ATI Radeon HD3200 vs. Intel GMA X4500

With the coming of the new integrated solutions from ATI and Intel, which one do you think is best or just prefer in general taking into account battery, heat, performance and driver support?

 

My bet is on the HD 3200.

 

Intel never gonna win vs other GPUs.

 

Never say never....

But yeah, never .

Seriously though, the HD3200 is most likely gonna be better. Intel have become much better though.

 

the hd3200 is almost twice as fast as the x4500. the hd3200 gets around 1700 3d marks the x4500 around 900

 

i would assume the intel's x4500 consumes less battery power though.

 

dont stop looking at Intel just yet, history might repeat itself
people are quick to forget just how good the i740 was
if they want to throw a value card at the market that can compete they will

but of course other "licensing" and "contractual" factors come into play since they have been jumping in and out of bed with Nvidia and (what was) ATI.

 

intel MIGHT make a big comeback some day... but that day isn't today by a long shot.

3 x 0 = 0

the ati card is going to be a lot better.

 

I'm with ATI/AMD this time around.

 

larrabee might change that

 

the ati 3200 is on par with a low end dedicated card. As for intel they have come a looooooong way since the gma950.

 

Much in the same way GM soured an entire nation on diesel engines in the late 70's to early-80's, Intel did much the same with millions of us who suffered through the GMA950 and before! I'm nauseous just thinking about it!

Thanks, I'll take the ATI!

 

Not saying much

 

Lol

performance: 3200>4500 by a very good margin
battery: 4500>3200
Driver support: Id have to go with ATI/AMD since the whole x3100 issues people had when that IGP was released.

As for heat it will all depend on the manufacture and how thier cooling system is setup, notebook size, and other specs that can effect internal heat (e.g. HDD speed, processor speed, ect). Personally Ill be going 3200 for the 12in gaming ability when my current 200m 12in dies....if it ever does die.

That better

 

I'd have to go with the 3200HD here as well.... coming from a X3100 that always had driver problems, so far my ATI gpu has performed great without any issues... for an integrated GPU, the thing is awesome... granted, anything integrated is limited from the start, but for what it is, it works and performs great. Portal and TF2 on high smoothly, GRID, Xplane9, Battlestations Midway, IL2, Company of Heroes, etc are all a blast to play on it.

 

HD3200 is the best integrated graphics performer released so far. Intel needs to double their performance just to CATCH UP. And by that time the next AMD integrated graphics will be released. Better yet, they might just be integrated straight into the CPU.

This is one area where EVERYONE is lagging behind AMD/ATI right now.

*sweaty with passion*

 

Hy,

anyone tried red alert 3 on hd3200? is it powerful enough for it?

 

Holy topic bump!
Jakabx2, please post this in the Can My Notebook Run It? thread, and keep in mind how old threads are when you post in them.

 

My HTPC has the HD3200 I have not tested it with anything other than... HTPC stuff though.

 

My Intel GMA 900 has the WORST graphics drivers that I have ever seen. My framerate in Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast varies from 100 FPS to 8 FPS (when an storm trooper or some other crappy enemy comes on screen). My Toshiba 2805 with a 16MB GeForce2 Go and Pentium3 850 only went down to like 15FPS in heavy fighting scenes and maxed out graphics options. Also, HL2 is more playable on the Toshiba 2805 with 256MB of SDRAM while it is unplayable (6-8FPS) on the GMA 900 with a Pentium M 2.13GHz CPU and 2GB DDR2 RAM! Talk about crap! AVOID INTEL IGPs IF YOU CAN!

Oh, and I forgot to mention that Portal and TF2 simply crash after a few minutes with a "memory could not be read" error with XP and Vista with different driver versions.

-J.B.

 

I have the GMA950 in my EEE 1000H and I like it, not meant for gaming but it runs emulators like a champ.

 

@Jstn - That's because the GMA 900 doesn't even have hardware T&L, let alone vertex shaders. I'm honestly surprised you're even trying to run Portal and TF2 on that kind of hardware!

@Vicious - No argument here. My old TravelMate's GMA 950 worked like a champ on Project64.

Oh, and I think that there's a new king of the IGPs now - just wait for the GeForce 9400M G to get more popular. 2000+ in 3DMark06.

 

Don't. Get. Intel. IGPs.

I have one, and I've learned my lesson. Yes, I know from the start that X3100 was never meant for heavy gaming, and I'm pretty satisfied with that condition. So I put in old games, and when I updated my driver, it began acting up.

I don't hate it because it's slow for games. I hate it cuz Intel doesn't seem to bother releasing any good set of drivers at all.

And as far as I know, with a good rig and some overclockings, someone has even claimed to be able to run Crysis (the original, not Warhead) on Medium-High setting on 3200. Plus, If it ever gets too slow, you can always opt for a Hybrid CrossFire. That way, the money you invested in the 3200 is not wasted, and you get a boost in performance. Props for AMD/ATI for releasing such cool IGP!

I myself is planning to get a Radeon for my new desktop when I could afford to buy one. 4650/70 are cheap, but powerful discrete cards.

 

intel IGPS suck big time, my friends cant even play tiberium wars lol. xD

ATI+AMD FTW!!11!