Intel: Our graphics silicon is gaining in gaming

Any gamer worth his or her salt is quick to decry gaming on Intel graphics silicon. But wait. The platform is taking off, according to Intel.

Empire: Total War

(Credit: The Creative Assembly)

"So you want to know what's so compelling about making sure your game runs on Intel integrated graphics?" Aaron Davies, a senior marketing manager in the Intel Visual Computing Software Development group, asked in a video on the Intel Software Network Web page. "Here's your answer: Mercury Research showed that in 2008, for the first time, integrated graphics chipsets outsold discrete (graphics chips), and in 2013, we expect to see integrated graphics chipsets outsell discrete by three to one," Davies said.

Intel is the leading supplier of integrated graphics--which are integrated into its chipsets--while Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices' ATI unit are leaders in the discrete (standalone) graphics chip market. Discrete chips are the most powerful engines for running games but Intel is the leading supplier, based on market share, of graphics silicon for laptops.

Davies said he wants to help developers "capture" where the mobile-game market is going to be in 2013.

"There are games actually targeting integrated graphics chipsets at this time," according to Davies. "We found through engaging with these Triple A (AAA) game studios that within a relatively short amount of time, they can identify graphics bottlenecks in their code and resolve that to have their games running on integrated graphics chipsets."

Davies mentioned a few of the beta members: Terminal Reality, which is slated to come out with Ghostbusters later this year; Gas Powered Games, which is building Demigod, and Empire Total War, which is put out by The Creative Assembly.

[Angmarr]

man all i can tell is that my Intel Core 2 duo is a beast when it comes to MMORPGs

[Mr. Dee]

Imagine my Core 2 Quad :D

[Angmarr]

I hate you = P

[tzu13]

You mean that integrated graphics chips sold more than discrete ones in the same year that netbooks took off? Wow, that is surprising.

[Maximusis]

Mate...
Most netbooks have intel integrated graphics in them....
seriously

[vini156]

Intel's graphics sucks. "Intel?s integrated graphics just don't work. I don't think they will ever work." - Tim Sweeney.http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/36390/118/1/1/ I cannot play games using intel's integrated graphics I need to buy discrete card for good gaming performance.

[streaks]

*** is "discrete"....I believe the proper term here should be DEDICATED....i.e. not mooching off my system's memory. Now look....I know that gaming isn't for everybody, fine. The world has to have it's office systems and budget rigs too. But just because Insmell sells a bunch of intigrated cards one year because laptops and cheap desktops take off.....doesn't mean they're poised to dominate the graphics market.....sheesh. This would be akin to Ben and Jerry's claiming they now dominate the icecream market because Rossi O'donnel ate more icecream than anyone else last year :P

[BigGuns149]

Is education really so bad that people don't know that discrete is the opposite of integrated? You are right that dedicated tends to get used more than discrete, but the term "discrete graphics" isn't an obscure term. A quick search of google will show that it is fairly commonly used to refer to a graphics chipset that is discrete from the motherboard.

Of all the things to criticize about cnet articles that has to be one of the more silly criticisms I have seen insofar as that there is nothing inaccurate about their statement.

[msjonker]

You'll notice Intel didn't mention how many of those discrete graphics systems were bought for gaming purposes. I don't know who Intel thinks they are fooling, but its going to take some accomplishments for people to take Intel GPUs seriously, not just self-serving unrelated statistics.

I'd still choose Nvidia integrated graphics over Intel integrated graphics any day.

[superaznman]

yup. my laptop with nvidia integrated graphics allows me to allocate up to 128mb of my ram in the BIOS, but my desktop with intel graphics only allows me to allocate 8mb. both run vista premium, one can play supreme commander, the other can't (the amount of memory allocated by windows dosn't factor into the memory used by games).

[BigGuns149]

Good point. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if Intel's market share of graphics chipset already is near that 3 to 1 figure. Most computers sold in retail and even many sold directly to consumers don't have discrete graphics. Furthermore, particularly on laptops Intel seems to dominate the graphics chipset market.

[sparrowhyperion]

Anyone who relies on integrated graphics sets needs to think a bit. If I lose a video card, then I just have to replace the card. If someone loses video on either board based or cpu integrated chipsets, they have to replace the entire motherboard or CPU. This is almost always expensive, especially with Intel's overpriced chips. Intel graphics reek and always have. I doubt that will change anytime soon. I would much rather offload graphics to a video card than have them on the MB or CPU. I doubt any Gamer is going to go to integrated graphics if he has any grey matter at all between his ears.

[adultswimfan]

we all know chips get faster, smaller, and cheaper. it will not be long before a cpu can do graphics better than we can imagine. AMD owns ATI because they could put them together in a way that blows intel out of the water. it takes time. AMD understood this long ago. intel just wants money. greed kills. if intel thinks they can compete in the long run they need to think again; look at ford and gm. ford and gm only thought about today (or yesterday) and they lost. honda and toyota thought about the future and they win. AMD will win. no help from the government is needed for AMD to win. also, please look at genesis 1;12. please change the laws about a plant god gave us.

[belal12]

What a joke.

[tipoo_]

9 in 10 new computers sold are laptops, and most of them use Intel GMA graphics. Can people realy not see why PC gaming is declining? Blame Intel.

[kelmon]

It could also be that PC games are, frankly, boring and that no amount of graphical whizz-bang is going to change that.

[Lerianis3]

Bull. Intel's integrated graphics are still POOP for things like Crysis, BioShock, etc. Heck, even some REALARCADE GAMES they have problems with keeping the frame rate up high enough, and most RealArcade games are NOT what you would call 'graphics intensive'.

Anyone who is looking for a computer for gaming in ANY form...... get one with an NVidia or Ati discrete graphics chip. It's a no-brainer.

[BigGuns149]

While I agree with you on Crysis and some other newer titles there are a lot of older games and even a few more recent titles that you can play at a good framerate using the GMA 4500 provided that you keep the resolution and the AA low.

[QMT]

It's simple to explain, really.
The average consumer now wants games that run smoothly with their hardware, instead of the old model of buying hardware to fit the game.

If several million people already have a GMA950 onboard, there's a hell of alot of money to be made making games that run reliably on a GMA950.

[epross]

So this is news? Laptops and Netbooks are outselling desktops for the first time in history and the majority of those have integrated intel graphics. Personally I just bought a laptop last year that didn't have intel graphics (ATI) and it still sucks when it comes to playing games. So if they can convince developers to design games that will actually play on the common denominator out there - good for them. Personally I'll just stick to my PS3. I'm tired of upgrading my PC to play the latest batch of games.

[Angmarr]

I would just want to to hear what games people are talking about

I have Intel core 2 duo T5250 1.50Ghz
& mobile intel 965 express chipset
2G ram

I play MMORPGs like Rappelz, Perfect World, Cabal - and they all work fine! (but I dont run them @ max graphics though)

any feedback plz!

[Tod Smith]

Intergrated graphics still suck! I hope Intel is going to change this.

As for ATI and Nvidia, they need to make more PC game dev investments. Knew this years ago when they were worth billions. They wouldn't make investments then!

It's funny, now is the time they have less cash on hand to fund PC games development. So if PC game content dies then so will ATI and Nvidia. Consoles are still much more powerful than intergrated solutions. Maybe Intel will make content business investments!

I remember when Bill Gates wouldn't invest in game development. Look how long MS took to become #2! I'm predicting that MS will never become #1 unless all Consoles hardware goes to the ONLIVE model. Nintendo is going to make a 360 clone Wii2 then it's GAME OVER.

I'm all for Obama to tax the rich. The FACT is most of them don't know how to spend their money. If the top 100 US rich are not producing many jobs then where will the JOBS come from?

Why does Bill Gates wants more foreign worker Visa programs? With the time he has spent on that demand he could have educated a generation!

Bill Gates won't let his wife buy an IPHONE, my take is that he doesn't really love her.

The above news details that graphics hardware doesn't sell hardware.

[Inconnux]

sure more intel integrated video chips are sold, but anyone who wants real performance knows better and gets a decent Video card by either Nvidia or ATI.

[kelmon]

Fair enough. We can all come back in 4-years time and see whether Intel's claims were proven to be true or not. I confess to being skeptical at the claim but I'm not prepared to write it off entirely since Intel does have a lot of resources to throw at a problem.

[djmatix]

These numbers are horribly skewed. A lot of people out there purchase motherboards that have built in video which they almost immediately disable when they put in a discreet graphics card. Besides that, there is no way to tell exactly how all of those entry level dell's and HP's are being used. Sure they are selling more than systems with beefy discreet cards but anyone who knows gaming knows that on-board video ESPECIALLY INTEL has a hard time keeping up with today's games. ATI on the other hand, takes their discreet chipsets and makes them on-board for laptops and some desktop systems.

You simply cannot compare an ATI or nvidia GPU to an onboard intel chipset. That's like comparing apples to seagulls.

[john94857]

I agree that a lot of people buy boards with onboard video and immediately add a dedicated card right away. Still though, eventually, Intel will likely get better over time. The question is whether in the next few years, if they will become a real force in this market place or not.