Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intel HD 3000 wow...

H

hcho3

macrumors 68030
Original poster
May 13, 2010
2,783
0
Just used Intel HD 3000 graphic card to play Left 4 dead. The result was awful. It was wayyyyy worse than I expected. The core i5 is so freaking useless with GPU like this.

Tested in MY friend's MBP and my Samsung Series 9 laptop. They both have Intel HD 3000. I hope MBA gets a better luck.
 
A

axu539

macrumors 6502a
Dec 31, 2010
929
0
hcho3 said:
Just used Intel HD 3000 graphic card to play Left 4 dead. The result was awful. It was wayyyyy worse than I expected. The core i5 is so freaking useless with GPU like this.

Tested in MY friend's MBP and my Samsung Series 9 laptop. They both have Intel HD 3000. I hope MBA gets a better luck.
Click to expand...

Did you have the settings adjusted accordingly? You can't expect to be playing on high settings with either of those machines...
 
X

Xgm541

macrumors 65816
May 3, 2011
1,098
818
housecat said:
what settings were you on? L4D is a pretty taxing game.
Click to expand...

unless he was playing on high, its not a taxing game. My OLD laptop ran it on medium and had a nvidia geforce 8400gs. The intel is better than that.
 
C

Cali3350

macrumors regular
Feb 16, 2009
249
0
Multiple reviews have shown the terrible performance is mostly due to Intels windows drivers. In OSX the HD 3000 usually eeks out a win vs some other lower end cards like the 320m. Apple writes the OSX drivers and appear much better at it.
 
thejadedmonkey

thejadedmonkey

macrumors G3
May 28, 2005
9,182
3,342
Pennsylvania
I agree it's downright dreadful. I can get a constant 20-30fps in Rift, with most settings on high, with my 6630m, but if it runs off of the IIG 3000, I get around 0 fps, with the occasional spike to 1 :p

I'm sure if I dropped all the settings down to low, it would do better, but where's the fun in that!

However, for 80% of the population, it'll be more than adaquite.
 
F

fs454

macrumors 68000
Dec 7, 2007
1,979
1,825
Los Angeles / Boston
I just don't get what the use is of such a configuration. It's like going backwards to the days where laptops had extremely crippled GPUs....Intel Extreme Graphics!


I'd much rather have a CPU that benches ~1400 points lower in Geekbench, still is adequate for what one might be using an 11" ultraportable for, and a killer GPU for the size. L4D and Portal 2 run absolutely maxed out averaging 35-45fps on my 1.6ghz Core 2 Duo, 4GB RAM and 320m. You're telling me the new i5/i7 configs with the 3000HD will run this much worse?


Despite the rumors, I really, really, really still don't see Apple using Sandy Bridge in these computers anytime soon. They'll wait for Ivy. Calling it.
 
Dark Void

Dark Void

macrumors 68030
Jun 1, 2011
2,614
479
i realize that there is a more pressing issue at hand, but with its subtle mention, is there something i missing about the negative opinions on the hd3000 in windows laptops? every laptop at a common comparing price (say around $400) to a laptop that would run the hd3000 is running some ati gpu that scores at least 2k lower on 3dmark06 than the hd3000 does. laptops around a $400 price point (at least on newegg) are running either the hd3000 (3.6k 3dmarks with a faster cpu) or an ati gpu up to 2k (and that's with the A-350 APU i.e. amd 6310), in which contest any hd3000 model with a faster cpu would be better, yes?

what is the obvious thing that i am missing here? my numbers are according to notebook check. do i have to look beyond the numbers, er?
 
alust2013

alust2013

macrumors 601
Feb 6, 2010
4,779
2
On the fence
Apple isn't forcing anyone to buy it. Plus it's not like they really had a choice, seeing as they don't have the option to continue with the Core 2 Duo (which really is too old to put in a computer that expensive). I also don't think it was intended to be a gaming computer at all.
 
KnightWRX

KnightWRX

macrumors Pentium
Jan 28, 2009
15,046
4
Quebec, Canada
Cali3350 said:
In OSX the HD 3000 usually eeks out a win vs some other lower end cards like the 320m. Apple writes the OSX drivers and appear much better at it.
Click to expand...

Hum, no, the 3000 UD scores between the 320M and the 9400m on OS X.

Are you talking about the lame Anand benchmark where he posted numbers for a CPU bound scenario where it was Sandy Bridge that was barely beating out Core 2 Duo and not the 3000 HD vs the 320 M ? All other graphics benchmarks show the Intel 3000 HD being a significant downgrade to the 320M, and that's for normal voltage applications.
 
C

clockwise33

macrumors newbie
Mar 8, 2011
8
0
KnightWRX said:
Hum, no, the 3000 UD scores between the 320M and the 9400m on OS X.

Are you talking about the lame Anand benchmark where he posted numbers for a CPU bound scenario where it was Sandy Bridge that was barely beating out Core 2 Duo and not the 3000 HD vs the 320 M ? All other graphics benchmarks show the Intel 3000 HD being a significant downgrade to the 320M, and that's for normal voltage applications.
Click to expand...

Standard voltage HD3000 a significant downgrade from 320m?

HD3000 showed an average 8% increase in FPS in six popular, modern games. -> http://www.anandtech.com/show/4084/intels-sandy-bridge-upheaval-in-the-mobile-landscape/5
 
H

hcho3

macrumors 68030
Original poster
May 13, 2010
2,783
0
O

orfeas0

macrumors 6502a
Aug 21, 2010
971
1
Athens, Greece
hcho3 said:
Right... my laptop with HD3000 graphic card with sandy bridge runs left 4 dead like crap and I have it on low settings.

I don't even want to try SC2. It might die.
Click to expand...

maybe YOUR laptop is the problem here. can it play hd videos flawlessly? does everything else work as it should? and if it plays l4d like crap on low settings, there's something strange with your laptop...
 
thejadedmonkey

thejadedmonkey

macrumors G3
May 28, 2005
9,182
3,342
Pennsylvania
Archlord said:
i realize that there is a more pressing issue at hand, but with its subtle mention, is there something i missing about the negative opinions on the hd3000 in windows laptops? every laptop at a common comparing price (say around $400) to a laptop that would run the hd3000 is running some ati gpu that scores at least 2k lower on 3dmark06 than the hd3000 does. laptops around a $400 price point (at least on newegg) are running either the hd3000 (3.6k 3dmarks with a faster cpu) or an ati gpu up to 2k (and that's with the A-350 APU i.e. amd 6310), in which contest any hd3000 model with a faster cpu would be better, yes?

what is the obvious thing that i am missing here? my numbers are according to notebook check. do i have to look beyond the numbers, er?
Click to expand...

In most games, the GPU is the bottleneck, not the CPU. That's why games like Portal can run on a Macbook Air, but fail spectacularly on a PC with an i7 but only a IIG 3000.

Check out the new AMD cpu series, probably standard in all notebooks by x-mas.. it's a faster CPU that's about i3 speeds, plus a 6xxx series GPU that'll out-perform any intel setup, and it's priced for the $400 laptops.
 
jmpnop

jmpnop

macrumors 6502a
Aug 8, 2010
821
34
hcho3 said:
Just used Intel HD 3000 graphic card to play Left 4 dead. The result was awful. It was wayyyyy worse than I expected. The core i5 is so freaking useless with GPU like this.

Tested in MY friend's MBP and my Samsung Series 9 laptop. They both have Intel HD 3000. I hope MBA gets a better luck.
Click to expand...

I was disappointed when MBP 13 didn't get dedicated graphics card. MBA neither will, expect the same gaming performance on the next MBA:(
 
M

mark28

macrumors 68000
Jan 29, 2010
1,632
2
Cali3350 said:
Multiple reviews have shown the terrible performance is mostly due to Intels windows drivers. In OSX the HD 3000 usually eeks out a win vs some other lower end cards like the 320m. Apple writes the OSX drivers and appear much better at it.
Click to expand...

Apple writes worse drivers in OSX than the drivers from Nvidia on Windows.
 
A

AdrianK

macrumors 68020
Feb 19, 2011
2,230
2
Meh. Apple's 13" laptops have always had crappy GPUs (Intel GMA X3100 until early '09, 9400M until mid 2010 etc), it's a good way to pull customers towards the 15".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom