i5-3570k + HD4000 vs Core2Duo P8400 + GF9600M-gt

Hello folks,

Just a quick question: do you think a desktop i5-3570k with its integrated HD4000 graphics adapter could offer comparable gaming/graphics performance relative to a laptop with a Core2Duo and a GeForce 9600M-GT 512 Mb?

Just asking as I am in the process of building a new system; I thought about starting to put it together and hold on until next payday to get a Radeon HD7850.

I am curious about how badly off I would be compared to my current laptop, should I go the "get the system now and the card in the future".

Thanks in advance!
10 answers Last reply
More about 3570k hd4000 core2duo p8400 gf9600m
  1. Easily. It should actually probably get you slightly better performance - the 9600M is not anything close to formidable.
  2. Better

    http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4000

    Definitely get the PC now and pick up the GPU when you can.
  3. That is encouraging; I suspected the 3570k with integrated graphics would be similar if not better in performance; All evidence I collected seems to point to the mobile i5 + HD4000 combination being a close match for my current set up. If anything, the desktop version is more powerful.

    Thanks!
  4. h3llr4iser said:
    Hello folks,

    Just a quick question: do you think a desktop i5-3570k with its integrated HD4000 graphics adapter could offer comparable gaming/graphics performance relative to a laptop with a Core2Duo and a GeForce 9600M-GT 512 Mb?

    Just asking as I am in the process of building a new system; I thought about starting to put it together and hold on until next payday to get a Radeon HD7850.

    I am curious about how badly off I would be compared to my current laptop, should I go the "get the system now and the card in the future".

    Thanks in advance!


    That is what I did. I bought the 3770k and built the core system first. The HD 4000 was actually a very nice card compared to every single internal GPU I have ever had an experience with. Even the HD 4000 in my i5 laptop is capable of playing most new games. I'm currently playing Borderlands on high and Far Cry 3 on Medium (DX11). The HD 4000 should tidy you over until you decide to buy the GPU. Then, when you do get the GPU, you will be pleasantly surprised how much better everything looks. The HD 4000 is actually comparable to an Xbox 360, maybe a bit better. The HD 4000 is definitely better than the 9600M (478-283 in a passmark GPU benchmark). A 7850 is a big step up from the HD 4000, but a 79xx series is a running leap up. You might want to consider a 7950 or 7970. Not all games will run in ultra high settings with the 7850 or very well in DX11. They will on the 7970. And the differences between DX9 medium-high settings and DX11 Ultra settings in some games make it look like two completely different games. Far Cry 3 is a perfect example. In DX11 and Ultra setting, it looks pretty close to realistic as any game I've ever seen. in DX11, medium-high, it looks okay but the lighting and shadows are different and there are no reflections off of water or glass surfaces or sun rays bouncing off of everything.
  5. get the desktop, and get a gpu (a good one) later. the laptop has no/slim chance of upgrades so that is one big disadvantage.

    make sure you get a good gpu though, so as not to bottleneck that cpu, plus its unlocked too.
  6. h3llr4iser said:
    Hello folks,

    Just a quick question: do you think a desktop i5-3570k with its integrated HD4000 graphics adapter could offer comparable gaming/graphics performance relative to a laptop with a Core2Duo and a GeForce 9600M-GT 512 Mb?

    Just asking as I am in the process of building a new system; I thought about starting to put it together and hold on until next payday to get a Radeon HD7850.

    I am curious about how badly off I would be compared to my current laptop, should I go the "get the system now and the card in the future".


    I think 9600M will be tad faster (But barely noticeable). Get the pc and upgrade to GTX 650 when you can.
  7. Can't comment on faster or not. But I have tried that same processor for gaming with integrated graphics, and it sucked the big one.
    Be prepared to play a limited selection of games, and crank the video settings to the bottom, lol.
  8. jk47 said:
    Can't comment on faster or not. But I have tried that same processor for gaming with integrated graphics, and it sucked the big one.
    Be prepared to play a limited selection of games, and crank the video settings to the bottom, lol.


    Well i play 3 games in HD4000

    Hawx 2
    720p 2X AA Dx11 terrain Disabled to get the playable fps

    Shift 2
    720P AA disabled to get above 30fps

    COD 4
    1080P shadow AA disabled

    Tomorrow i'm getting GTX 660
  9. To be entirely honest, I'm not really an heavy gamer: I might explore some newer games every now and then, but my PC gaming is often limited to Star Trek Online and Flight Simulator 9 (could not switch to X because of the limited power with the laptop). They kind of run smoothly on the 9600M-GT (1920x1080) so I should be fine until I can get a proper graphics adapter. Thanks!
  10. Mutant_Guy said:
    jk47 said:
    Can't comment on faster or not. But I have tried that same processor for gaming with integrated graphics, and it sucked the big one.
    Be prepared to play a limited selection of games, and crank the video settings to the bottom, lol.


    Well i play 3 games in HD4000

    Hawx 2
    720p 2X AA Dx11 terrain Disabled to get the playable fps

    Shift 2
    720P AA disabled to get above 30fps

    COD 4
    1080P shadow AA disabled

    Tomorrow i'm getting GTX 660



    Well I guess it all comes down to opinion. I'm used to native 1080p resolution, high FPS, and high graphics quality. To me, 30 FPS is borderline unplayable - however I do know that console gamers are stuck with that FPS cap often so apparently it's something you can get used to.
Ask a new question

Read More

Desktops Graphics Cards Intel i5 Components Graphics