[Spoon]

I'm with The E and Fury on this

[Enzo03]

AMD M880G with ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4200

Works for me because so far it plays any game I'm actually interested in playing, including FSO with MVPs and MV_Advanced and decent framerate, although I turn off MV_Advanced because I really don't need it.

Played through all of FS2 Main campaign this way without a single problem with my framerate.
BP runs great too.
Oddly enough, I had problems with Spoon's WoD even though it looks like it should be less graphics intensive.

Of course this is by no means a gaming PC.  This laptop's just to get me through college and I don't have the $$$ to go build a decent gaming PC.

[Timerlane]

Geforce 6150SE nforce 430

This. It feels a lot like my old Radeon 9200/98SE machine(which had a few OpenGL disable flags obviously), but I finally get to see normal maps and such now(which is definitely still worth it).

[Androgeos Exeunt]

Intel GMA X3100 on my MacBook.
Intel 915GL Express on my IBM.

Given that most manufacturers seem to slap on an nVidia or ATI card to newer computers, and a significant portion of HLP's veterans build their own computers from scratch, I'm not too surprised by the polling results.

[Retsof]

  Ehm... Mobile Intel 4 Series Chipset.  It's been a while since I've played FS though.  I think I had decent performance as long as there wasn't a BoE.  Of course, that fact that things like normal maps simply don't work probably helps with performance.  Would that go under i3/i5 vote?

[ShivanSpS]

integrated gpus on AMD APUS are quite good, Intel Sandy Bridge igps are also excellent.

AMD Zacate APUS includes an HD6310, a 80 sp gpu, its a HD5450 integrated.
AMD Llano Apus will include a cut down version of the HD5670, its goes from 160 to 400 stream processors.

[The E]

No Intel GPU will ever be able to compete against an ATI or NV chip. Also, Intel chips still suck in terms of OpenGL support.

[ShivanSpS]

And in some Directx features too, but still, core i3, i5 gpus are already as fast as a HD3200. Sandy Bridge HD2000 and HD3000 gpus are faster than that, nearly as a HD5450.


http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Intel/Core_i5_2500K_GPU/1.html

and Quick Sync is able to encode videos much faster than CUDA and Stream combined lol

[The E]

Which would be totally cool and relevant, except FSO doesn't care about that.

[ShivanSpS]

But, i remember having playing FSO on the IGP of my core I3 before i brought a HD6870... i dont remember well, i need to try again.

Anyway, dont forget that Sandy Bridge IGP are quite powerfull gpus(nearly like a HD5450)... especially the HD3000. Intel next gen cpus, Ivy Bridge, will feature more powerfull gpus, incluiding dedicated gpu memory integrated on cpu. Yet again, i have no idea about how good is the OpenGL support.

AMD Llanos APUs are excellent, i bet any of those will be able to play FSO on 1920x1080 whiout a issue.

BTW, FSO can be ported to ARM platform? Tegra 2 is a dual core ARM processor made by nvidia with a Nvidia gpu... and next gen includes a more powerfull nvidia gpu on a quad core ARM.

[The E]

If those ARM CPUs are x86 compatible, yes. If they're not, probably yes.

Also, the Internet says that Sandy Bridge cores can do OpenGL 3. Will be interesting to see how that turns out.

[Androgeos Exeunt]

No Intel GPU will ever be able to compete against an ATI or NV chip. Also, Intel chips still suck in terms of OpenGL support.

It gets even worse on a Mac, where there are no OpenGL driver updates that I know of. Jeff once troubleshoot a problem I had and mentioned how horrendously outdated the OGL on my MacBook was.

[Enigmatic Entity]

I have some low end nVidia 128MB card, don't know the number. Should be fine for me, as I used to run FSO on less...

[CAP1331]

I have a Mobile Intel 4 Series Express Chipset (it's a work notebook). I'm replaying the FS2 campaign and the Hatshepsut is the only thing that makes my FPS drop noticeably. I'm playing with all the settings at max so I guess that I could lower them in case of distress...

[Grizzly]

I have some low end nVidia 128MB card, don't know the number. Should be fine for me, as I used to run FSO on less...

I could run FSO on a Geforce 4 MX 440.

That's from the 367 days though. Dunno what has changed.

[LHN91]

Radeon HD4870 w/ Athlon II X4 620 and 4 GB of Ram on the desktop (runs beautifully, i think i got down to at worst maybe 17 fps lowest in WiH), and shortly enough at least attempting to get playable on AMD C50 w/2 GB Ram and the integrated Radeon HD 6250. Desktop used to be a Nvidia 9800GT, worked well on that too.

I admit, I used to play on a 2 GHz Core Duo laptop with GMA 950 and 1 GB of ram. Frustrating, but playable with the right settings. Albeit in the 3.6.9/early 3.6.10 days. It was still better than my desktop at the time. Pentium 4 1.8 Northwood, 1 GB ram (originally 512 Mb), Radeon 2400 Pro AGP (open box 20 bucks) (originally a PCI GeforceFX 5500). Good god that thing chugged with FSO. Especially with the 5500.

edit: Can't tell i'm an AMD fanboy, can you.....

[Aramil]

I find it interesting that no one has marked even one vote in : No (Different option)

[LHN91]

I don't find it particularly interesting..... I've not seen too many cards from other companies in a few years. Perhaps the odd integrated S3 or Via chip, but even then, they were all on P4 era boards and quite frankly were fairly poor performing, 16-32 MB DX8/9 chips that managed to be worse than Intelgrated chips.

[ShivanSpS]

Via Nano 2 dual core is a quite fast processor, indeed faster than a E350. And the integrated Chrome GPU is quite fast too.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/chrome-520-nano-dc-vn1000,2779.html


And, that poll needs the AMD APu option too.

[castor]

Running NV 7600GS here. Got an 9600GT somewhere, but can't be bothered due to extra heat it generates (I don't play any new games anyway, mostly got the 9600 to experiment with VDPAU).