[ZeeKid2k10]

What does this means ? You Have: 2.5 GHz Performance Rated at: 5.63 GHz
Is Intel i3 380m good processor ?

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit
Intel i3 380m 2.53 GHZ(Fall 2010 Processor)
Intel HD Graphics(Spring 2010 Graphics Card)

Atheros AR9285 Wireless Network Adapter(Spring 2010 Wireless Card)
4GB of DDR3 Ram expandable to 8GB(Early 2011 Memory Ram)
1600 x 900 HD LED Backlight Screen(Early 2011 LED Screen)
500 GB of Hard Drive

This post has been edited by ZeeKid2k10 on Sunday, Apr 8 2012, 03:29

[SyphonPayne]

i3 is not bad but the Intel graphics are going to hold you back from playing most modern games at decent settings.

[YankeesPwnMets]

Its good enough for day to day use.

[Slamman]

The earlier Nehalem (?) i3, i5 Core processors have embedded graphics, Intel HD, which IS BETTER then the GMA series all told, but it can't match wits with discrete graphics, it CAN RUN GTA games, however, they will have issues, I mean GTA 4 of course, the install requirement is having Shader Model 3.0 support.

The Atheros I'm familiar with from a mid-2000 Toshiba laptop, I used it well enough, though it was G- rated, rather then N

A new Wireless standard, Ab I think, is proposed to succeed the n band WiFi, and it's going to operate above 2.4 and 5Ghz ranges where the most traffic is, IIRC

Depending on the motherboard, some discrete graphic option MAY exist, as in my case I made clear, Acer's 4710 has a revision mobo supporting MXM cards, but this is not promoted generally, you have to dig about for the info!!

[ZeeKid2k10]

QUOTE (Slamman @ Sunday, Apr 8 2012, 06:02)

The earlier Nehalem (?) i3, i5 Core processors have embedded graphics, Intel HD, which IS BETTER then the GMA series all told, but it can't match wits with discrete graphics, it CAN RUN GTA games, however, they will have issues, I mean GTA 4 of course, the install requirement is having Shader Model 3.0 support. The Atheros I'm familiar with from a mid-2000 Toshiba laptop, I used it well enough, though it was G- rated, rather then N A new Wireless standard, Ab I think, is proposed to succeed the n band WiFi, and it's going to operate above 2.4 and 5Ghz ranges where the most traffic is, IIRC Depending on the motherboard, some discrete graphic option MAY exist, as in my case I made clear, Acer's 4710 has a revision mobo supporting MXM cards, but this is not promoted generally, you have to dig about for the info!!

My computer can GTA4 on Low settings 25 Fps

This post has been edited by ZeeKid2k10 on Sunday, Apr 8 2012, 06:41

[ZeeKid2k10]

QUOTE (SyphonPayne @ Sunday, Apr 8 2012, 04:45)

i3 is not bad but the Intel graphics are going to hold you back from playing most modern games at decent settings.

I can play most modern Games on medium settings but not high settings and average 25-30 fps still good enough

[Slamman]

None of those "modern" games will say they support Intel chipsets on their respective boxes, In the early 2000s, the move was away from any Intel graphics basically, since you had at most 32MB of video RAM, and shared Ram in many instances, which is beneficial if you have enough, but many people think it helps to slow the system's operation regardless

Intel's GMA at 3100 I believe will run GTA IV, but it's not going to be very fun, it just should work, and there's a mod I mentioned before that reduces the graphic traits for these gamers, they sacrifice a bit to get the game to run, and not spend $300 or more on graphics alone

[YankeesPwnMets]

QUOTE (ZeeKid2k10 @ Sunday, Apr 8 2012, 02:35)

QUOTE (SyphonPayne @ Sunday, Apr 8 2012, 04:45) i3 is not bad but the Intel graphics are going to hold you back from playing most modern games at decent settings. I can play most modern Games on medium settings but not high settings and average 25-30 fps still good enough

Modern = Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, DiRT 3, LA Noire, etc.

Your system will sh*t on itself if you try to run those games. Do you mind, tell me that games you play right now.

[Slamman]

You guys love to rain on people's parades. I wonder what you did in PC gaming only a few years back!? It musta been pretty painful! hahaha
I would add that internal graphics are still found in i3, and i5s now, but it's the second proliferation, Sandy Bridge, now to be improved further with Ivy Bridge Intel HD, and believe me, magazines are reporting that their gaming prowess has yet to be determined, I for one, think it shall be interesting, but don't expect 3D gaming miracles. It's just that there's space in the CPU for more graphics chips, so they can ramp up what it does onboard

[SyphonPayne]

HD 3000 in Sandy Bridge is a lot better than the Arrandale HD Graphics. HD 3000 is about equivalent to a 9400GT, or the HD 5450, if that helps to put things in perspective. HD 4000 (Ivy Bridge) will be approximately 40% faster. Then there's also the Intel driver issue, mainly being that most games simply aren't designed for Intel graphics.

[Slamman]

Of course, more then a few people have the ATI HD5450, and it can run GTA IV on PC, and Episodes as well, but perhaps a bit slower they tell me

[finn4life]

QUOTE (Slamman @ Monday, Apr 9 2012, 08:34)

You guys love to rain on people's parades. I wonder what you did in PC gaming only a few years back!?

The intention is not to rain on parades, we are giving the straight truth, better the truth than lying to people and then they end up with high expectations, purchase I high end game, and it doesn't run.

[Slamman]

It's not lying to say the game will run on "less then the best", which is always my point in this economy, and wanting to pinch some pennies!!

[ZeeKid2k10]

QUOTE (SyphonPayne @ Monday, Apr 9 2012, 05:31)

HD 3000 in Sandy Bridge is a lot better than the Arrandale HD Graphics. HD 3000 is about equivalent to a 9400GT, or the HD 5450, if that helps to put things in perspective. HD 4000 (Ivy Bridge) will be approximately 40% faster. Then there's also the Intel driver issue, mainly being that most games simply aren't designed for Intel graphics.

HD 3000 and Arrandale HD Graphics cards suck all they use shared memory. I research the HD 3000 Sandy Bridge is 15% faster than 1st gen Intel Graphics, One Game HD Graphics 1st Gen give u 30 fps and 2nd HD 3000 give u 39 fps.

[Slamman]

It's still High Def, baby! The main thing they focus on is not really beating dedicated gaming cards, but up to the demands of general HD PC use, and it's showing a change of focus rather then ignoring the need. I wound up using graphics cards if the prices
At least Ivy Bridge is using a new way to put a GPU chip inside the CPU core geography, with the die shrink