How good is a 9800 PRO comared with integrated graphics?

[Maximilian]

Just trying to get an idea on how far integrated graphics have progressed over the past 4 years. The 9800 PRO was my first real gaming card and it was fooking amazing, have integrated graphics caught up with it? Is that new intel X3000 thing better? I gather the 945/950 integrated graphics are much poorer than a 9800 PRO but theyre older so... Whats the score with integrated stuff today?

 

[will889]

9800 pro is still light years better than anything IGP - however the architecture is so old (agp) that support in drivers, and the lack of expandability on the agp platform is waning or nil (depending). Also, the 9800 pro lacks sm3-4 spec. Not that anything IGP is SM3 "viable" in terms of gaming.

 

[g8wayrebel]

Not only is the above true , but depending on the processor in question , any sound card and dedicated graphics will make a huge difference by freeing the processor to do it's job and the GPU to do the same.
To answer the question though , there are some high rated boards that test very close to a standard socket 478 3.0 processor and 9800 pro with the tests that you would have run for graphics then. 3D mark- 06 comes to mind specifically.
They have progressed tremendously to the point of at least usable for non demanding and older games.

 

[nerp]

The HD3200 on the 780G might give the 9800 Pro a run for its money in some situations. Any serious gaming with high settings and resolutions demands a dedicated card, though.

 

[Maximilian]

So even after 4-5 years its still better, cool.

 

[Fox5]

The 780G probably beats it. 780G I think is around the same pixel pushing power, with less memory bandwidth, and way more shader compute ability. For older games, 9800 pro probably wins, newer games I could see the 780g winning. The two chips are of a comparable transistor count too.

 

[Face2Face]

Man, I miss my 9500 Pro!!! used to tear up some games!

 

[nerp]

Originally posted by: Fox5
The 780G probably beats it. 780G I think is around the same pixel pushing power, with less memory bandwidth, and way more shader compute ability. For older games, 9800 pro probably wins, newer games I could see the 780g winning. The two chips are of a comparable transistor count too.

Sounds right.

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Fox5
The 780G probably beats it. 780G I think is around the same pixel pushing power, with less memory bandwidth, and way more shader compute ability. For older games, 9800 pro probably wins, newer games I could see the 780g winning. The two chips are of a comparable transistor count too.

well, the 780G can flat out RUN code that the 9800PRO does not even support, that is DX10, of course everything DX10 has a DX9 version as well at the moment. And it is not like the game is going to be playable on DX10 anyways on an IGP...

 

[nenforcer]

I would take your 9800 discrete card over any integrated graphics from Intel. If its between the AMD/Nvidia integrated graphics then the very latest models will probably be faster or at least support newer features.

 

[chane]

The specs on the ATI Radeon 9800Pro 128MB card say it can output 1920 x 1200 resolution, which I want to do so it will drive my EIZO monitor at its native resolution. But will this make the card run hotter?

In any case, since I’ll only be using the card’s DVI-D output, there will then be no digital to analog video conversion taking place, correct? If so, would there at least be a little less heat output from the card, since it will have to do that much less work?

 

[VirtualLarry]

The specs on the ATI Radeon 9800Pro 128MB card say it can output 1920 x 1200 resolution, which I want to do so it will drive my EIZO monitor at its native resolution. But will this make the card run hotter?

In any case, since I’ll only be using the card’s DVI-D output, there will then be no digital to analog video conversion taking place, correct? If so, would there at least be a little less heat output from the card, since it will have to do that much less work?

The heat output of a RAMDAC running at 1920x1200 is pretty negligible.

 

[Munky]

I tested a AMD 3300 IGP and it pretty much equaled a 9800p in 3dmark06. It might have even beat it slightly.

 

[EarthwormJim]

Pretty much any recent IGP from Nvidia or AMD will be at least as fast if not faster and potentially offer more features. Like hardware accelerated h.264 decoding and DX10.

 

[happy medium]

Pretty much any recent IGP from Nvidia or AMD will be at least as fast if not faster and potentially offer more features. Like hardware accelerated h.264 decoding and DX10.

The 785g is faster then a 9800pro

 

[GaiaHunter]

I think this chart is decently accurate.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/graphics-card-radeon-hd-5870-geforce-gtx-480,2621-6.html

Nice to see that Intel is at Geforce 3 Ti500 level...

 

[dug777]

The 785g is faster then a 9800pro

I am not sure where it stands compared to very bad discrete cards, but can tell you that while my 3450 generated solid 3Dmarks compared to the 9800 pro and 6600GT without AA, that did not translate to great gaming scores even in games that were fine on my 9800 pro and 6600GT, especially once you enabled AA, that just smashed my 3450 whereas my 9800 pro and 6600GT held up very nicely.

I really miss my 9800 pro, that was probably my one true love in the graphics realm

 

[tokie]

The 785g is faster then a 9800pro

If that is the case, then the 320m in the new MacBook Pro (integrated) would stomp the 9800 Pro. Potentially it could come close to even an X800XT.