Intel HD Graphics 3000

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for bentayllor20
#1 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

Hello, could anybody tell me what the graphics are like with this intel graphics card. They have been put into the new Macbook Pro's, released today. They have replaced the nVidia Geforce 320M.

I would like to know the difference and if one is better than the other as I am looking for the best Mac for gaming.

Many Thanks.

Avatar image for SoraX64
#2 Posted by SoraX64 (29221 posts) -
>Intel graphics >Macbook >gaming I'm not too knowledgeable on laptops, but I'd suggest if you want gaming you look for a different brand.
Avatar image for bentayllor20
#3 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

I agree apple is probably not the best for gaming, but I do a lot of video editing and movie making. I am just looking for the best Macbook to be able to play games on the odd occasion.

Avatar image for SoraX64
#4 Posted by SoraX64 (29221 posts) -
If you're looking to game on a Macbook then you're probably going to want either the new 15 inch or the new 17 inch models. Biggest difference is screen size, it looks like.
Avatar image for bentayllor20
#5 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

Okay so can you tell me the difference between the Intel HD graphics 3000 and what was previously included in the macbook, I understand the new 15 inch and 17 inch models have theAMD Radeon HD 6750M.

Avatar image for ionusX
#6 Posted by ionusX (25760 posts) -

Okay so can you tell me the difference between the Intel HD graphics 3000 and what was previously included in the macbook, I understand the new 15 inch and 17 inch models have theAMD Radeon HD 6750M.

bentayllor20

simple this is

intel's video solutions are OLD.. fossils old they just put them in there for the sake of the ability to display SOMETHING on the screen thats about it.. currently intel's common offerings are about equal to a radeon 9200-9800pro which date back to about 2004-2005 and since then gargantuan leaps in preformance have occured.. at their best an intel integrated video can barely run half life 2.. while basically any modern gpu can play that on highest settings possible.

a geforce 320m is a more mdoern release from nvidia it operates in direct9 and directx 10 environments and it actually packs quite a significant punch.. you can game on that to a degree. you could probably play more contemporary titles like batman arkham asylum or dragon age of medium which is pretty respectable.

now that amd hd 6750m.. ooh now there is a find.. thats amd's mid range offering and is about equal to an ACTUAL hd 4830 videocard. its designed for directx10 and 11 environemtnet.. it supports blu-ray playback and 100p video watching. it can also encode video decently enough. in terms of gaming power.. things like mass effect 2 on high, bfbc2 on high, starcraft II on high.. crysis on medium.. these are all attainable realities for that card.

so there you have it an explanation about each and its limitations

Avatar image for bentayllor20
#7 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

Thank you that was extremely helpful. I am not a hardcore gamer but occasionally like to play Grand Theft auto IV, San andreas and some Battlefield or Cod.

So I am guessing theamd hd 6750m would be my best bet?

Avatar image for Xtasy26
#8 Posted by Xtasy26 (5288 posts) -

Hello, could anybody tell me what the graphics are like with this intel graphics card. They have been put into the new Macbook Pro's, released today. They have replaced the nVidia Geforce 320M.

I would like to know the difference and if one is better than the other as I am looking for the best Mac for gaming.

Many Thanks.

bentayllor20

Dude whatever you do stay the hell away from Intel graphics. They are extremely $hitty. My brother brought an Intel laptop with their best graphics back in 2008 and it couldn't even run Left 4 Dead on everything low on like 800x600. Intel suck balls. If you are looking for gaming laptop then get a PC laptop because for the price you will spend on an Apple laptop you could get a vastly more powerful PC laptop with far more powerful graphics card that will smoke through today's game. My friend brought an Asus laptop with a HD 5730 for like a little less than $1000 last year and that would have killed any of Apple's laptops for the same price. That was last year Asus lineup this year they probably updated their line up with even a beefier graphics chip. Check out their offereing (as well as others) on Newegg.

If you are going to get an Apple get the better ones with an AMD graphics card (the ones that are in the newer Macbook Pro's Apple released recently or going to release soon).

Avatar image for Xtasy26
#9 Posted by Xtasy26 (5288 posts) -

Thank you that was extremely helpful. I am not a hardcore gamer but occasionally like to play Grand Theft auto IV, San andreas and some Battlefield or Cod.

So I am guessing theamd hd 6750m would be my best bet?

bentayllor20

Grand Theft Auto IV would require a beefy graphics chip so get the HD 6750M.

Avatar image for bentayllor20
#10 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

It looks like Apple's new macbook pro's are only supporting intel graphics on the 13inch ones. So I have two options.

First option, buy a Macbook Air for 1020 pound and get an NVIDIA geforce 320m.

Second option, buy a Macbook Pro for 1549 pound and get theamd hd 6750m.

Now like I stated I am only a casual gamer and am more interested in playing older grand theft auto's (San andreas) but would also be able to run maybe Battlefield and CoD.

Avatar image for James161324
#11 Posted by James161324 (8315 posts) -

Gaming and macs just don't go hand and hand.

Avatar image for Tezcatlipoca666
#12 Posted by Tezcatlipoca666 (7241 posts) -

Do you need a Mac? Do you run MAC only programs that don't have a decent alternative on Windows? I have to ask because you'll get a lot more power from a Windows based laptop :?

Avatar image for bentayllor20
#13 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

so if I decided to go to Windows, what laptop would you recommend? any specific models that are particularly good for gaming?

Avatar image for Tezcatlipoca666
#14 Posted by Tezcatlipoca666 (7241 posts) -

so if I decided to go to Windows, what laptop would you recommend? any specific models that are particularly good for gaming?

bentayllor20

Since you were considering spending 1G or more on a Mac... consider this (compare the specs with a similarly priced Mac for lulz):

http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduct.php?prodid=LT-025-MS&groupid=959&catid=1828&subcat=

Avatar image for bentayllor20
#15 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

Wow that looks like some beasty laptop, and this can play all the latest games, and are graphics equivalent to ps3?

Avatar image for CellAnimation
#16 Posted by CellAnimation (6116 posts) -
The Intel HD 3000 is PART OF the Sandy Bridge CPU. The 13" MacBook is not a gaming notebook, hell it's debatable if the 15" or 17" are either, but saying that the HD 3000 is an old technology is complete garbage.
Avatar image for bentayllor20
#17 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

Thanks for all the help, I am leaning towards something other than Apple now.

Avatar image for Tezcatlipoca666
#18 Posted by Tezcatlipoca666 (7241 posts) -

Wow that looks like some beasty laptop, and this can play all the latest games, and are graphics equivalent to ps3?

bentayllor20

Equivalent to PS3? I'm pretty sure that laptop can destroy anything the PS3 can do :lol:

Avatar image for CellAnimation
#19 Posted by CellAnimation (6116 posts) -

Thanks for all the help, I am leaning towards something other than Apple now.

bentayllor20
If you want a gaming notebook you should be. The new Apple notebooks are sweet as, but they're not for gaming.
Avatar image for bentayllor20
#20 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

I did want to get a new Macbook as mine is very old now, but also wanted something I can play games like San Andreas on.

Avatar image for CellAnimation
#21 Posted by CellAnimation (6116 posts) -

I did want to get a new Macbook as mine is very old now, but also wanted something I can play games like San Andreas on.

bentayllor20
Dude that game is 10,000 years old. It'd play fine on any of those new MacBook Pros.
Avatar image for CellAnimation
#22 Posted by CellAnimation (6116 posts) -
Anandtech - Intel HD Graphics 2000/3000 Performance
Avatar image for gmaster456
#23 Posted by gmaster456 (7568 posts) -
The Intel HD 3000 is PART OF the Sandy Bridge CPU. The 13" MacBook is not a gaming notebook, hell it's debatable if the 15" or 17" are either, but saying that the HD 3000 is an old technology is complete garbage.CellAnimation
I agree. While intels graphics used to suck they're not THAT bad now.
Avatar image for bentayllor20
#24 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

Oh good :) So the intel HD 3000 wouldn't be too bad with the older games I want to play, but if I was to play a newer game it would not run very well?

Avatar image for Tezcatlipoca666
#25 Posted by Tezcatlipoca666 (7241 posts) -

Oh good :) So the intel HD 3000 wouldn't be too bad with the older games I want to play, but if I was to play a newer game it would not run very well?

bentayllor20

Pretty much.

Avatar image for bentayllor20
#26 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

I am not sure what to do. To buy the 13 inch pro or the 15 inch pro with the AMD card.

Avatar image for gmaster456
#27 Posted by gmaster456 (7568 posts) -

I am not sure what to do. To buy the 13 inch pro or the 15 inch pro with the AMD card.

bentayllor20
Just get the 15 inch. Its much better overall.
Avatar image for bentayllor20
#28 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

Yeah I think thats my best bet. Can the graphics card be removed and upgraded?

Avatar image for Urworstnhtmare
#29 Posted by Urworstnhtmare (2630 posts) -

I am not sure what to do. To buy the 13 inch pro or the 15 inch pro with the AMD card.

bentayllor20

Out of those, definitly get the Macbook Pro 15'.

I would recommend anyone getting a Macbook Pro to get the screen upgrade.

"The 15-inch MacBook Pro comes with a 1440-by-900-pixel LED-backlit glossy display. You can also choose a high-resolution 1680-by-1050 glossy or antiglare display that gives you 36 percent more pixels." -Apple

The glossy hi-res screen is $100 bucks extra, the antiglare hi-res one is $150 extra.

Unlike the HDD and RAM, this would be really hard to do later, and would probably cost more latter, as the parts would be hard to get.

Avatar image for Urworstnhtmare
#30 Posted by Urworstnhtmare (2630 posts) -

Yeah I think thats my best bet. Can the graphics card be removed and upgraded?

bentayllor20

No. But you might be able to use Thunderbolt.

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html#thunderbolt

http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm

Avatar image for Cliffx72
#31 Posted by Cliffx72 (25 posts) -
I just bought the new 13" MacBook Pro today. It has the intel Core i5 with the Intel Graphics HD 3000. This laptop outperforms the previous generation (Nvidia) by a long shot. This graphics card is completely different than previous Intel Graphics Cards. Go get it, and at the same time, enjoy the Ferrari!
Avatar image for kchow6575
#32 Posted by kchow6575 (25 posts) -

I was curious about the difference between the GeForce 320M and Intel's latest HD 3000 offering too. From the benchmarks I've found online, the 320M and the HD3000 are comparable in performance.

What does the 2011 MacBook Pro 13 gain out of this? Better battery life, while maintaining its graphical performance from the previous model.

Does it make me pull out my wallet, ready to give everything I have to Apple for a new MBP 13? Nope.

I agree with the others; the MBP 15> is where things get interesting.

Hello, could anybody tell me what the graphics are like with this intel graphics card. They have been put into the new Macbook Pro's, released today. They have replaced the nVidia Geforce 320M.

I would like to know the difference and if one is better than the other as I am looking for the best Mac for gaming.

Many Thanks.

bentayllor20

Avatar image for kamikaze148
#34 Posted by kamikaze148 (25 posts) -
Basically i am in the same boat, i no longer really play games all that much anymore, except for World of Warcraft. so am thinking of going mac. i want to know A: is the new card worse off than the previous model?, or am i better off going to ebay or auction sites and getting a 2010 MBP?. also...would the new graphics chip run WoW smoothly?. doesnt have to be on high settings, just after smoothness.
Avatar image for kchow6575
#35 Posted by kchow6575 (25 posts) -

That might not be viable until the next iteration of Thunderbolt, when it runs at 100Gbits/s. Right now, the 2011 MBP has a 10Gbits/s Thunderbolt port. 10Gbits = 1.25GBytes. A PCIe x16 2.0 (graphics card) slot runs at 8GBytes/s on your modern day desktop PC. That's not enough bandwidth.

However, a future Thunderbolt 100Gbits/s port will definitely change mobile gaming. :] 100Gbits = 12.5GBytes.

[QUOTE="bentayllor20"]

Yeah I think thats my best bet. Can the graphics card be removed and upgraded?

Urworstnhtmare

No. But you might be able to use Thunderbolt.

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html#thunderbolt

http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm

Avatar image for -CheeseEater-
#36 Posted by -CheeseEater- (5258 posts) -
The answer is simple; Don't buy Apple, and purchase something that actually has a decent ratio between performance and price.
Avatar image for Urworstnhtmare
#37 Posted by Urworstnhtmare (2630 posts) -

Basically i am in the same boat, i no longer really play games all that much anymore, except for World of Warcraft. so am thinking of going mac. i want to know A: is the new card worse off than the previous model?, or am i better off going to ebay or auction sites and getting a 2010 MBP?. also...would the new graphics chip run WoW smoothly?. doesnt have to be on high settings, just after smoothness.kamikaze148

The 2010 MBP would be far above the system specs you need for Wow. However, the new MBPs with the AMD GPUs will be significantly better.

Avatar image for kungfool69
#38 Posted by kungfool69 (2584 posts) -

[QUOTE="bentayllor20"]

Wow that looks like some beasty laptop, and this can play all the latest games, and are graphics equivalent to ps3?

Tezcatlipoca666

Equivalent to PS3? I'm pretty sure that laptop can destroy anything the PS3 can do :lol:

in the top end of the market, wo are now seeing GTX460m's in commonly used laptops from ASUS and Toshiba. These come coupled with 2Ghz i7 sandybridge. laptop gaming is now no longer in the realm of the SUPER rich. these PC's start from $2500AU

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#39 Posted by ronvalencia (25643 posts) -

That might not be viable until the next iteration of Thunderbolt, when it runs at 100Gbits/s. Right now, the 2011 MBP has a 10Gbits/s Thunderbolt port. 10Gbits = 1.25GBytes. A PCIe x16 2.0 (graphics card) slot runs at 8GBytes/s on your modern day desktop PC. That's not enough bandwidth.

However, a future Thunderbolt 100Gbits/s port will definitely change mobile gaming. :] 100Gbits = 12.5GBytes.

[QUOTE="Urworstnhtmare"]

[QUOTE="bentayllor20"]

Yeah I think thats my best bet. Can the graphics card be removed and upgraded?

kchow6575

No. But you might be able to use Thunderbolt.

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/features.html#thunderbolt

http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm

DIY ViDock uses mini-HDMI cable to channel ExpressCard's PCI-Express data.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/418851-diy-vidock-experiences-274.html#post7112152

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#40 Posted by ronvalencia (25643 posts) -

[QUOTE="Tezcatlipoca666"]

[QUOTE="bentayllor20"]

Wow that looks like some beasty laptop, and this can play all the latest games, and are graphics equivalent to ps3?

kungfool69

Equivalent to PS3? I'm pretty sure that laptop can destroy anything the PS3 can do :lol:

in the top end of the market, wo are now seeing GTX460m's in commonly used laptops from ASUS and Toshiba. These come coupled with 2Ghz i7 sandybridge. laptop gaming is now no longer in the realm of the SUPER rich. these PC's start from $2500AU

The power consumption of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M is around 72 Watts i.e. not possible for thin 15" gaming laptops.

AMD Radeon HD 5830M (Terascale 2 uArch, 800 SPU, 500Mhz, GDDR5) consumes ~25 watts.

AMD Radeon HD 5730M (Terascale 2 uArch, 400 SPU, 650Mhz, GDDR3) consumes ~26 watts.

AMD Radeon HD 5750M (Terascale 2 uArch, 400 SPU, 600Mhz, GDDR5) consumes ~30 watts.

NVIDIA Geforce GT540M (CUDA uArch) consumes ~35 watts. In performance, this GPU is between Radeon HD 5650M and 5730M(1).

AMD Radeon HD 5850M (Terascale 2 uArch, 800 SPU, 625Mhz GDDR5) consumes ~39 watts.

AMD Radeon HD 6750M (Terascale 2 uArch, 480 SPU, 600Mhz, GDDR5) power consumption is estimated be around AMD Radeon HD 5750M i.e. slightly higher than 30 watts.

1. http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-540M.41715.0.html

Avatar image for ronvalencia
#41 Posted by ronvalencia (25643 posts) -
I just bought the new 13" MacBook Pro today. It has the intel Core i5 with the Intel Graphics HD 3000. This laptop outperforms the previous generation (Nvidia) by a long shot. This graphics card is completely different than previous Intel Graphics Cards. Go get it, and at the same time, enjoy the Ferrari!Cliffx72
Not against 15" MacBook Pro 2010's NVIDIA Geforce GT330M.
Avatar image for ronvalencia
#42 Posted by ronvalencia (25643 posts) -

Yeah I think thats my best bet. Can the graphics card be removed and upgraded?

bentayllor20

You could go via DIY ViDOCK

My DIY ViDOCK setup. http://forum.notebookreview.com/gaming-software-graphics-cards/418851-diy-vidock-experiences-274.html#post7112152

I plan to house my DIY ViDock with Silverstone SG06 or Silverstone SG07 mini-iTX case.

The problem with some laptops is their broken PCI-Express address resource allocation. Both of my Sony Vaio VGN-FW45 and Dell Studio XPS 1645 laptops works fine(no workarounds) with a second GPU connected to ExpressCard slot(DIY ViDock adapter).

My older ASUS GS1N and N80VN laptops fails DIY ViDock i.e. broken PCI-Express address resource allocation.

Intel Thunderbold (yet another external PCI-Express solution) would work with external GPU card, IF Apple allocates atleast 256MB memory address space to the second GPU.

AMD's XGP is another external PCI-Express solution.

Avatar image for bentayllor20
#43 Posted by bentayllor20 (487 posts) -

I'll be going for the MBP 15Inch, hopefully I'll be able to play a few of my favourite games on it.

Avatar image for drake919
#44 Posted by drake919 (25 posts) -
I know Intel Graphics are FAR not the best. However there starting to step up to the plate. I play Far Cry 2, Dead Space 2 All on Medium settings In HD Resolution. If You KNOW ANYTHING about the Sandy Bridge, you would know you would also receive more FPS by Increasing Your Memory Bandwidth. Many people do not know this but the Core i5/ Core i7 Supports 1666 Mhz and 1833 Mhz DDR3 Memory Speeds. Now I only Trust Kingston Memory and They Have 1666 Mhz DDR3 Hyper X Memory for laptops. I'm going to purchase 2, 4GB Sticks, lets see how impressive the Intel HD graphics can be. My System specs are: Resolution 1366X768 Windows 7 64Bit 4 GB Ram @ 1333 Mhz Core i5 2430M @ 2.4 Ghz (3Ghz max) 5,400 Rpm HDD System Specs WILL be: Windows 7 64 Bit 8 GB Ram @ 1666 Mhz Core i5 2430M 7,200 Rpm/ Possibly 10k HDD
Avatar image for kraken2109
#45 Posted by kraken2109 (13271 posts) -
[QUOTE="drake919"]I know Intel Graphics are FAR not the best. However there starting to step up to the plate. I play Far Cry 2, Dead Space 2 All on Medium settings In HD Resolution. If You KNOW ANYTHING about the Sandy Bridge, you would know you would also receive more FPS by Increasing Your Memory Bandwidth. Many people do not know this but the Core i5/ Core i7 Supports 1666 Mhz and 1833 Mhz DDR3 Memory Speeds. Now I only Trust Kingston Memory and They Have 1666 Mhz DDR3 Hyper X Memory for laptops. I'm going to purchase 2, 4GB Sticks, lets see how impressive the Intel HD graphics can be. My System specs are: Resolution 1366X768 Windows 7 64Bit 4 GB Ram @ 1333 Mhz Core i5 2430M @ 2.4 Ghz (3Ghz max) 5,400 Rpm HDD System Specs WILL be: Windows 7 64 Bit 8 GB Ram @ 1666 Mhz Core i5 2430M 7,200 Rpm/ Possibly 10k HDD

So you're gonna put even more money into a laptop that won't be playing modern games whatever you do...
Avatar image for red12355
#46 Posted by red12355 (1251 posts) -

[QUOTE="bentayllor20"]

Okay so can you tell me the difference between the Intel HD graphics 3000 and what was previously included in the macbook, I understand the new 15 inch and 17 inch models have theAMD Radeon HD 6750M.

ionusX

simple this is

intel's video solutions are OLD.. fossils old they just put them in there for the sake of the ability to display SOMETHING on the screen thats about it.. currently intel's common offerings are about equal to a radeon 9200-9800pro which date back to about 2004-2005 and since then gargantuan leaps in preformance have occured.. at their best an intel integrated video can barely run half life 2.. while basically any modern gpu can play that on highest settings possible.

a geforce 320m is a more mdoern release from nvidia it operates in direct9 and directx 10 environments and it actually packs quite a significant punch.. you can game on that to a degree. you could probably play more contemporary titles like batman arkham asylum or dragon age of medium which is pretty respectable.

now that amd hd 6750m.. ooh now there is a find.. thats amd's mid range offering and is about equal to an ACTUAL hd 4830 videocard. its designed for directx10 and 11 environemtnet.. it supports blu-ray playback and 100p video watching. it can also encode video decently enough. in terms of gaming power.. things like mass effect 2 on high, bfbc2 on high, starcraft II on high.. crysis on medium.. these are all attainable realities for that card.

so there you have it an explanation about each and its limitations

I think you're underestimating intel graphics (it can max HL2 easily). It will be fine for most games, just not the intensive ones like BF3 or TW2. But for OP, the 6750m is a much better choice. I actually have one in my laptop and I can play most games with good FPS, no problem. Though I OC'd mine a bit.
Avatar image for ronvalencia
#47 Posted by ronvalencia (25643 posts) -
I know Intel Graphics are FAR not the best. However there starting to step up to the plate. I play Far Cry 2, Dead Space 2 All on Medium settings In HD Resolution. If You KNOW ANYTHING about the Sandy Bridge, you would know you would also receive more FPS by Increasing Your Memory Bandwidth. Many people do not know this but the Core i5/ Core i7 Supports 1666 Mhz and 1833 Mhz DDR3 Memory Speeds. Now I only Trust Kingston Memory and They Have 1666 Mhz DDR3 Hyper X Memory for laptops. I'm going to purchase 2, 4GB Sticks, lets see how impressive the Intel HD graphics can be. My System specs are: Resolution 1366X768 Windows 7 64Bit 4 GB Ram @ 1333 Mhz Core i5 2430M @ 2.4 Ghz (3Ghz max) 5,400 Rpm HDD System Specs WILL be: Windows 7 64 Bit 8 GB Ram @ 1666 Mhz Core i5 2430M 7,200 Rpm/ Possibly 10k HDDdrake919
On IGP battles, SB IGP get destroyed by AMD Llano IGP.
Avatar image for superclocked
#48 Posted by superclocked (5864 posts) -
The Intel HD 3000 is okay. It's alot better than Intel's past integrated graphics. I play Starcraft 2 on low/medium with Ultra texture quality, so it's a capable GPU, but it's definitely not the greatest...
Avatar image for gerdtak
#49 Posted by gerdtak (25 posts) -
would anybody help me and share his DIYViDock-Setup 1.x with me? that would be rly nice.....