which intel graphics card is better

well i dont know much about laptops and im planing to get my 1st laptop at
best buy, i found this sony vaio laptop which has almost all my needs. the only problem is the graphics card which is a: Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator X3100 with 358MB video memory; VGA-out with Smart Display; is that better than the usual :Intel® Graphics Media Accelerator 950 with 224MB video memory; VGA-out with Smart Display Sensor, that i see in most of the laptops on bestbuy?
im mainly using the laptop for games like CS, Fear, halo, homework, net surfing, chating
by the way im planing to get this laptop Sony VAIO Notebook
Model: VGN-FZ145E/B from best buy for $1200 please give some opinions about this laptop, i want to know if this laptop is worth buying

 

The X3100 is better than the GMA950. However, if you wish to do some gaming, you should consider a dedicated video card, even if it is a low end one. Integrated cards are by no means meant for any kind of performance work, they are merely for 2D rendering on a desktop environment.

 

oh ok thanks and if i want a dedicated video card how much would that cost at minimum

 

There are laptops with dedicated cards that be found for anything above $1,000.

 

Hard to tell, prices in notebooks with dedicated cards can vary a lot depending on many factors.

Here is an Asus F3 with an ATI X1700, one of the most powerful video cards availible in a notebook. Price is $1,228.99

 

This is a good asus and a good video card which surely will suit your needs. But if you want to have some more horsepower for the future I'll suggest you to get a notebook with an Nvidia GeForce 7900gs which is nearly 1.4x faster. One model with it on board it's the Gateway NX860XL for around 1500$ and it has a very good conf.
If you want you can write the full config of the sony vaio and we can help you further.

There is a forum post which can give you a better idea of notebook videocards http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=39568

 

oh ok um here the site i was looking at on bestbuy about that sony vaio
http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp?skuId=8346603&type=product&id=1177717722882

 

btw do u know why there is a intel core 2 duo and also a intel centrino duo on it
i thought there was supose to be only one in a computer

 

Intel Core 2 Duo is the name of the processor. Intel Centrino Duo is the name of the platform. The Centrino platform consists of the processor, chipset (integrated graphics would fall into the chipset category), and Intel PROSet wireless card. You need all 3 to call it a Centrino laptop.

 

The X3100 will be better then current low end dedicated cards when the hardware drivers are finally released, so it's not a great idea to be recommending even a low end 'dedicated' card over the X3100....at least, not until we have a true idea. It's easily possible that the x3100 will outperform the Go7200/X1300 class.

 

Based on Intels track record, I could not recommend one of their GPU's over a low end NV or ATI solution right now based solely on "promises" it migh be worthwhile, but based on everything from intels past, I wouldnt hold my breath. Their cards have always been weak, but moreover, driver support and game support in general has always been sorely lacking, and I dont expect that to improve much until they decide to get fully involved in the gaming performance market. At least with NV and ATI you know what you are getting into and have a good idea if it will or will not will suit your current needs.

 

I would usually agree, except that they have demonstrated these new drivers in beta form, and they were running Half Life 2 on high settings, and Call of Duty 2 on unspecified, but nice looking settings also. So it's a bit more then a simple promise, not to be taken at 100% face value but a good indication I think that it's going to be respectable.

 

Overall support still remains to be seen, and half life 2 is a pretty old title, I could run it decent settings on my X1300 in my E1505, , I'm not trying to say its a bad solution, I just cant recommend and intel solution to someone that wants to game right now, if they regularly update the drivers,and fix issues that come up in a timely matter, then I might change my tune, my guess is this will be just like the Kyros,Chromes, whatever matrox last put into the mix...pahrelia or something? They werent the best chips out there,though they were capable at their time, but there were serious issues in major games that never got resolved, much like ATI's cards before they decided to take on Nvidia full bore with the radeon series. The graphics chip is only as good as its latest driver revision, a lot of folks gripe about Nvidias "The way its meant to be played" program, but its a real blessing to gamers, especially with nvidia hardware, NV working hand in hand with the developers mean we get games that push the hardware, and will work with said hardware, I dont see intel offering that kind of commitment right now especially for an IGP, they may when they finally do target the serous gaming market, the latest offering is by far the best, but they are still playing catch up.

 

I would have to say that the X3100 is much better, and for the standard user's needs, even if you do do gaming, this will still suffice.

 

I defintely think that the X3100 is better than the GMA950 BUT you should really be thinking about a dedicated video card!

 

oops I forgot that I'd already replied - sorry.

 

DX10 cards that will whip the X3100 are around the corner...and most DX9 cards out now will whip the X3100 as well. Optimized drivers or not, the hardware performance is in the 3dMark scores and will not get much better at all. If you're going to play games, wait for something like the 8400 cards to come out.