Mobile Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 4500MHD ~VS~ 256MB ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3450

HI i am looking to get a new laptop and have been offered the the cheaper Mobile Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 4500MHD
or
256MB ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3450

I was jsut curious how much of a difference there was between these 2 and how capable hey each where of playing higher end games.
Thanks.

 

I personally stay away from all Intel graphics solutions. and there is quite a difference. the Intel chip is integrated, which means that it sucks for anything that has to do with gaming. unless your running pacman, in which case it should work Also, it will share ram with the system, and use the CPU for most of the calculations. The ATI chip is a discrete graphics solution, meaning that it can game. It doesnt share memory with the system, or use the CPU for most of its calculations.


In a nutshell, anything that is integrated means that the CPU will do most of the calculations. The "graphics chip" is there only for the special calculations. Anything that is listed as a discrete solution means that it is like its desktop companion, in that it is an entirely self contained system.

 

I agree. If you're looking to do any sort of 3d gaming, the Intel is integrated graphics and will not perform very well.

 

Thanks i am looking to buy a new laptop and need a dedicated video card.
Do you know if its possible to put them in myself?

 

Disagree on several of the 'integrated sucks' comment.......

The 4500MHD GPU does NOT use the cpu for most calculations, it's a full-fledged GPU, self contained for anything other than memory. It has on-board HDTV, BR, and videoconference hardware accelleration and is supported by all of the major and most of the minor codecs.

As far as memory usage goes, the Intel GMA driver only takes what is needed at any one time. I have one machine that is reporting 3.71Gb of usable physical memory out of 4 Gb installed (Vista, SP2).

The ATi chip in question here has a hard limit of 256Mb ram while an integrated Intel GMA 4500MHD can and will use up to 1100Mb of ram (as necessary). I have seen the current rev of the GMA mobile driver idle along using only 65 Mb of ram.

What is your perceived need for a higher-end GPU? Perceived Need can cost a lot of $$$ especially if you're getting it for bragging points with some fanbois.

By the way, ALL laptop GPUs are integrated. Other than some high-end products (think of sager and the like), the GPU is soldered on to the mainboard and can't be changed out.

So that 'nutshell summary' need to be reworked.

 

My ATI chip that is listed as integrated can't do anything. it has a hard limit of 256 MB, no matter how much memory i put into the system. Its supposed to share memory with the system. Explain that one.

And im still right....
"Compared to other modern integrated graphic cards like the Nvidia GeForce 9400M (G 102MNVIDIA GeForce G 105M) or AMD ATI Radeon HD 3200, the GMA 4500M HD noticably slower and provides less optimized drivers for games."

Check it out.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Graphics-Media-Accelerator-4500MHD-GMA-X4500MHD.9883.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-3450.9593.0.html

 

:shrug:

Selective quoting from another web site doesn't help your cause much.

Here is another quote:

"The following benchmarks were conducted with a FSC Amilo SI3655 notebook and an underclocked (as presample) Express 45 (only 475 MHz instead of 533 MHz as stated above). Therefore, the above values can be higher with production samples and newer drivers."

A guy testing GPUs on a substandard laptop with an underclocked pre-release enginering sample chipset (and likely pre-release drivers) isn't doing anyone a favor.

There is no dispute that an ATi or maybe a modern NV laptop GPU will outperform an Intel GPU on frame-rate sensitive gaming. But your other assertions are way off base.

 

What's your point. I provided a link to the article. Would you rather have me cut and paste the entire article? I can do that if you like... i didnt realize you enjoyed having people perform redundant actions.

What other assertions? that the chips that are dubbed integrated suck?
I do believe i posted that i personally do not prefer them. possibly because that is my opinion. not necessarily fact. try comprehending before posting.

 

A small lesson:

Shared memory for a GPU = BAD

Dedicated memory "" "" = GOOD

 

The ATi 3450 will give you better performance in games (although it's not a gaming card at all...you won't be able to play CoD4 at anything higher than 800x600). The Intel 4500MHD will be enough for HD video playing, but not games. However, your battery life will be significantly longer with the Intel card.

 

I agree with you. If we don't play heavy game, then 4500MHD is best choice.

 

Problem is, Intel often takes a long time to optimize their drivers for hardware-accelerated video playback. CPU usage can still be significantly higher when playing back H.264 video as opposed to with the ATI chip. The one single benefit to Intel graphics is better battery life; I don't consider the cost savings to be worthwhile when ATI does everything else that much better.

In my case, I've ordered a laptop with switchable graphics. ATI Radeon 3470HD for the good stuff, switchable to Intel 4500HD on-the-fly for when battery life is more important. Best of both worlds.

 

Intel already has validated WDDM 1.1 drivers for Win7.

Sounds very much a lot of people haven't been keeping up with anything other than ATi.

 

Despite that, I dont think the 4500MHD offers as much performance as the 3450, and as other have stated.

 

I believe that is incorrect. Discrete refers to having memory seperate from the regular memory, dedicated to graphics data. Integrated refers not to the fact that the graphics chip is soldered to the PCB (as 99% of mobile graphics are), but to the fact that those GPUs lack their own memory, and have to use the system's RAM.

Also, integrated graphics does not mean that the CPU takes most of the load that would otherwise be on the GPU. The only instance when that is partially true is with Intel graphics chipsets that do not have the "HD" designation, which means they are not capable of decoding HD video - the CPU instead handles that.

The ATI Radeon 3450M is more powerful than any of the Intel GMA offerings, but in either case, it will not be pleasant to play more demanding modern games.

 

My Studio 15 has the ATi 3450 graphics card, and it's not a gaming card by any stretch of the imagination. It will do Half-Life 2 and Counter-Strike: Source at native res, and that's about it. Mind you, even the 4500MHD can do that.

Dedicated graphics are, of course, more powerful than integrated ones, but the 3450 isn't really significantly more powerful than the 4500MHD.

 

At least by a hair's end, the Radeon 3450 edges out over the Intel 4500. Integrated solutions work best for batter longetivity. If light gaming will have it, as Mastershroom said, then the 4500 isn't bad as long as it's not heavy duty DX10 gaming.

 

How is it possible to have both?

 

Those types of laptops have the standard integrated graphics and then have a separate higher-powered gpu. Then either through the bios, some physical switch or via software/drivers, you can switch between using either gpu. These types of hybrid systems have been around a few years...

 

youtube - gaming 4500HD and you'll see some evidence that you can game with it.

COD Modern Warfare

In comparison with the ATI chip though, I think the ATI will be better for gaming.

 

I disagree - I've been wasting so much of my allocated 'productive' time being able to play CoD4 at 1280x800 low on a HD3200/64MB sideport.

 

That's very interesting. The game is absolutely unplayable for me at 1024x768 with all settings and textures at their minimum options on the 3450.

 

Vista mucked around with my PowerPlay settings so I couldn't have 'maximum power save' for battery and 'maximum performance' for plugged in within the same plan. It would just choose one - could that have happened to you?

 

I am always on High Performance mode, and I've made sure to adjust the PowerPlay settings accordingly.

 

These are the settings I've been using:
ocau.com/pix/d3k4u
ocau.com/pix/gmazt

Have you tried other games? Far Cry 2 perhaps?

 

well the advantage of the mobility radeon anyways is its switchable so you win both sides. only downer is cost

 

Only on some machines.

I've tested it on the HD 4330 which beat the 3450 in the Crysis benchmarks and FC2 runs ok at medium res, mostly low settings. The gameplay however is abysmal, though that's nothing to do with GPU.....serisously, who wants to walk for miles through Africa just to kill someone.

 

Being the rare owner of both cards (T400 has switchable graphics), I'd say get the integrated option for the additional battery life. It makes a significant difference (on the magnitude of two hours). Spend the money you save on a gaming desktop machine, and take the notebook on the road with you.

The 4500MHD handles Half-Life 2 brilliantly. I can play CS Source on full settings with no problem.

On the other hand, the 3450/70 will give you some extra frames (meaningless past 70+ FPS), but less battery life and really isn't considered a "gaming" card anyway. I'm guessing you're purchasing a more portable (smaller-form factor) machine since those were the only two options offered.

Go integrated.

 

"Mobility Radeon" does not mean you have switchable graphics. That's just the term that AMD/ATI uses to name its notebook graphics card line.

The only switchable graphics laptops that I can think of now are the Thinkpad T400/T500 laptops, the Sony Vaio Z, the Dell Studio XPS 13 (hybrid SLI), the Alienware M15x, and some models of the Apple Macbooks. Sony has been using switchable graphics in its ultraportables for a while now, but the benefit was small without the ability to switch it in Windows - a reboot was previously required.

Personally, I would choose integrated graphics if I had the choice between the two graphics solutions mentioned by the OP.

 

Thanks for your input.
I did go with the integrated because i got a sick deal on it.
Got a Dell Studio 1537