8600M GS v X3100

Which graphics card is better for gaming? Nvidia 8600M GS or Intel's X3100?

 

Lol @ X3100

 

deffinatly the 8600...the 8400 is about 4x as powerful as the x3100, and the 8600 is about 2x as powerful as the 8400...

 

Is this a serious question? Let's just put it out here that

Intel graphics are horrible for gaming! Absolutely crap. If gaming is any way a concern, stay as far the heck away form any GPU with "Intel", "S3", or "SiS" in it's name as humanly possible.

NO integrated graphics solution will outperform any decent dedicated card EVER, but ESPECIALLY not Intel's horrible IGPs. So the final word is this: If you care about games, make sure you get an nVidia or ATi card, preferably of the GeForce 8xxx or RADEON HD 2xxx series.

 

Yep, 8600GS is LOT better than the x3100

 

Please read the stickies that say "PLEASE READ BEFORE POSTING" before posting a thread like this

 

Shoot the x3100 will outperform the 8600 any day of the week! What are you guys talking about?

tisk tisk *shakes head*

The x3100's support DX11!

 

Why not ask: "Which is better to take to a tank battle: a switchblade, or an M1 Abrams?"

 

I'd rather have the Leopard 2, or the Canadian modded Leopard 1 much more versatile and cheaper

 

in the vein of comparing this to other ludicrous things what would you fly across the atlantic with? the wright brothers plane or a 747

altough i must cede that the X3100 isnt a bad graphics card its just not aimed at the gaming market altough it runs Half-life 2 on medium settings with a stable fps

 

Which means it still doesn't compare to a low end card from two generations ago (my VAIO runs Source games at max and 4xAF and the stress test gives me 41.6 avg fps

 

my x200m played HL2 with a stable fps. though all low settings lol. Half Life really isn't a good benchmark. The game is coded "perfectly" I imagine you could modify a machine still running DOS to play the game.

Though i would like to say the X3100 is suppose be a pretty powerful integrated card.

 

yea also the x3100 suffers from horribly bad drivers

 

For all you hawks here, you may have not noticed that this guy may have asked an honest question. Take a look at his info:

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dhaka, Bangladesh
Posts: 5

From what I can guess, he's probably very new to the computer world. There are many people who don't know much about computers. It can be sometimes quite brave for them to ask a question in a public forum. Just my 2 cents.

 

We're still waiting for the unified shader drivers for it , isn't the x200 an IGP as well? comparable to the 6150?

 

I'm almost certain no one here was "attacking" him. I've asked super stupid questions on this forum before. Don't believe me? Just search for threads with my name. He asked a legitament question, our "exagerated" responses only served to show just how big of a difference there really is between the two cards.

EDIT: x200M is an integrated card. In my opinion powerful for an integrated card. It didn't ever let me down . I do however prefer my 8600M GT over it though lol.

 

Well technically sarcasm is "stating the obvious with derogatory intent" so all you sarcastic ppl have given him reason to take offense
I just pointed him to the sticky
I wonder if we're gonna have an Intel X3100 vs ATi X3100 thread

 

FINE THEN! MAKE ME FEEL BAD MEANIE!

on a serious note:

Info on X3100:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accelerator-X3100.2176.0.html

Info on 8600M GS:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-8600M-GS.3707.0.html

That shows which one is better and why. Anyways goodluck!

 

And the 8600's obviously better, it's made by NVidia

 

Screw those, the challenger 2 owns em all

 

As posted, is this a serious question? Pleas refer to the GPU Guide next time, it's right in the stickies.