Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Graphics card on the Intel Core i7-2600 3.4Ghz?

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
October 9, 2011 12:38:58 AM

Hello,
How good is the graphics card on the i7-26003 4Ghz?
a c 358 U Graphics card
a c 115 å Intel
October 9, 2011 12:50:16 AM

The Core i7-2600 has an Intel HD 2000 graphics core.

The Core i7-2600k has an Intel HD 3000 graphics core.

In terms of performance I would say....

HD 2000 = around +50% more performance than the GMA 4500.
HD 3000 = marginally faster than desktop Radeon HD 5450. Or a little more than 100% more performance than the GMA 4500.
m
0
l
October 9, 2011 2:41:05 AM

Pretty, bad the only thing you could do is movies and internet surfing. If you want a graphics card, pm me and il help you find one. Or you could just post forum so everyone can help you :D 
m
0
l
Related resources
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 9, 2011 6:15:51 AM

It's fine for everything but gaming.
m
0
l
October 9, 2011 7:50:49 AM

jyjjy said:
It's fine for everything but gaming.


How about 3D content creation? 3D CAD? 3D simulation based learning /like pilot training/? ... :) 
m
0
l
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 9, 2011 2:44:21 PM

You can give it a go but I suspect you'll at least want a cheap discrete card.
m
0
l
October 9, 2011 3:04:20 PM

I have seen HD 3000 on a laptop play most games maxed out at 1280x720 (that also being a core i3), You wont be able to achieve enthusiast resolutions or settings, but most games will be playable, even at decent resolutions.


I will say though, a cheap Radeon card will give you much better performance.
m
0
l
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 9, 2011 4:00:50 PM

viridiancrystal said:
I have seen HD 3000 on a laptop play most games maxed out at 1280x720
I Don't know what you mean by "most games" but cards roughly twice as powerful as the HD3000 struggle to max out most current games even at a resolution like that.
m
0
l
a c 358 U Graphics card
a c 115 å Intel
October 9, 2011 4:21:06 PM

My Lenovo IdeaPad Y470 has a Core i5-2410M CPU and nVidia GT 550M and 1366x768 resolution.

I tested the HD 3000 core with Crysis and Fallout 3. Crysis had to be set to low graphic settings and no anti aliasing (AA) to get between 18 FPS - 24 FPS most of the time. Switching AA to 2x resulted in frame rates of 8 FPS - 11 FPS. It was able to handle Fallout 3 better with graphic options set to medium (some tweaking is necessary to get the best performance though).

I suppose the HD 3000 can nearly max out Half-Life 2 since that is not a very demanding game. However, HL2 came out in late 2004.
m
0
l
a c 107 U Graphics card
a b å Intel
October 9, 2011 4:33:36 PM

For the 2600k integrated. many games run, just not well and at the lowest settings to make them playable(fps wise). I was honestly surprised to see how far it has come.
m
0
l
October 9, 2011 7:52:34 PM

jyjjy said:
I Don't know what you mean by "most games" but cards roughly twice as powerful as the HD3000 struggle to max out most current games even at a resolution like that.


Killing floor, Oblivion, Bioshock, Black and White 2.

It had no chance against Assassins Creed 2 though.
m
0
l
a c 376 U Graphics card
October 10, 2011 4:35:43 AM

Those games are all quite old.
m
0
l
a c 107 U Graphics card
a b å Intel
October 10, 2011 2:12:34 PM

SC2(low settings too, but this game is cpu limited for most things, I did not try any massive unit count user maps either) And Just Cause 2 Played. Just Cause 2 needed the lowest settings ever....and well, the fps was still low.

Source games worked better then I would have guessed for onboard. Not saying it is great. but for someone who will play old games or low system requirements games. it may just do the trick.

Clearly it is not every going to be hardcore.
m
0
l
!