Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Portal, TF2, L4D, (Source games) played fine with high to very hight settings. Albeit not at 60fps but still playable. Games live Civ 5, COD4, Dirt, Street Fighter 4, StarCraft 2, dcu, wow, avp and arma II were all playable with low to medium settings no aa or af. I used this on my Epson 8700UB projector with 1920x1080 resolution.
some of what he claimed is bunk though.I didn't get the Lenovo x220t (i7-2620M with HD 3000) to game but I will say that it actually games better than I thought and my experience is similar to this. I think that HD 3000 can provide a decent gaming experience for mobile gaming in the bulk of modern games particularly if you're only driving a 720P display.
Is intel hd2000 graphics (i3 2100) better than a nvidia 210? I can't find any benchmarks that compare the two.
all those games at 1920x1080 with HD3000? um my own experiences with gpus that are stronger than a HD3000 sure do not make that seem plausible. even my 8600gt is faster than HD3000 graphics and no way in hell am I able to play games like AvP or ARMA 2 at 1920x1080 on even low never mind medium.
some of these game are not even as demanding as AvP or ARMA 2 yet are barely playable at 1024x768 and low settings. http://www.anandtech.com/show/4134/the-brazos-review-amds-e350-supplants-ion-for-miniitx/5
HD2000 graphics would probably be slower than a g210 with HD3000 being slightly better. a gt220 would beat the crap out of the HD2000 and 3000 though. http://www.anandtech.com/show/4476/amd-a83850-review/5
there is no way that is possible.I most certainly did play AvP and ARMA 2 at 1920x1080 with the lowest settings and frames were mid 20's to mid 30's. I ran the GPU at an overclocked speed of 1550. It wasn't awesome but it was very playable. Every game I listed was playable.
AMD Fusion in a laptop destroys both those options, just so you know.
It's for an htpc, so I will probably get a gt 430. I have a 6850 in my main rig, I wish I would have gone the 1gb 460, drivers blow so hard with ati.Also munkle, evga usually has 768mb gtx460s for $89.99 refurbed on their site. Can't really beat the overall bang for the buck of teaming one of those up with a 2100.
there is no way that is possible.
you are living in a fantasy land claiming to run all those games at 1920x1080. even with your gpu at 1550, an 8600gt would still be 20-30% faster and it can not do close to everything you are claiming. I just fired up ARMA 2 on my 8600gt and even at just 1280x960 it was not playable at all on all low settings. AvP could barely handle all low at 1280x960 so forget about 1920x1080 with an even slower gpu. and in that review I linked to earlier, Anandtech could only get 10 fps in Civ 5 on all low settings at 1680 while you claim you ran it at 1920x1080.
AvP at just 1280x960 on all low with an 8600gt that is faster than HD3000
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
ARMA 2 at just 1280x960 on all low with an 8600gt that is faster than HD3000
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
yes and my 8600gt will beat all of those scores. and as I just showed you it is impossible to run AvP and ARMA 2 at 1920x1080 on my 8600gt so no way could HD3000 graphics do it.I'll have to try and get around to setting it up and use fraps to test fps. I didn't look at fps before but I certainly played all those games like I said I did and none of them chopped to the point of being unplayable. I'm using a GTX 460 now and don't plan on going back to the HD 3000 but I can say I'd recommend it to anyone looking for light gaming sessions.
Check out this review of the HD 3000.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/graphics/display/intel-hd-graphics-2000-3000.html
They clocked the HD 3000 at 1500MHz and tested 1024x768 and 1650x1050 with low quality settings
Here are some 1650x1050 results on 2500k CPU with HD 3000
Crysis Warhead - 37.53 fps
Far Cry 2 - 41.81 fps
Left 4 Dead - 43.72 fps
F1 2010 - 30.94 fps
HAWX 2 - 50 fps
Civ 5 - 55.22 fps
StarCraft 2 - 32.16 fps
Those results look pretty good to me...
yes and my 8600gt will beat all of those scores. and as I just showed you it is impossible to run AvP and ARMA 2 at 1920x1080 on my 8600gt so no way could HD3000 graphics do it.
that was going by what one other site had said so it could have been an issue with Intel driver. I am testing AvP and ARMA right in front of me. the fact is that an 8600gt is faster than HD3000 even when overclocked. I just showed you proof that ARMA 2 was not playable at all on low settings even at 1280x960 yet you said you played it fine at 1920x1080. AvP was barely playable at 1280x960 on low settings with the 8600gt so no way would it be playable on the slower HD3000 at 1920x1080.You also said Civ5 would be impossible yet they got 55fps at 1650x1050. I have no idea what the actual frames were but arma2 and avp worked on my i5 2500k and hd3000 @1550.
that was going by what one other site had said so it could have been an issue with Intel driver. I am testing AvP and ARMA right in front of me. the fact is that an 8600gt is faster than HD3000 even when overclocked. I just showed you proof that ARMA 2 was not playable at all on low settings even at 1280x960 yet you said you played it fine at 1920x1080. AvP was barely playable at 1280x960 on low settings with the 8600gt so no way would it be playable on the slower HD3000 at 1920x1080.
some of those other games you exaggerated a bit on but as for those games your claim are 100% impossible.
I still call BS especially for ARMA 2. facts are facts and your HD3000 at stock speeds is equal to a 5450 at best. overclocked to 1550 would still make it slower than an 8600gt. my benchmarks line right up with it is possible on my card. there is no way in hell you are running ARMA 2 at 1920x1080 at FOUR times the framerate I am getting on faster card at just 1280x960. there is zero logic in that.
heck the very minimum card just to run ARMA 2 is a 7800gt which is faster than your overclocked HD3000. and yet you are posting screenshots of you getting 50-60fps at 1920x1080? again there is no logic in that.
Uhh, 3D resolution != 1920x1080... The game is being rendered at 96x540 and upscaled to the screen size aha...
because like I said facts are facts on how much gpu power the HD3000 has. its no secret that it is only as fast as a 5450 which is abysmal for most games even at very low res and settings. in fact a 5450 does not even meet the minimum requirements to play many newer games. and again even overclocked you would still not match a wimpy 8600gt. unless I was running some out dated or very low end cpu then it would not matter. any modern dual core cpu would not even be remotely close to being the limiting factor with an 8600gt or HD3000 especially at 1920x1080. considering I can drop the res and get a massive increase in framerate shows a gpu of that level is the absolute limiting factor.You're hilarious. I post screen shots and its still not good enough for you. What else would I need to do?
Just because you don't think it is possible doesn't mean it isn't. You were all over CIV 5 until I posted a review that showed it was playable. Like someone else said maybe the Intel drivers just work better for ARMA 2. Also like I said maybe my CPU is a lot better and it helps that game. Which CPU is your 8600GT running with?
I don't understand the point of you basically calling me a liar. What would I have to gain from making up numbers? I told you what my experience was and I took the time to post screen shots for you.
Using the Intel HD 3000 on a i5 2500k I was able to play some games at 1080p resolutions, some maxed and some with details turned down. The HD 3000 is a little faster but not a lot, the biggested difference would be the CPU.
Portal, TF2, L4D, (Source games) played fine with high to very hight settings. Albeit not at 60fps but still playable. Games live Civ 5, COD4, Dirt, Street Fighter 4, StarCraft 2, dcu, wow, avp and arma II were all playable with low to medium settings no aa or af. I used this on my Epson 8700UB projector with 1920x1080 resolution.
Ahh... i didn't really realize that... that would explain the performance. I thought it was something for 3d glasses or something.
@teletran8, lol macbook gaming versus regular laptops.
BS any of those games are playable at 1080p with an Intel HD3000. They might run at 5fps if you're lucky, with all setting turned down, but that's about it.
I'm not sure who calls 5fps or less "playable" though.
lol, yeah, those screenies you posted may have been 1080p, but the tiny resolution was totally upscaled. How did you not notice that? It's very obvious.
because like I said facts are facts on how much gpu power the HD3000 has. its no secret that it is only as fast as a 5450 which is abysmal for most games even at very low res and settings. in fact a 5450 does not even meet the minimum requirements to play many newer games. and again even overclocked you would still not match a wimpy 8600gt. unless I was running some out dated or very low end cpu then it would not matter. any modern dual core cpu would not even be remotely close to being the limiting factor with an 8600gt or HD3000 especially at 1920x1080. considering I can drop the res and get a massive increase in framerate shows a gpu of that level is the absolute limiting factor.