Performance Test Configuration: Integrated Graphics


 Performance Test Configuration
Processor(s): Intel 2.8E Prescott (Retail)
Intel 2.8C Northwood (Retail)
RAM: 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3500 Platinum Ltd OR
2 x 512MB Mushkin PC3500 Level II
Hard Drive(s): Seagate 120GB 7200RPM (8Mb buffer)
Video AGP & IDE Bus Master Drivers: ATI Platform Driver 8.01 Beta
Intel Chipset Drivers
Video Card(s): Integrated 9100 IGP PRO (64MB Frame Buffer)
Integrated 865G (64MB Frame Buffer)
Video Drivers: ATI Catalyst 2.2 Platform
Intel Graphics Driver 14.1 (2/10/04)
Operating System(s): Windows XP Professional SP1
Motherboards: ATI 9100 IGP PRO Reference Board
Intel D865GBF (865G)

Benchmarks used either Mushkin PC3500 Level II or OCZ PC3500 Platinum Ltd memory modules. Both DIMMs use Winbond BH5 chips and perform virtually the same in our tests.

All performance tests were run with the onboard integrated graphics using a 64MB frame buffer for the fairest comparison. Intel 865G graphics have a maximum 64MB frame buffer while the ATI integrated 9100 graphics allow a frame buffer to 128MB. The AGP aperture was set to 256MB with Fast Write enabled. Resolution in all benchmarks is 1024x768x32 unless otherwise noted.

Additions to Performance Tests

Future Mark PCMark2004 is included to measure General Performance in addition to our standard Veritest Multimedia Content Creation Winstone 2004 and Veritest Business Winstone 2004 for system benchmarking.

Game Benchmarks

Games were run in our standard motherboard test configurations except for Splinter Cell. Since Splinter Cell requires a 128MB frame buffer for High Shadow Resolution, we were forced to reduce Shadow Resolution to medium to allow the Splinter Cell benchmark to run. All other Splinter Cell settings are the same as used in other benchmark testing.

Comparing Integrated Graphics Integrated Graphics: General Performance and Media Encoding
Comments Locked

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • araczynski - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    Who that comes to this site give a flying f*ck about integrated graphics?? Whether you're comparing a Yugo GV or a Yugo GVX, ITS STILL A FRICKING YUGO!!!

    where are the x800 bencharks?? that's what we care about.
  • Regs - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    To bad the 2.8 Prescott's are worthless considering how they hardly out shine their Northwood counter parts. But it's interesting to see how a Prescott tweaked mobo performed.
  • Marsumane - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    Integrated graphics that still suck!
    Although they are just like the comparison between the 9800xt and the 6800u. 2x as fast)
  • MAME - Monday, May 3, 2004 - link

    nVidia -> King of AthlonXPs
    ATI -> King of Prescotts

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now