View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 120
# 6
01-12-2010, 09:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by thelasthallow View Post
Intel HD Graphics are a joke. when they were making them they were running call of duty 2 maxed out and were saying how great it was. well a few years later they still blow and my GPU could max out call of duty 2 without stuttering like intels graphics were. granted intels stuff is better now then a couple of years ago. but my graphics card is still generally better than intels stuff. also its DX9c so my GPU is just as capable as theirs.

funny thing is Intels new GPU's are DX10 but are so weak they probably couldn't even run the start menu for crysis.

Edit. also my dads laptop is the exact same as mine except his has a 7150 in it. but iv done some checking and its the exact same as mine except its got a smaller process 90nm to mine wich is like 130nm or something. other than that it is no faster or better.
The Intel HD Graphics is integrated, wich explains why it is so bad, no integrated graphics will be able to run this game.

What you might have seen is the new graphics card coming from Intel, its not integrated it's similar to the middle end cards in the NVidia 200 series. But it's very different as its built to support raytracing in realtime, wich is a revolution for both gamers and programmers. With raytracing in realtime they wont have to spend hundreds of hours to simulate reflections and such, and games will look better and more realistic.

But anyway, a 6xxx card from NVidia might run STO on lowest settings, but to really enjoy the game would need to step up to the higher end cards in 9xxx or 200 series.