What can HD 4000 really play?

[twelve25]

Okay, before you say "nothing, it's a POS", I am serious. Say you have a desktop or laptop with just built in Intel HD 4000. What games will you be able to play and on what settings. All the benchmarks I find they end up testing ridiculous settings like "Look it only gets 8fps on 1080p high quality!". But what about 720p low?

Anyone have any experience here?

 

[tabascosauz]

Okay, before you say "nothing, it's a POS", I am serious. Say you have a desktop or laptop with just built in Intel HD 4000. What games will you be able to play and on what settings. All the benchmarks I find they end up testing ridiculous settings like "Look it only gets 8fps on 1080p high quality!". But what about 720p low?

Anyone have any experience here?

Uh, honestly, it can't really play anything. Everywhere it says the HD 4000 is a huge improvement over HD 3000 but I'm skirting the edge of unplayability (20-35 fps) in Minecraft with low render distance, and pretty much all advanced graphics features off or turned to low. In comparison my GT 640 GDDR5 OC'ed to GTX 650 clocks manages 120-300fps (obviously it's vsynced).

i5-3210M + 6GB DDR3-1600 + HD 4000 + 750GB 5400rpm HDD. It's a pretty normal laptop.

To give you some perspective, HD 4000 manages around only 17 frames for BF3, everything on lowest possible settings.

 

[tabascosauz]

However, I did see someone with a i5-3570K using the HD 4000 and they said they could manage 30+ fps on BF3. Presumably low and 720p because that's all the card can manage, but it was very surprising.

Other than that, I am unfamiliar with desktop HD 4000 performance. The i5-3210M that I have is a tiny bit lower in performance than the i3-3220. And the Minecraft performance I told you was while the laptop was plugged in to the wall.

 

[ArcticWonder]

It really sucks. At least it did on one of my computers. Athlon II x2 @3.00ghz, HD 4300 and 8gb ddr2. It would play Dead Island at all lowest settings (including resolution) and get 20-30 fps.

 

[andrewcarr]

If your resolution of the screen is low enough there is actually quite a bit that HD 4000 can play (with low to lowest settings that is).

But it is by no means ideal when any $50 GPU is many times better. So the conclusion is that although it's pretty good for laptops, considering what they had before, it's a step in the right direction but still isn't even close to AMD's higher end A series.

 

[abbadon_34]

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.69168.0.html

Games at the bottom

Best look games over 5 years old

 

[bunkgoats]

Okay, before you say "nothing, it's a POS", I am serious. Say you have a desktop or laptop with just built in Intel HD 4000. What games will you be able to play and on what settings. All the benchmarks I find they end up testing ridiculous settings like "Look it only gets 8fps on 1080p high quality!". But what about 720p low?

Anyone have any experience here?

I have a 13 inch MacBook Pro, that runs Windows 7 via Bootcamp with an Ivy Bridge I5 and HD 4000 graphics. I have played the Witcher, Borderlands, World of Warcraft, Half-Life 2, and Civilization Colonization on this system.

Now the games aren't running on high textures with 1080p and 60+ FPS, but its acceptable and its playable.

 

[Onus]

...Athlon II x2 @3.00ghz, HD 4300...

Not relevant. He is asking about Intel's HD4000; the AMD HD4300 is an entirely different animal.

The HD4000 is a little stronger than a GT520, and not as powerful as a HD6450. Neither of those can play new games very well if at all. You'd be able to play the original Guild Wars with enjoyable settings at 720p, but Guild Wars 2 would be "sufferable" at best. FPS titles tend to be even more demanding.
Older titles like UT2004 would play fairly well, as would anything online or Flash-based (e.g. Fate or Torchlight). Diablo II would be fine, but I'm not sure about Diablo III, although probably tolerable on low settings.

 

[DarkSable]

However, I did see someone with a i5-3570K using the HD 4000 and they said they could manage 30+ fps on BF3. Presumably low and 720p because that's all the card can manage, but it was very surprising.

Other than that, I am unfamiliar with desktop HD 4000 performance. The i5-3210M that I have is a tiny bit lower in performance than the i3-3220. And the Minecraft performance I told you was while the laptop was plugged in to the wall.

Due to high overclocking.

The mobile chips are a fair bit slower, and can't be overclocked, so have even worse performance.

 

[abbadon_34]

Very true, a lot of people assume laptop and desktop chips are same, and vendor perpetuate this myth. i.e. an i7 desktop chip is 4-6 cores, an i7 on a laptop is 2-4

 

[DarkSable]

You'd be able to play the original Guild Wars with enjoyable settings at 720p, but Guild Wars 2 would be "sufferable" at best. FPS titles tend to be even more demanding.

Haha, bad example, my friend. Guild Wars 2 is the second worst optimized recent game, right behind planetside 2. I get better framerates in battlefield 3 on ultra, 1080p than I do in either of those at mediocre settings.

 

[quas]

My Ivy Bridge only has HD2500 and using the lowest settings (sometimes 800x600), I have played:

Need for Speed Most Wanted
Red Alert 2
Warcraft 3
X Men Origins Wolverine
Bully

Most of these games are old (5+ years old), but some not that old, but even the newer ones are still mostly console ports so no worries there.

I think with HD4000 you can play Batman Arkham Asylum and Need For Speed Hot Pursuit.

 

[twelve25]

Good answers, thanks.

I actually was thinking laptops. I kinda wanted to get a Intel based ultrabook for my daughter, and she doesn't play many games, but I was just wondering what I might expect. I think thin, light and cool looking is going to beat getting a decent GPU either way.

So are the mobile HD 4000 slower than the desktop ones? I know the main CPU are. Most mobile i3's are on Celeron level.

 

[ArcticWonder]

Not relevant. He is asking about Intel's HD4000; the AMD HD4300 is an entirely different animal.

The HD4000 is a little stronger than a GT520, and not as powerful as a HD6450. Neither of those can play new games very well if at all. You'd be able to play the original Guild Wars with enjoyable settings at 720p, but Guild Wars 2 would be "sufferable" at best. FPS titles tend to be even more demanding.
Older titles like UT2004 would play fairly well, as would anything online or Flash-based (e.g. Fate or Torchlight). Diablo II would be fine, but I'm not sure about Diablo III, although probably tolerable on low settings.

My bad I thought he meant the Radeon HD 4000 line....

 

[DarkSable]

Good answers, thanks.

I actually was thinking laptops. I kinda wanted to get a Intel based ultrabook for my daughter, and she doesn't play many games, but I was just wondering what I might expect. I think thin, light and cool looking is going to beat getting a decent GPU either way.

So are the mobile HD 4000 slower than the desktop ones? I know the main CPU are. Most mobile i3's are on Celeron level.

They're significantly, yes. They're also hard to find, unless you get an i7 QM (which if you aren't, then you shouldn't bother with anything more than an i3; the supposed i5's are dual-cores, as are i7's that are just M or MX, rather than QM.)

 

[Headbomb]

Hehe, I have Intel HD 4000 and I am able to play Minecraft on Maximum settings!
Planetside 2 however is just playable on lower than low settings. Portal and Portal 2 run fine on Medium and sometimes even oh high. World of Tanks is also playable on low. League of legends gets 60fps on medium too. (all games at 1920 - 1080)


These graphics have amazed me at what they can do! I'm waiting for my HD 7950 to arrive but HD 4000 has not been a disappointment

My specs are as follows. i5-3570k @4.5ghz - ASRock z77 Extreme 3 - CM Hyper 212 Evo - G.Skill Ripjaw X 8GB 1600mhz - 1TB HDD - Intel HD 4000 Graphics - HAF 922 case.

 

[abbadon_34]

my daughter ... I think thin, light and cool looking is going to beat getting a decent GPU either way.

If she's anything like my girlfriend, that's all she cares about, surpised it's not an ipad

 

[Guest]

I have an i7-intel core 3520m and Intel HD 4000 and on planetside 2 i can run at about 30FPS with medium settings, 40 FPS on low settings and 50FPS on very low