Quadro NVS 160 M vs Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 4500MHD

That's the hottest I have seen on my E6400 and it must have got there before something else triggered the fan to come on. The normal ACPI temperature under sustained heavy load is around 63C. The 70C suggests that ACPI temperature isn't one of the factors controlling the fan unless there is a time delay.

John

 

I have the Nvidia graphics and the maximum temperature I've had is 60.

I still think you should not really care about which will fail faster, these are two business-class components, they ought to be pretty well made BUT they are electrical components and do have some chance to fail.

 

I am not sure who is bitter, I certainly am not, but when I see someone repeatedly saying that "cooler temperature does not mean it's more reliable", I feel a need to chime in .

I actually am one of those in the minority who has both models: the Intel graphics and the Nvidia graphics equipped E6400's. The decision is really clear: if you don't need the Nvidia to play those games that do not play well on the Intel, pick Intel. And maybe if you need to render 3-D objects as quickly as possible in your line of work, the Nvidia may be more suitable. I use Photoshop quite a lot on this laptop, and I don't find the Intel to be any slower: the bottleneck is rarely in the graphics card in just about all of my photo-editing.

 

I am not sure who is bitter, I certainly am not, but when I see someone quote me wrong, I feel a need to chime in

Wow.. thank you Captain Obvious. You just rehashed the early posts, and brought nothing new.

 

The pros and cons of both GPU options have been set out and I am now closing this thread.

John