Slashdot Mirror


Integrated 3D Graphics Motherboard Round-Up

Keefe writes "In the recent past, integrated video was seldom a viable solution for hardcore computer gamers. Enthusiasts shunned from motherboards with integrated video, and opted to buy ones without it, in additional to a much faster ATi or Nvidia-powered graphics accelerator. Today, the picture is beginning to change. The last few integrated motherboards sported decent graphics chipsets, like the Nvidia NForce (GeForce2 MX), ATI IGP320 (Radeon VE), or Intel 845G. Techware Labs has taken a look at the current integrated 3D video chipsets on the market and concluded how they perform in the latest 3D software."

10 of 188 comments (clear)

  1. Uhh... by Spazntwich · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The submitter makes it sound like these integrated video platforms are good enough for gamers. WTF? At no point in history, including now, have integrated video accelerators offered acceptable performance for current games. Sure, these things might run Quake 3, but they better, seeing as it's so many years old.

    True gamers are never going to use integrated video, when even the cheapest of new videocards spank them in all terms of performance, and most joe blows don't need anything approaching good 3d performance in their integrated video, because their activities consist of emailing and web surfing.

    These motherboards are trying to fill a niche that doesn't exist. Power users will ignore the integrated video, and normal users (if they have any say in what goes into their box) will get cheaper integrated video solutions that don't cost as much as 'supAr fast 3d shared memory game integrated 3d card things'.

    1. Re:Uhh... by Ciannait · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I take it you haven't really looked at the specs for this integrated chipset.

      While it's convenient to think that there are two and only two groups of users - the ubergamers, and the drooling morons - this isn't the case. If it were, there would be two, and only two, cards on the market. The "eke out 3 more fps in Q3A" card, and the "maybe it'll play The Sims" card.

      These integrated chipsets have a lot of nice features, including digital 5.1 sound. It's essentially like having a GeForce4 MX (a card I have in my machine at home) with a good quality sound-card - only, two fewer cards to buy.

      Not everyone likes having a mess of cards in their PC. Not everyone needs bleeding edge. Lots of people are perfectly happy not having the latest-greatest.

      That's who this integrated chipset is for.

      --
      A good traveller has no fixed plans and is not intent on arriving.
    2. Re:Uhh... by epukinsk · · Score: 5, Funny

      These motherboards are trying to fill a niche that doesn't exist.

      You mean the OEMs-looking-for-cheap-marketable-components market?

      Yeah, that market never existed, never will. What are these guys thinking?

      Erik

    3. Re:Uhh... by Hoser+McMoose · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I know that people tend to really hate it when I post facts instead of blathering out mindless opinions.. however I'm going to go with the facts anyway.

      Here's a link to some real and true benchmarks of the nForce 220 and 420 with their integrated graphics as compared to a GeForce2MX in Unreal Tournament and Max Payne.

      For UT, the nForce 420 is 9.5% slower than the GeForce2 MX (at 1024x768), and for Max Payne the nForce is just under 15% slower. That's a far cry from "1/3rd the frame rate".

      Ohh, and the original nForce was available without integrated graphics as well (the nForce 415 chipset).

      Long story short, the nForce can and does play games just fine. It's not getting 200+ f/s at 1600x1200, but as long as you can get by with only 30-60f/s at 800x600, the nForce is up to the task. The nForce 2 should be about twice as fast since it has somewhat higher memory bandwidth and some new stuff which reduces it's dependance on memory bandwidth.

  2. postgresopengl by j1mmy · · Score: 5, Funny

    The motherboard in our DB machine at work has an ATI Rage chip integrated. Especially useful for rendering our logs in 3D. It doesn't support vertex shaders, though, so the lighting on the timestamps is kind of shoddy.

  3. Re:Good enough for gamers? by nilstar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It does make sense from this perspective - integrate a cheap graphics core now. If the consumer wants to upgrade, most of these core have an AGP slot (if the mobo maker has one that is). Cheap now, Cheap later (when an decent AGP card usable for then-in-styles games is cheap).

    It is also cheap in the future - when these mobos become outdated the law of supply & demand (and discounting) - will make this cheaper than the then-current motherboard - with the added caveot that you can build a really cheap system (ie, no vid card) - or you can buy an AGP card.... as some solutions like Nforce 2 have superiour memory controller solutions - even compared to intel/via's next generation (dual channel ddr for example).

    --
    ===> An eye for an eye makes everyone blind - MG
  4. Video for the Masses by BaldingByMicrosoft · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't be elitist. There are plenty of gamers out there that can't bloody afford the latest and greatest, much less upgrade every two years (6 months?). Some folks are actually interested in knowing what the best integrated video is, even if it doesn't compare to your Robocop 6000 SUX.

    If only they had a sample of the NVIDIA nForce2 to compare. Then again, maybe they did -- anyone seen a mirror? I loaded their page once, it linked a supposed mirror, but it was for a 40x CDRW review...

  5. Re:Video on motherboard == Stupid. by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "Then WTF would you want an integrated graphics chip?"

    If you're a bussiness. Seriously, most of the computers at work, even the ones we got receantly, have something like a Matrox G400 or a GeForce 2 MX or soemthing like that. There is just no need for a fast 3d card because it is for work, not for games. Now some of the systems come with built-in video cards and this is rather nice. Saves money and it's all interrgated. Does just fine for office apps.

    Not everyone needs the latest greatest accelerator. Yes, I have a GeForce 4 in my home computer, I play games here. At work I'd be fine with an integrated graphics card.

  6. the latest and greatest is largely unnecessary by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You can play Everquest, Ultima Online (3D client,) America's Army, Warcraft 3, all Sims versions, and every half-life mod known to man with a GeForce2 MX and an Athlon 1 ghz quite nicely. It may not be as pretty as your more powerful cards, but your gaming experience with older gear is still quite good. You're not really missing out on the most popular gaming venues with an old system.

    Also, it's often not a matter of not being able to afford the card, but a matter of interest. If the low-end integrated video can play the more popular titles, it's possible that the player might develop an interest in gaming that he didn't have when he bought the machine (reason no. 1 to ALWAYS make sure you have proper expansion slots!)

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  7. Re:Video on motherboard == Stupid. by stew77 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Then WTF would you want an integrated graphics chip?

    You save
    • money
    • space
    • cooling
    • installation trouble

    And if you use your computer not for 3D work or gaming, there probably won't be a reason to upgrade for the next 3 years. Doing my daily work, I can't tell a difference between a TNT and a GeForce4.