Could you recommend games for Intel HD Graphics 2000 ?

J

JekylHyde

n00b
Joined
Mar 30, 2012
Messages
24
Hi

Could you recommend games for this pc that will run smooth?

Intel Core i3 2120 3.0GHz (with Intel HD Graphics 2000...)
Kingston 4GB DDR3 1333MHz
Motherboard: Chipset Intel H61 B3
hdd: Seagate 500GB 7200RPM 16MB
LG SATA DVDRW
300W psu Active PFC

i know about that list but i guess it's just a sample of games
plus - i'm sure a lot of them are not really going to work good under Intel HD Graphics (well, they will run, but its not enough that they "run" they need to run good).
so - Could you recommend games for this pc that will run smooth?
(not ancient games)
thanks
 
What resolution?

The person who made that list needs to be informed that *s usually gets used when denoting something special...not on every single item :D
 
well
my max is 1600X900
so if they could run smooth at this resolution - the better
but i could settle on 1280X720 more or less
 
DeathPrincess said:
What resolution?

The person who made that list needs to be informed that *s usually gets used when denoting something special...not on every single item :D
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the * means it was tested on W7 64bit.

And it's not super recent, but its not ancient IMO, Age of Empires 3 should run great, I love that game, and it runs almost flawlessly on my older Asus Netbook with an Atom N450/GMA 3150
 
really you can run a lot of stuff just not the more modern stuff. check out some reviews of it, anand shows it pulling 42 FPS in dragon age orgins at 1024x768, low. another shows L4D 30+ fps 1027x768 low.

most source games should run fine. i played TF2 with intel onboard. the HD2000 is much better then old intel onboard. think games from like 5 years ago.
 
Pong, break out and tetris :D

Probably a lot of good old school games out there you can run and a few new ones that arent so graphics intensive, if you like point and click I'm sure almost any of them will run on that.
 
The original Fallout is free on GOG. It's ancient, but would be good!

Dragon Age Origins running on low settings with 1024x768 resolution apparently gets 42.4fps
Hawx running on low settings with 1024x768 resolution apparently gets 54fps
Starcraft 2 running on low settings with 1024x768 resolution apparently gets up to 96.5fps
 
Last edited:
I have found anything pre-2004 to run pretty decent on laptops running intel graphics.
 
I had a laptop similar in specs to yours except CPU (mine got an older Core i5-450M 2.40GHz).

Team Fortress 2, Portal and Portal 2 ran fairly OK (around 30+FPS) at low settings 1366x768. I can bump up the settings on textures a bit with not much noticeable hit on performance, but that's about it. Lowering resolution to 1280x720 certainly helps, but graphics become a bit blurry.

Most games based on the source engine would probably run nice with what you have.
 
CaptNumbNutz said:
I have found anything pre-2004 to run pretty decent on laptops running intel graphics.
Click to expand...

its funny
i have a fair cpu
& enough ram
but because of the gpu, all that hardware doesn't count... we are in 2012 & because of the gpu only games from way back 2004 fit?:rolleyes:
one could have a crappy computer
but if he has a good graphics card - he's good.
 
JekylHyde said:
its funny
i have a fair cpu
& enough ram
but because of the gpu, all that hardware doesn't count... we are in 2012 & because of the gpu only games from way back 2004 fit?:rolleyes:
one could have a crappy computer
but if he has a good graphics card - he's good.
Click to expand...

No, a slow CPU will bottleneck a video card. Not having enough ram will make your hard drive spin up all the time from swapping.. it all goes together just spend 200 dollars and get a decent video card.

Integrated graphics are made as cheap as possible so people can get basic functionality. They pretty much exist so people can get computers as cheaply as possible.

If you are really stuck with this it means you are either, broke, living with your parents or on a laptop. Either way there are plenty of good old games, not to mention emulators for old consoles which should work fine on integrated video.
 
JekylHyde said:
its funny
i have a fair cpu
& enough ram
but because of the gpu, all that hardware doesn't count... we are in 2012 & because of the gpu only games from way back 2004 fit?:rolleyes:
one could have a crappy computer
but if he has a good graphics card - he's good.
Click to expand...

Games need good graphics cards, simple as that. There's no point spending $300 on a CPU if you don't buy a GPU or get a $50 GPU, if your intention is to play games.

If you're not playing games, you probably don't need that GPU. My work computer has never seen a game, but it does a LOT of number crunching, so that expensive CPU gets put to good use even though its only running a crappy $50 GPU.

You buy the computer that you will fulfil the task you want it to fulfil. If you want to play games, you buy a computer which has a good GPU (keeping things in proportion of course, don't waste money on a $500 GPU if the entire rest of the computer only cost you $500 and has a shitty CPU that will bottleneck it). On the other hand, if you want a home theater PC or a internet/work that won't be playing games, stick with the integrated graphics.

You don't buy an F1 car to go down the street to get the milk, and you don't buy a Prius to race the 24 hours Le Mans. You don't buy a PC without a GPU to play new modern games, and you don't buy a $500 GPU to watch TV on a HTPC.
 
StaticSurge said:
No, a slow CPU will bottleneck a video card. Not having enough ram will make your hard drive spin up all the time from swapping.. it all goes together just spend 200 dollars and get a decent video card.

Integrated graphics are made as cheap as possible so people can get basic functionality. They pretty much exist so people can get computers as cheaply as possible.

If you are really stuck with this it means you are either, broke, living with your parents or on a laptop. Either way there are plenty of good old games, not to mention emulators for old consoles which should work fine on integrated video.
Click to expand...

Yea this is true but gray area for instance I have put really good video cards in with POS CPUs and made the game I was playing much much better I have upgraded POS CPUs to high end CPUs with little impact on frame rate. For instance a little bit ago just for fun I took an old AM2+ dual core CPU at 2.8 GHz and installed an old GTX 295 and then I tried a GTX 470 I had laying around the GTX 470 made Skyrim run Way smoother so then I put both video cards in to a AM3 quad core CPU at 3.7GHz and the FPS was higher in all my games I tried but not by much. Nothing formal I just played some games for a few hours on each setup and had fraps running and I found that gaming on the dual core with the GTX 470 was not bad at all and well worth the upgrade. For the improvement where the same video card in the Quad core was not really worth the work or the cost for the small improvement it made.

Nice improvement for around $300 and quick install
A GTX 470 easy install band new I don't know around $300

Around $300 lots of work marginal improvement
New motherboard ram and CPU $300
 
I played the original Stalker on low settings with the HD 3000. I was totally shocked. I thought i'd see a slide show. Smooth as butter. I don't know how that translates to HD 2000, but you might have similar experience.
 
cthulhuiscool said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/11

This should give you an idea of the kinds of games you can run and at what settings. Honestly it seems like you can run quite a bit if you're willing to sacrifice some visual flair.
Click to expand...

The other thing that shows is even a cheap dedicated GPU like a 5570 is a big step up from the integrated graphics. It might be worth looking around the FS/FT forum to see if you can pick something up for a few bucks from a previous generation. You might be able to pick up a 2nd hand 8800GT for under $40.
 
JekylHyde said:
its funny
i have a fair cpu
& enough ram
but because of the gpu, all that hardware doesn't count... we are in 2012 & because of the gpu only games from way back 2004 fit?:rolleyes:
one could have a crappy computer
but if he has a good graphics card - he's good.
Click to expand...

This is why developers are turning to consoles.
i3, integrated graphics, expects to play modern games...
 
Why shouldnt they? An integrated graphics chip that could play modern games could save gaming on PCs. Nvidia ION was decent but it's like they gave up after that. Not everone can afford a dedicated GPU. If it was always like this I might never have gotten into gaming due to costs as a kid in the 90s. Luckily back then you could play almost any game on any video card. Games like wing commander would run on nearly anything Doom as well. If these games had needed a 300 dollar GPU to run I might be on a console now.
 
StaticSurge said:
Why shouldnt they? An integrated graphics chip that could play modern games could save gaming on PCs. Nvidia ION was decent but it's like they gave up after that. Not everone can afford a dedicated GPU. If it was always like this I might never have gotten into gaming due to costs as a kid in the 90s. Luckily back then you could play almost any game on any video card. Games like wing commander would run on nearly anything Doom as well. If these games had needed a 300 dollar GPU to run I might be on a console now.
Click to expand...

I think its just an issue of practicality. Look at the size of the heatsink on a GPU, even lower end ones capable of gaming usually require their own fan. Performance needs power, power means heat, heat means you have to think more carefully about design and include adequate cooling. Not to mention the extra money involved. It'd create another subset of motherboards, those slightly above the ones for people who don't want to game and want integrated graphics which are good enough for high def video, but well below those people who can afford even a low end dedicated GPU.

The other alternative is developers just scale down their games to the point where they can be played on crappy integrated graphics, which most of them do (you can play a lot of modern games at uber low res and uber low settings on integrated graphics), but it just doesn't seem practical to scale all the way down to that level which is so far removed from dedicated GPUs. Even an 8800GT, a nearly 5 year old video card which can be found for less than the cost of a new game on ebay, is several times more powerful than integrated graphics.
 
Ahh 8800GT. That card was the shit. Super affordable with amazing performance (back then.. wouldn't get it nowdays, you honestly won't see a boost big enough to justify the bother). Mainstream GPU done right
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top