Review Index:
Feedback

Low-End Laptop Graphics Solution Comparison: Five Options Go Head-To-Head

Author: Matt Smith
Subject: Mobile
Manufacturer:

Image Quality, Conclusion

Image Quality

Perceived image quality is an issue that is hard to talk about with discrete GPUs, but also important. It is theoretically possible for a game to look better at lower detail settings if it’s being rendered at a higher quality. But can you really perceive a difference?

To try and find out, we’re going to look at two sets of screenshots. One is from Diablo 3, a game that has a plethora of beautiful lighting effects. The other is from Skyrim, which gives us a great chance to check out real-world texture filtering quality. 

All test samples were taken at the image quality settings used to benchmark the games. 

Let’s start with Diablo 3.

View Full Size

Click for larger

This is Tristram, the first village you have as your home base, and the one with the most dynamic lighting. For the most part, each sample from each graphics solution is nearly identical. However, there is one exception: shadows. While the NVIDIA and Intel solutions rendered stark, hard-edged shadows, Trinity’s Radeon HD 7660G rendered softer, more natural shadows. It’s a pleasing effect and one that’s often noticeable in Diablo 3.

I also think that, if you squint at the images hard enough, the Intel HD 4000 sample looks a little duller than the other two. I notice this most in the grass, which is a bit less colorful. I also notice it in the design on top of the player stash. It looks flatter and less detailed on HD 4000.

Author's Note: After this article was published Blizzard has patched in an option that lets players decide if they want hard-edge or soft-edge shadows in Diablo 3. This removes the major difference in image quality between AMD, Intel and Nvidia - all three are nearly identical.

What about Skyrim? Let’s have a look.

View Full Size

Click for larger

When I took these images on the laptops themselves I perceived them to be the same, but when I saved them and compared them side-by-side on my desktop I noticed an immediate difference in color. The NVIDIA sample is simply yellow-er (is that a word? [heh, we'll go with it]) than the other two. All of these screenshots are taken from the same save at the same time of day so, as far as I’ve been able to discover, the GT 640M is rendering light a bit differently. 

After spending a fair bit of time staring at these images I feel that the Radeon HD 7660G is also a bit darker than the Intel HD 4000 sample, which is the brightest. In terms of texture quality, I have a hard time perceiving a difference. I do know that even in synthetic test images all of these solutions have similar texture filtering properties, so I’m not surprised at this result.

Overall, I think that the Radeon HD 7660G has the most attractive image quality, but I also must point out that this advantage is minimal and obscured by display quality. This was obvious when I took the screenshots, viewed them on the laptops running the games, and then transferred them to my desktop and its Dell Ultrasharp display. The difference – particularly in the colorful yet dark Diablo 3 – was night and day. If image quality is your concern you should devote all of your attention to the quality of a laptop’s display, and treat the graphics solution as a secondary concern.

Conclusion

View Full Size

I think it is obvious from these results that none of the IGPs on the market today, including Trinity, are capable of satisfying anyone who might label themselves a gamer.

Intel’s HD 4000 is adequate in the sense that it can offer a playable experience in most games at 1366x768, but you will have to turn down the detail below the modest settings we used in this round-up. Trinity is a bit more than adequate in the sense that it will let you turn up some settings in games and still have a playable experience, but just barely. 

If you want a decent gaming experience you will do yourself a huge favor by considering a low-end discrete solution like the NVIDIA GT 630M. This solution offers a clear advantage over Intel HD 4000 and is also better than Trinity because, besides offering better overall GPU performance, you aren’t tied down to a lackluster CPU. Three of the five games tested (Dawn of War 2: Retribution, Civilization 5 and Diablo 3) were playable even at 1080p on the GT 630M.

The GT 640M, which already impressed me in its review, only continued to prove itself here. It was able to handle all of the games at 1080p and provided excellent framerates at 1366x768. A gamer with a laptop that maxed out at 1366x768 would be able to play most games at high detail.

AMD does offer alternatives to NVIDIA’s GT 640M such as the HD 7730M and HD 7750M, but I suggest going with NVIDIA if possible. I think the green team has a much better driver software interface. I also think that Optimus is a smoother (and more mature) switchable graphics solution. With that said, I don’t encourage readers to put a huge weight on NVIDIA’s products. If you prefer a certain laptop that is only available with Radeon graphics, buy it – but if all other things are equal I recommend going with the NVIDIA equipped laptop. [In the end though any discrete card will be better than none at all.]

I think that these findings prove there is still a lot of life left in discrete laptop GPUs. Both Intel and AMD have made huge strides with their IGPs and improved them substantially relative to previous versions, but the requirements of modern games aren’t standing still. Display resolutions seem to be on the rise, as well. There’s definite interest (for good reason) in making 1600x900 and 1080p displays common among laptops, but all the IGPs struggle to cope when asked to push more pixels. 

Discrete GPUs also appear to be a good value. Though more expensive, they more than justify their price by providing substanially better performance. It's usable performance, as well. A better GPU will let you play more games and enjoy higher detail settings.

Don’t confuse “adequate” with “enjoyable” and don’t succumb to the lure of saving a couple hundred bucks. Most people keep their laptops for at least three years, so if you have an interest in gaming a mid-range discrete GPU is a wonderful value you’d be crazy to pass on.

June 18, 2012 | 04:29 PM - Posted by Annoyingmouse (not verified)

Nice work, I was glad to see you go with higher LODs than we've been seeing in reviews. I hope this is something that you'll update with more games and chips (like lesser Trinity models) when time\availability permits.

June 18, 2012 | 08:14 PM - Posted by Rick (not verified)

how much slower is a sb hd3000 compared to ib hd4000?

June 18, 2012 | 11:41 PM - Posted by Matt Smith

Well, I didn't do testing that would provide a truly accurate figure, but I'd say 30 to 50% slower depending on the game. That's compared to the Intel HD 4000 in the Core i7-3720QM, not the ultrabook version.

June 19, 2012 | 12:21 PM - Posted by madhatter256 (not verified)

not that much.

I have a core i5 laptop with HD3000 and it plays Diablo 3 at 24+fps at low settings and resolution at 1200x720. Makes it very playable.

Have yet to try BF3 and Skyrim as I have those but they should perform similar (but slightly less) to the HD4000.

June 19, 2012 | 11:55 AM - Posted by klatch

Interesting article. I'm in the market for a new laptop and want it to be able to handle SC2 reasonably well, but still lean to the thin and portable side, though not necessarily an ultrabook. Glad to hear that Optimus is doing well and seamless as I hadn't really stayed on top of it. Will any laptop that has an ivy/sandybridge CPU and a nvidia gpu have optimus or only if it specifically indicates so? That is, are there other components that need to be in place that might not be in place if not indicated?

June 19, 2012 | 12:36 PM - Posted by Matt Smith

I believe all of the 600-series GPUs and most of the 500-series GPUs have Optimus. You should still check the laptop description to be sure, as it will almost always be listed as a feature.

3D Vision enabled laptops are the exception (there is apparently a difficulty with offering 3D Vision and Optimus together) but you're probably not looking for that anyway.

June 19, 2012 | 09:22 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Why test these budget oriented notebooks on high/medium settings? They should've been tested on Low settings, so that we'd at least know if they can handle the games.

As it is, all I learned is that HD4000 can't handle medium, ever.

June 20, 2012 | 02:12 AM - Posted by Matt Smith

I don't find it interesting to discover if a laptop can run a game at settings that make the game look like ass.

I am not unsympathetic if you disagree. After all, money is not unlimited and maybe you want to know if a laptop can just barely play that game you have your eye on.

But that's not the perspective I decided on for this article.

June 21, 2012 | 10:51 AM - Posted by Annoyingmouse (not verified)

I applaud your decision to try gaming at higher settings. For benchmarks at the lowest settings, try every other review on the web.

June 21, 2012 | 06:59 PM - Posted by klatch

Now seeing the ASUS ultrabook with the GT 620M in it, I wished this also had that chip in it's comparison - as I'm wondering if it is worth getting the model that has it. Oh well.

June 22, 2012 | 02:44 PM - Posted by Matt Smith

We have not reviewed a GT 620M equipped laptop but we did review the Dell XPS 15z, which had the similar GT 525M. It could play a lot of games at 1366x768 and low/medium settings but that's the limit for new titles. For example, it achieved about 25 FPS in BF3 at 1366x768, but went down to an unplayable 15 FPS at 1080p.

June 24, 2012 | 04:31 PM - Posted by klatch

Thanks Matt.

September 4, 2012 | 06:04 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I was looking at getting an Acer laptop with a 630m. Can anyone confirm if it can play Diablo 3 on Infero with at least LOW settings no lag?

October 5, 2012 | 11:37 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

I have a default Acer Aspire x3990 with windows 7, people sau that the Intel® HD Graphics wont run Dawn of War 2 even on low, other say I can. Do you believe it will run even if it has the lowest quality settings.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.