Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Why does the HD3000 suck so bad?

Tags:
  • PC gaming
  • Intel i7
  • Hewlett Packard
  • Video Games
Last response: in Video Games
Share
October 21, 2012 4:45:45 PM

Here's the deal. I have an HP Probook 4430s with 4GB RAM and a quad core 2630qm i7. The i7 has built in HD3000 graphics. I'm trying to play GTA San Andreas.

I can't even play with medium settings, at 800x600, lowest draw, no AA. It is sooo laggy. On my old laptop, DELL E6400 with 4GB RAM, Core 2 Duo 2.8GHz, and dedicated 256mb Graphics (Nvidia Quadro NVS 160M), I could play this game on the highest settings no lag at all.

From research, the HD3000 simply beats the 160M altogether, which it should seeing the Quadro came out in 2008, and the i7 2630QM came out in 2011.

What the heck is going on?

More about : hd3000 suck bad

October 21, 2012 4:53:15 PM

Well the HD3000 is integrated and the other one you listed is dedicated. Dedicated is almost always more powerful even it's very weak.
a b α HP
October 21, 2012 5:00:41 PM

The Intel HD 3000 is an integrated graphics core. The desktop version of it i basically equal to a Radeon HD 5450. The laptop version is slower than that due to reduced power consumption.

I've never played GTA:SA on a laptop with a HD 3000, but I have played Mass Effect 3 using the HD 3000 in my laptop. I have to admit that it was playable; I completed the game from start to finish only using the HD 3000. Of course, the nVidia GT 550m in my laptop is much more capable of playing games, but it was nice to see that Intel is making an effort.

In terms of lagging in GTA:SA... since the game is pretty old it might not be running very well in Windows 7. You should google around for possible issues running that game in Win 7.
Related resources
October 21, 2012 7:21:43 PM

Thanks for your help, I just had to run the game in compatibilty mode for Win98. Now I'm playing at max settings, minus AA. What is AA anyway? :p 
!