Intel GMA X3100.. looking for some info

TurnX

Senior member
Jan 19, 2006
677
0
76
Thanks to a nice deal my father is getting me from Acer, in the next week or so I will be picking up the Acer 6920. C2D 2.0ghz, 4gb ram, etc., but for video it has the GMA X3100. For the past few years I have been strictly using a desktop, so I payed little attention to laptop graphics. I assume that since its not a Nvidia or ATI card then its not very good, but like I said I have no idea. I wont be doing much gaming on it, mainly will be using various adobe apps, but I am curious as to what I could run if I so decided to game. So if anyone has any bechmarks, info, etc on it it would be greatly appreciated.
 

imported_Kiwi

Golden Member
Jul 17, 2004
1,375
0
0
Actually, the drivers haven't unlocked all of the claimed features / functions, making me wonder whether it's like the nForce mobile chips -- defective. Because of that, games that test for T&L, and other IGP omissions, will CTD or error out with the X3100 (Oblivion, many others).
 

hans007

Lifer
Feb 1, 2000
20,212
17
81
its probably ok, and if you dont game much its probably better to get integrated as it doesnt use much power at all (the chipset tdp doesnt rise on intel igps versus non igp)
 

adlep

Diamond Member
Mar 25, 2001
5,287
6
81
Originally posted by: DarkRogue
http://www.notebookcheck.net/M...chmark-List.844.0.html

It ranks #102, lower than my Mobility Radeon X1300, and lower than the Mobility Radeon 9600 from my 4 year old laptop. :p
Still, it's decent and doable for gaming, just don't expect crazy high fps, and lower the settings.

This is an excellent reference page - thanks for that link.
:thumbsup:

Also, AFAIK the GMA X3100 is the chip that they put in regular MacBooks (not Pros).
 

Insomniator

Diamond Member
Oct 23, 2002
6,294
171
106
Depends on what kinda games you like to play, but It could run things like Wc3 and probably Counterstrike Source, which for many people is all they ever need...
 

tcsenter

Lifer
Sep 7, 2001
18,338
253
126
Originally posted by: DarkRogue
It ranks #102, lower than my Mobility Radeon X1300, and lower than the Mobility Radeon 9600 from my 4 year old laptop. :p
Both those Mobility products are discrete GPUs, not integrated solutions, as are the top 80 or so spots on the list.
 

IlllI

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2002
4,927
10
81
Originally posted by: tcsenter
Originally posted by: DarkRogue
It ranks #102, lower than my Mobility Radeon X1300, and lower than the Mobility Radeon 9600 from my 4 year old laptop. :p
Both those Mobility products are discrete GPUs, not integrated solutions, as are the top 80 or so spots on the list.


thank you captn' obvious
 

DarkRogue

Golden Member
Dec 25, 2007
1,243
3
76
I'm aware they were discrete, but when I was shopping for a replacement for my T42 laptop, I expected integrated to at least catch up to the Mobility 9600 after 4-5 years.
Besides, the OP wanted benchmarks, and that site has it, along with others for easy reference.
 

tcsenter

Lifer
Sep 7, 2001
18,338
253
126
Originally posted by: DarkRogue
I'm aware they were discrete, but when I was shopping for a replacement for my T42 laptop, I expected integrated to at least catch up to the Mobility 9600 after 4-5 years.
This expectation would not have been consistent with actual trends over the past eight years. Integrated graphics are typically achieving par with entry-level discrete GPUs that are four to five years-old. e.g. the GeForce 6200's and Radeon X1300's. The Mobility R9600 was solidly a mid-range GPU when it was introduced four years ago.
 

imported_Kiwi

Golden Member
Jul 17, 2004
1,375
0
0
Originally posted by: tcsenter

This expectation would not have been consistent with actual trends over the past eight years. Integrated graphics are typically achieving par with entry-level discrete GPUs that are four to five years-old. e.g. the GeForce 6200's and Radeon X1300's. The Mobility R9600 was solidly a mid-range GPU when it was introduced four years ago.

Those are some truly odd introduction date mixups there.

The Mobility 9600 Pro is two months past its fifth birthday, while the X1300 Pro has two more months before it reaches its third birthday. I don't think Intel (given its failed drivers) has reached the level of the first of these two examples, although I would say that AMD has probably done so with its own respective IGPs.

http://www.gpureview.com/show_...php?card1=15&card2=328

Your third named example was actually contemporary with the X300, making those two the 4 year olds that AMD and nVIDIA matched performance with about a year ago, probably, with their IGPs at that time (and I don't know that the X3100 is even as good as those).

http://www.gpureview.com/show_...php?card1=189&card2=86


 

tcsenter

Lifer
Sep 7, 2001
18,338
253
126
Originally posted by: Kiwi
Those are some truly odd introduction date mixups there.
By "the 6200's and X1300's", I was referring to them as representative examples of entry-level GPU products vis-a-vis mid-range products like 6600's and X1600's. IOW, the bottom-most part in each GPU family, though I can see how my statement easily lends itself to your interpretation.

AMD 780G and NV GF8200 represent the most significant generational IGP performance increase that I've seen in the past 10 years. Typically, each new IGP product has barely offered 30% performance increase over its predecessor, if not less, in spite of IGP product cycles frequently spanning a full two years.

Edit: And I was wrong about the MR9600 being a mid-range GPU when introduced. It was the definitive top-performing notebook graphics product available until the MR9700.
 

octopus41092

Golden Member
Feb 23, 2008
1,841
0
76
Well, depends what you're going to be using it for. You could do Photoshop and such just fine. I have a laptop with that a Core Solo, and 2GB of RAM and it handles just fine in Photoshop. Now, games if you're talking like Quake 3, CS:S, Warcraft III, then yeah. It has no problem running those, just don't expect to be playing COD4 or Mass Effect on it. If you set everything to low then maybe. But the main purpose of that card is not for gaming.
 

Sylvanas

Diamond Member
Jan 20, 2004
3,752
0
0
I recently got a Dell 1525 with an X3100, C2D, 4GB ram and have installed Ubuntu on it myself. Very nice laptop and have had no problems with the X3100, it does everything I want it to for 2D (very polished open source Intel drivers for Linux btw), haven't tried 3D but that is not what I use it for. It will be fine for your usage.
 

AlgaeEater

Senior member
May 9, 2006
960
0
0
For reference I ran The Sims 2 (All expansions) on this card at the moment on my Acer laptop and is averages roughly 10-20 FPS. (Medium-High Settings)

It can't render shadows worth a damn, and lighting effects bog down even more.

"Playable" yes, but far from comfortable of course. Considering The Sims 2 isn't very new or taxing on the hardware, it's a good benchmark for me personally not to try and run anything on it released within the last 3 years.