Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Trinity integrated vs. dedicated

Last response: in Graphics & Displays
Share
July 3, 2012 10:41:29 AM

I'm in the market for a new laptop and the budget is from 700 to about 900 dollars. I've been looking extensively and here's what I've decided. First I'm going to be waiting just a bit because with trinity and ivy bridge really hitting the laptop market now it seems silly not to wait to get a computer that should have more improved battery life and should perform better. I mainly plan to write code for school and do some gaming away from the tower when the situation requires it. Here's where the issues begin. What I would like is to have something compact and light that wouldn't be hard to lug around with me so preferably 13 - 14". However I'm also torn because packing too much into a small package can lead to cooling issues. In addition I'd like this laptop to run newer games like Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, SWTOR, and Civ 5 smoothly, but if it's on bare minimum settings i couldn't care less. AMD's new trinity APU's seem like the perfect solution. They'd allow for a smaller package due to the absence of a dedicated GPU and hopefully less heat and maybe a few more bonus features because it'll be cheaper. The other choice is to jump into getting a dedicated GPU which seems to say to me more heat, more weight, etc. My only worry is that i'll regret say the A10-4600 because it might fall just short of running my games above at solid framerates (50-60) on the LOWEST settings. Just looking for input or any personal experience with the 7660g graphics and if it will do what i need it to do. Also i've checked notebookcheck.com or w/e.

Best solution

July 3, 2012 2:37:59 PM

Both the Ivy bridge and the better AMD integrated graphic chips will play those games at the low resolution of 14" laptops with low to medium settings. 50-60 FPS is very unrealistic expectation from a integrated graphic chip and complete overkill for all of the games you mentioned. 30 FPS steady is more than adequate for almost any game unless you are trying to tweak a First person shooter. Latency and disk caching will have more effect on gameplay than 30FPS.
Share
July 3, 2012 7:41:17 PM

That's reasonable i suppose I'm curius how SC2 would work out in a 4v4 (i do this a lot with a few friends) otherwise i think you're correct. Also i was under the impression that they A10's 7660G outperformed Intel's HD 4000 graphics pretty significantly.
Score
0
Related resources
July 3, 2012 7:57:31 PM

AMD's graphic side is better but Intel's main processor is more powerful. Which you choose depends on which you find more important. Intel's graphics are getting better, but they nailed the video code/decode feature. It all boils do to what programs you use and how do they preform.
Score
0
July 10, 2012 9:55:17 AM

Best answer selected by popejustice.
Score
0
a c 271 U Graphics card
July 10, 2012 3:58:40 PM

This topic has been closed by Mousemonkey
Score
0
!