Navigate: Advice Beginners BIOS Guide CPUs Links Mainboards Memory Network Storage Video/Sound Cards Contact Forum SiteMap Sponsors WebNews Home	.	.
Prices: Mainboards ABIT ASUS Chaintech Shuttle Soyo Tyan CPU Intel P4 2.4C-800 P4 2.6C-800 P4 2.8C-800 P4 3.0-800 P4 3.2-800 AMD AthlonXP XP 1700+ XP 2000+ XP 2400+ XP 2500+ XP 2700+ XP 3000+ XP 3200+ Athlon64 Athlon64 3200+ Athlon64 FX-51 Opteron Opteron 240 Opteron 242 Opteron 244 Opteron 246 Memory Corsair Crucial Kingston Mushkin OCZ Search Prices:

LOSTCIRCUITS	SHORTCUTS: Integrated Graphics AMD's 690G / Radeon 1250 Platform Intel G965 / GMA X3000 Platform Test Environment / Pricing DVD Performance Gaming: F.E.A.R. Gaming: S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 3DMark '06 Vista Performance Index Vista DVD and DRM Storage Subsystem Final Words Give Us Some Feedback on this Review
AMD' 690G vs Intel's 965G Revolte of the Integrated Graphics
(Joe Freund, September 4, 2007)

Gaming Performance

Rather than taking it easy on the 3D gaming tests, we went straight for the jugular. Using F.E.A.R. to represent an older, but still demanding game, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. for a new title, it was not hard to choke the integrated graphics on both platforms. The Intel G965 was tested with both the official 14.29 driver and with the beta 14.31 driver, which enables hardware transformation and lighting.

F.E.A.R.

Both platforms provided playable framerates in F.E.A.R., though at low resolution and with most options at their minimum. Here are the settings used for each system:

AMD

Intel

Results

The AMD 690G produces playable framerates at 800x600, while the Intel G965 only musters solid performance at 640x480. The beta Intel driver does boost the minimum framerate (the limiting factor) by about 10%, but still doesn’t produce enough speed to make the game playable at 800x600. Enabling antialiasing, increasing detail, or otherwise raising the graphics options slowed both systems to unplayable speeds even at 640x480.

next page: => Stalker =>