A quick breakdown of Intel processors

So, I’ve been doing a bit of digging into Intel and AMD processors just to get my bearings. From what I can gather, Intel seems to have the edge, though they definitely charge a premium for it. What I'm really trying to wrap my head around is how the integrated graphics work. If I take an Intel chip—like an i3, i5, or i7—and pair it with a dedicated graphics card, does that effectively give me "two" GPUs? Or does the onboard Intel HD xxxx graphics only kick in if there isn't a separate card installed? I was reading some things about AMD setups where you choose between an APU+GPU combo or a CPU+GPU setup, and it left me a little confused...
Basically, like the title says, could someone please help clarify this for me?

That’s not quite how it works... There aren't really "better" or "worse" processors in a vacuum. Every single one is good for something specific. It all comes down to value—finding the chip that hits your specific needs at the lowest possible price point based on what you actually do with your PC.

You can't just compare Intel and AMD as whole brands because they use completely different architectures. You compare two specific processors to decide which one fits your setup better or offers more bang for your buck.

As for graphics, integrated graphics moved from motherboards directly into the processors; some CPUs have them, others don't. They can be toggled off, too—like in a laptop, where the system switches to integrated graphics to save power and stretch the battery life.

With certain processors that have integrated graphics, there's a way to combine them with a discrete GPU to try and boost performance, but honestly, don't count on it. For that to even work, the software or game has to be specifically coded to utilize both simultaneously, which is pretty rare...

With Intel, you don't really have the option to buy a CPU without integrated graphics anymore. They used to offer models without an iGPU—like that old I5 3350 p—but those aren't available on the current socket. What’s funny about that specific chip was that it cost practically the same as the cheapest i5 3330 that actually had integrated graphics included. My point is, you don't need to stress over whether a chip has an iGPU or not. You can't pull a stunt like people do with AMD's FM sockets, where you end up paying a premium for an APU just to have half that extra cost wasted on integrated graphics you won't even use once you pair it with a decent dedicated GPU instead of trying to run crossfire.

Here is a comparison of Athlon processor prices, both with and without integrated graphics:

(the top-tier version)