GMA X4500(GM45) benchmarks, 3DMark06, WIC

It looks like we have the first GMA X4500(GM45) benchmarks on the net. Here is the link: http://www.notebookjournal.de/praxis/79/3

Vista 7.15.10.1472 15.9 beta driver

3DMark06:
T8300+Geforce 8400M GS-1333
T9300+Geforce 8400M G-1044
X9100+GMA X4500-955
T9400+GMA X4500-949
T7700+GMA X3100-586
T7500+GMA X3100-555

World in Conflict 1024x768 Low:
T8300+Geforce 8400M GS-21
T9300+Geforce 8400M G-12
X9100+GMA X4500-16
T9400+GMA X4500-15
T7700+GMA X3100-11
T7500+GMA X3100-11

World in Conflict 1024x768 Very Low:
T8300+Geforce 8400M GS-27
T9300+Geforce 8400M G-15
X9100+GMA X4500-22
T9400+GMA X4500-21
T7700+GMA X3100-14
T7500+GMA X3100-14

(As you can see, the CPU doesn't really affect the results much)

GM45 will have 533MHz core clock in its final version, the GPU-Z claims its 475MHz, but can't tell whether its reporting wrong or the hardware is indeed at 475MHz(There will also be higher end GM47 with 640MHz core). The memory used isn't shown either. Whether they use DDR2-800 or DDR3-1066 will make a difference.

 

Nice! Intel's definitely cookin' up somethin' good! I can't wait!

 

Oh yeah?
T7500+Geforce 8600M GT OC- 5807

Anyways, good job to Intel.

 

Those benchmarks are about on par with my x1400 so i'd say the x4500 is pretty good for an igp.

 

Ya it looks like Intel is starting to get their act together, but ATI's 780G and nVIDIA's MCP78 seem to be ~33% faster. Anyway, it's pretty nice that all 3 chipset makers are raising the bar for budget graphics solutions. Just look how far Intel has come with this chipset compared to the 3 year old GMA900, which got ~60 marks in 3DMark06. Let's just hope that Intel won't disappoint us with their drivers like they did last time with the X3100.

-J.B.

 

There still is GM47 unaccounted for, and the most of the tests on the 780G and MCP78 are desktop versions. I think the fastest version(the desktop G45) should be able to perform par with the 8400M GS on 3DMark06 and WIC.

The 780G can yet be still faster by using HT3.0 supported processors like Turion Ultra and Phenom. Remember they use the Hypertransport bus for carrying the data from the integrated memory controller to the GPU.

 

Did you really have to post that?

 

I saw other benchmarks in which the Intel performed quite bad.

 

I assume that's because of the weak VS on the current version. The X4500 will have 2x faster VS. It looks like we'll have much more solid IGP this time. Let's see how it goes .

 

Overall still lacking IMO.

R61 with T9300/ NVS 140m scored over 2600.

 

im assuming these benchmarks were with the ddr3 memory?

 

no , I saw the new Intel tested not the old X3100 , I am talking about the X4500 being compared to the GF8400m GS.

I can't find the link now since I erased all my internet history this morning before my boss checked his computer, when I go back to my school on monday I will find it again.

maybe I expected too much for it(I thought it would beat the GF84GS).

PS.I think the X3100 is definitely under rated , it is more than capable for most of people who are not demanding or into gaming or hard core Video encoding decoding stuff.

 

The BEST IGP, which is AMD 780G, is still in the range of Geforce 8400GS. X4500 is gonna be competitive more with the Nvidia Geforce 8200 IGP.

I wasn't talking about the X3100. I was comparing to it. I responded to a previous post, you did not notice?

Yea, the best current IGP, 780G scores 1500 on a desktop configuration if you have a HTT3.0 supported processor.

This is definitely gonna be miles ahead of X3100 if the performance is consistent. The more meaningful part of all this is that the minimum baseline for developers will go up.

Halogod2007: It doesn't say.

 

Wait and see will probably be a new motto for laptop consumers on a really tight budget yet burdened with the urge to game on an IGP.

 

I thought AMD`s Puma platform was awesome. I`ll have to see which one is the better IGP in the end.

 

yea if those are legit they are not really impressive, the AMD platform looks more promising

 

Still need to improve the HD side of the equation, but definitely a nice step forward, especially if it starts with most things working and not waiting for future driver promises, because they lost that cred in the last gen.

Anywhoo, nice first look hopefully others are as positive.

 

One thing to remember is compatibility lets not get fooled by benchmarks & hardware specs like many of us did with the x3100...

 

Wow still trash, but it just proves that the drivers still suck considering its twice as fast as GMA965 yet the performance increase isnt that. I think the X3100 still has a lot more potential, simply due to the fact its ability to play games is so inconsistent, heck it plays HL2EP1 with full HDR yet cant play the likes of Deus Ex IW. Intel have only made the chip have faster clocks, which means well be seeing more driver support

 

they also improved Vertex Shader support, so it's not just an x3100 with higher clocks... well, lets wait and see

 

Disappointing from the earlier reports I read about, that promised such dramatic increases in performance (that's hype for ya! ), but still a step in the right direction I think.

 

by the time it comes out the nvidia 8400 would probably be much more affordable maybe intel is getting their act together or its just hype when the real performance comes around everyone is gona be dissapointed

 

The 2x claim is comparing to GM47. The GM45 is around 1.6-1.7x, which is the one they shown on the review. Now one of the problems on the X3100 is inconsistent performance. I think the X4500 should be able to make it more consistent.

Its true. There is currently no competitor to the 780G IGP from AMD. But it might have a chance against the Geforce 8200 IGP on the 780U IGP from Nvidia.

 

Hope so, as somebody said, they will be improving Vertex performance, playing older games is a real pain, but you cant play new games either!

 

It'll be interesting to see how the x4500 fares with the 780g (mobile version) with updated drivers.