i recently compared GMA950 vs GMA3000 using Gigabyte GA-945GM-S2(GMA950) and Gigabyte GA-946GM-DS2(GMA3000)
for 945 i enable DVMT making it 224MB and 946 also same but 256MB both frame size same at 8MB... both using Intel Pentium D 925 3GHz, Kingston 512MB DDR667, Samsung 80GB and e-View 450W PSU...

i ran 3Dmark03 a couple of times and it shows tat GMA950 scored more... even in term of FPS also GMA950 perform better...

GMA950: 14**
GMA3000: 11**

BTW... both can play C&C3 at everything low... and GMA3000 can play DOW wif everything low except texture detail which i put high... nicy...
the 945 jump out half way playing C&C3...

This post has been edited by t3chn0m4nc3r: Jun 10 2007, 11:51 AM

both sucks for an on-board graphic.. full stop
i think those GeForce 6100 as onboard is wayy better.. merely guessing

This post has been edited by imperialrealcs: Jun 10 2007, 11:52 AM

u can only find them on nForce3 or 4 i think... and same class as GMA3000...

BTW... Lappy 6150 scored 820 in 3Dmark03...

the 3xxx is essentially a DX10 capable adaptor

the 950 is a native DX9.0c

that's the only difference. in term of performance, both adaptor suxxors to the max

i wonder how's the performance of those on-board ATI graphic compare wif GMA or GeForce

err... i know but it's budget ma... not for advance gaming ma... like i said... GMA3000 good enough to play DOW wif high texture resolution at 800x600... no lag... not good meh...?

compare to Geforce Go 7300GS, is Intel GMA better or worser?

i bet worse

GAM950 cant play NFS:Carbon if i m not mistake.

friend dell inspiron with GMA 950 run NFS Most Wanted at even 800x600 is lag like hell and he fedup and stop playing
think the current best onboard would be the A690 chipset from ATI? it offers X1250 right? or maybe on par with GeForce 6150 I guess

but Intel is the biggest onboard graphic chips maker in the world, ironically

but performance is sucky

I think it's because of the centrino platform. Laptops can't be called centrino if it doesn't use intel chipsets.

3100 aka G33 still DX9
3500 aka G35 -->dx10

This post has been edited by arjuna_mfna: Jun 11 2007, 12:23 PM

No matter how sucky GMA is, Intel lead the biggest share of graphics processing unit market. Seconded by Nvidia.

Budget graphics processor is important for business class computer as it does not burden the manufacturer in mass-producing business computers.

In real benchmark, GMA are decent performer compared to VIA Unichrome II stuff, which still stuck at DirectX 8.1 or even Geforce 6100.

Intel's GMA is for a different (which is the biggest share of computer market share), which is the business/corporate computing. Comparing it with a dedicated PCI-E/AGP GPU completely unsuitable for benchmark as it is using shared memory architecture and different bus system.

This post has been edited by dopodplaya: Jun 11 2007, 12:33 PM

avoid geforce 6100, go for ati xpress200 or intel gma950 instead

This post has been edited by pk Tokan: Jun 11 2007, 12:40 PM

You joking, right? It's a no-no..

i rather go for X3000 (desktop) or X3100(laptop) for low-budget.

I think u r giving a wrong information, for gaming on onboard vga, geforce 6100 is far far better than xpress200 and GMA950.

guys... 1 prob... can any1 here exp how come GMA950 score better than GMA3000 in 3D mark... but not in gaming...? it's very confusing... putting a 7100GS in both boards... 946 board out perform 945 board quite far...
wif 7100GS:
945 - 1921
946 - 2923
both still using same PD925 3GHz, Kingston 512MB DDR667 RAM, Samsung 80GB Hdd... can it be because of the RAM...? cuz 945 max 533 only while 946 can go up to 667...

PS: These 2 boards are RM300 and below...

This post has been edited by t3chn0m4nc3r: Jun 11 2007, 03:53 PM