Top
170°

The Battle for Budget Graphics: AMD Lynx vs. Intel Sandy Bridge

Mentioning the term "onboard graphics" to a gamer is like yelling four-letter words in holy places. You're free to do both, but the results are less than optimal. Until recently, onboard graphics were useful for games like Scrabble or perhaps Solitaire, if you really wanted to push the envelope. Intel's Sandy Bridge processor changed that a bit by pairing the beefy Core i3/i5/i7 processors with Intel HD 3000 and HD 2000 graphics.

Read Full Story >>
gamespot.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Newtype2395d ago

AMD > Intel "Graphics"

JsonHenry2394d ago

Not currently. But Tegra 2&3 might take the crown soon.

OpenGL2394d ago

@ JsonHenry

What the heck are you talking about? Tegra is an ARM based SoC, this is a quad core x86 CPU with an on-chip GPU we're talking about that has a TDP of 100W, making it a desktop chip.

Also this chip is basically including the Mobility Radeon 5650 on die which is more powerful than the GPUs in the PS3 and 360.

slayorofgods2394d ago (Edited 2394d ago )

2.9GHz Quad-Core
Radeon HD 6550D GPU
for 135 bucks.

Not a bad deal especially for casual pc owners, but a lot of people will still want to use graphics cards.

TABSF2395d ago (Edited 2395d ago )

Intel Vs AMD

Intel CPU element > AMD CPU element
Intel on-board GPU < AMD on-board GPU

Intel CPUs > AMD CPUs

----------------------------- ---------
Nvidia Vs AMD

Nvidia Single GPU > AMD Single GPU
Nvidia Dual GPU < AMD Dual GPU

----------------------------- ---------
AMD CPUs have taken a pounding over the last half decade, since Core 2 Duo, they have had it hard.
Even Core 2 Quads released in 1Q 2008 can take it to AMD current flagship X6 1100T.
From the looks of it Bulldozer is going struggle against Sandybridge never mind Ivybridge.

All that being said, I have a AMD CPU, main reason is the price Vs performance ratio, AMD is far more affordable plus the motherboards are significantly cheaper compared to their Intel counterparts.

PS360PCROCKS2394d ago

Ya definitely my 2500K and MSI mobo ran me like $400

slayorofgods2394d ago

AMD quad core processors are also very gamer friendly, and very good processors in general. Don't let the fact that Intel i7's beat out amd's Phenom's deter people from getting a gaming pc they can actually afford.

TABSF2394d ago

For sure, in gaming there is barely any difference between Intel and AMD.

No real noticeable difference at all.

That is another reason I went AMD, still though Intel is better at everything else, its true I'm sorry :/

zero_cool2395d ago

I never really liked ati graphics because the colors always seemed to over saturate game visuals!

Klaykid1232394d ago

I don't like them because they're too confusing to know which is good.

9000 series is decent for Nvidia, then you've got the GTX which I know are the good ones.

I think they're coming out with new ones though.

arjman2394d ago (Edited 2394d ago )

What about the GT, GTO, LE, SE, GS, GSO, GTS, GTX, GX2, Ti, Ultra and G...

O.o

That's confusing as well...

Klaykid1232394d ago (Edited 2394d ago )

Yeah, but IDC what SE and all that means. If it says GeForce and is high, it's good. If it is GTS or GTX it's good.

P.S. zero_cool why do you think the Xbox has really contrasted and saturated colors?

arjman2394d ago

I know, I'm just saying that both ATI and Nvidia are over complicating their naming schemes nowadays.

They put high end names on mediocre cards like the GTS 450 or the GTX 550 Ti and people can get confused with that...

bwazy2394d ago

I always loved AMD. The performance for the stupidly low price (a 6 Core CPU that EASILY OC's to 4.0GHz for 250 dollars? THATS INSANE).

I'll never pay 600+ more for an intel chip that only offers a few more FPS in terms of performance.