250. The primary reason why I'd recommend the RX 460 is because it has 4 GiB of VRAM instead of 2 GiB. Photo editing can use a lot of graphics card RAM.

You could try an R7 250 if you want to. It might work for you and it might not. That choice is ultimately yours.

Here's some things to look at to give you an idea of the performance difference:
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-460-vs-AMD-R7-250/3641vsm8217
http://www.hwcompare.com/32725/radeon-r7-250-vs-radeon-rx-460/
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-RX-460-vs-Radeon-R7-250

DisplayPort is the best connection to use.

 

[philmar]

A lot of the "low end" GPUs you see like the 250 are workstation display adapters and are designed to be used in machines that are fairly old and need to stay the same (stuff like PC's that contol electron microscopes, etc.) I would go for the 460 as it's got what you want right now and you can probably fit one in whatever your next PC will be without worrying.

Actually my next build will have a powerful GPU. I use Lightroom and Photoshop, neither of them are at all well coded to take advantage of GPU acceleration. BUT that is changing. I expect in 2 years that there will be upgrades to the products that will make better use of the GPU.
So really I am looking for a 2 year solution. It is NO problem to me whether it is $150 solution or $50 as I will be using this pc to get some of my photos on Getty images for sale.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/phil_marion/albums
Photographers, like pc enthusiasts, often rush out and by the latest and most expensive piece of equipment - even if the advantages are modest. It's something I have a handle on. It's just not my habit to purchase more expensive parts/components that only provide me with only modest indiscernible gains. I know what that is with photography gear. I don't know that with pc components.
Happily I see a 460 2 gb card on sale this week at Canada Computers - where I have my rigs built. It would be convenient for me to buy it and have then install it for me quickly....but if a mythical plug and play GPU that suits my needs for $50 exists...

 

[therealmeep]

Actually my next build will have a powerful GPU. I use Lightroom and Photoshop, neither of them are at all well coded to take advantage of GPU acceleration. BUT that is changing. I expect in 2 years that there will be upgrades to the products that will make better use of the GPU.
So really I am looking for a 2 year solution. It is NO problem to me whether it is $150 solution or $50 as I will be using this pc to get some of my photos on Getty images for sale.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/phil_marion/albums
Photographers, like pc enthusiasts, often rush out and by the latest and most expensive piece of equipment - even if the advantages are modest. It's something I have a handle on. It's just not my habit to purchase more expensive parts/components that only provide me with only modest indiscernible gains. I know what that is with photography gear. I don't know that with pc components.
Happily I see a 460 2 gb card on sale this week at Canada Computers - where I have my rigs built. It would be convenient for me to buy it and have then install it for me quickly....but if a mythical plug and play GPU that suits my needs for $50 exists...

What price range of GPU are you looking for then?

 

[philmar]

RX 460 gets all the power it requires through the motherboard.

When you get the card, all you'll need to do is turn off the computer, unplug the computer from the wall, remove one or two brackets at the rear of the computer, insert the card into the slot, fasten the card to where you removed the bracket(s), plug both monitors into the video card's respective ports, plug the computer back into the mains, and turn it on. You should see video on the screens which tells you the card is functioning as it should.

Once you reach the Windows desktop, you'll need to go to AMD's website and download the drivers for your RX 460. I'm not sure what operating system you're running but this is where you'll get those:
http://support.amd.com/en-us/download


There's a huge jump between R7 250 and RX 460. It's two generations difference and the 460 itself is quite a large step up. I'd guess the RX 460 is about twice as powerful as the R7 250. The primary reason why I'd recommend the RX 460 is because it has 4 GiB of VRAM instead of 2 GiB. Photo editing can use a lot of graphics card RAM.

You could try an R7 250 if you want to. It might work for you and it might not. That choice is ultimately yours.

Here's some things to look at to give you an idea of the performance difference:
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-460-vs-AMD-R7-250/3641vsm8217
http://www.hwcompare.com/32725/radeon-r7-250-vs-radeon-rx-460/
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-RX-460-vs-Radeon-R7-250

I read your post AFTER I composed/ posted mine.
If the RX460 is plug and play then that looks like a winner for me.
I guess then it is just academic for me whether I'd see any benefit with it over a cheaper CPU.
RAM isn't an issue for me - I have 32 gbs of it. With the photo editing I do (individual file at a time - no batch processing) the CPU can't munch through the data fast enough.

 

[therealmeep]

I read your post AFTER I composed/ posted mine.
If the RX460 is plug and play then that looks like a winner for me.
I guess then it is just academic for me whether I'd see any benefit with it over a cheaper CPU.
RAM isn't an issue for me - I have 32 gbs of it. With the photo editing I do (individual file at a time - no batch processing) the CPU can't munch through the data fast enough.

With that I'd say the 460 is relatively strong enough to keep you satisfied GPU wise unless down the road you get into heavy 1440p gaming at which point a volta or Vega GPU will be plenty.

 

[philmar]

What price range of GPU are you looking for then?

I don't really have a range - as a photo-enthusiast, not a pc enthusiast - I am here solely looking to see where the sweet spot is. Asking you bigger pc brained people what is best value. I'd buy the cheapest GPU I'd need that would create a discernible improvement upon my integrated HD 4000 graphics for 2D photo editing. If it could be done for $50 then great. If the solution is $100 , then so be it.
I'm not poor - just frugal. The RX460 is a cheap enough solution AND easy for a dolt like me to install - it isn't really worth my time to spend hours trying to save another $50. Time is money and the sooner I get my rig up to speed the sooner I can make money with it. Looks like the RX 460 is in my future!

 

[therealmeep]

I don't really have a range - as a photo-enthusiast, not a pc ethusiast - I am here solely looking to see where the sweet spot is. Asking you bigger pc brained people what is best value. I'd buy the cheapest GPU I'd need that would create a discernible improvement upon my integrated HD 4000 graphics for 2D photo editing. If it could be done for $50 then great. If the solution is $100 , then so be it.
I'm not poor - just frugal. The RX460 is a cheap enough solution AND easy for a dolt like me to install - it isn't really worth my time to spend hours trying to save another $50. Time is money and the sooner I get my rig up to speed the sooner I can make money with it. Looks like the RX 460 is in my future!

Good luck with that man

 

[philmar]

With that I'd say the 460 is relatively strong enough to keep you satisfied GPU wise unless down the road you get into heavy 1440p gaming at which point a volta or Vega GPU will be plenty.

LOL - At the high risk of alienating anyone here I am quite sure I will never be doing any gaming. I spend TOO much time in front of a pc due to my passion with photography. Today I was outside at the crack of dawn in freezing weather photographing the sunrise (I live in Canada). I love it. If I start getting addicted to gaming I'd never have time to take photos....But thanks!

 

[philmar]

RX 460 gets all the power it requires through the motherboard.

DisplayPort is the best connection to use.

So if a card has a DisplayPort, HDMI and a DVI - ALL of which support my qhd monitors resolution - does it really matter which port I use?

 

[FordGT90Concept]

You should definitely plug that 1440p monitor into DisplayPort because it supports the highest resolutions, deepest color depth, and fastest refresh rates without cutting corners. Plug your secondary monitor into HDMI or DVI. My preference would probably be DVI but it really depends on the specifics of the monitor (resolution, refresh rate, color depth, and built in speakers).

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

RX 460 gets all the power it requires through the motherboard.

When you get the card, all you'll need to do is turn off the computer, unplug the computer from the wall, remove one or two brackets at the rear of the computer, insert the card into the slot, fasten the card to where you removed the bracket(s), plug both monitors into the video card's respective ports, plug the computer back into the mains, and turn it on. You should see video on the screens which tells you the card is functioning as it should.

Once you reach the Windows desktop, you'll need to go to AMD's website and download the drivers for your RX 460. I'm not sure what operating system you're running but this is where you'll get those:
http://support.amd.com/en-us/download


There's a huge jump between R7 250 and RX 460. It's two generations difference and the 460 itself is quite a large step up. I'd guess the RX 460 is about twice as powerful as the R7 250. The primary reason why I'd recommend the RX 460 is because it has 4 GiB of VRAM instead of 2 GiB. Photo editing can use a lot of graphics card RAM.

You could try an R7 250 if you want to. It might work for you and it might not. That choice is ultimately yours.

Here's some things to look at to give you an idea of the performance difference:
http://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-RX-460-vs-AMD-R7-250/3641vsm8217
http://www.hwcompare.com/32725/radeon-r7-250-vs-radeon-rx-460/
http://gpuboss.com/gpus/Radeon-RX-460-vs-Radeon-R7-250

DisplayPort is the best connection to use.

Colour reproduction and comparability are better on low end AMD with upto 12 bit full rgb and fully lossless availability I'm not sure Nvidia has that.
A 460 of any brand would do you imho 4 GB might help with photo manipulation via a bigger frame buffer and your software can be accelerated by it ie the actual processing. It would be fairly plug in and go compatible taking it's power from the motherboard so easy to fit.
@ ford , misquoted sorry but I do fully agree with you too , bit baffled DOH.

 

[BoyGenius]

LOL - At the high risk of alienating anyone here I am quite sure I will never be doing any gaming. I spend TOO much time in front of a pc due to my passion with photography. Today I was outside at the crack of dawn in freezing weather photographing the sunrise (I live in Canada). I love it. If I start getting addicted to gaming I'd never have time to take photos....But thanks!

Go For RX 460, If you need help in installation come back and ask here, we will provide step by step information.

XFX 2GB one is available for ~$90 after rebate on amazon & Gigabyte RX 460 4GB for ~$100 fits your small incremental upgrade of $100 max.

So if a card has a DisplayPort, HDMI and a DVI - ALL of which support my qhd monitors resolution - does it really matter which port I use?

Display Port>HDMI>DVI

Prefer display port for main monitor.

 

[Xzibit]

Dont forget, just like you have do with the Intel HD4000 switch the setting to Full Range

Intel HD4000
Intel Graphics Control Panel / Display / Display Settings / Advance / Quantization Range = Full Range

RX 460
Radeon Settings / Additional settings / Pixel range / 4:4:4 Full RGB

You don't want to be taking pictures and then wonder why there is banding when viewing & editing them on your monitors.