Maximum PC readers know not to expect much from a notebook equipped with Intel Integrated graphics, but where do we draw the line? This is the answer Intel attempted to provide on its blog in response to concerns over poor performance of the Centrino 2, G45 based graphics chipset. Intel spokesmen Aaron Brezenski attempted to down play the results of the AMD demonstration pitting a Turion X2 vs. a Centrino 2 in a head to head blue ray and gaming playback competition.The AMD Pavilion dv5z features a RadeonHD 3200 and clearly outperformed the Intel Pavillion dv5t. The Intel based system locked the processor utilization at a steady 100% during video playback while the AMD based system hummed along normally with Windows Defender actively running background scans.
Intel half heartedly attacked the creditability of the comparison by accusing the trial of not being “apples to apples”, and that various OS and software tweaks were made to exaggerate the results. He further breaks down the good , the bad, and the ugly side of G45’s integrated graphics, but it leaves me wondering how a modern notebook chipset carrying the description “perfect home theatre” could have so much trouble with a simple blue ray disk.In response to the gaming comparisons the Intel spokesmen states in no uncertain terms, “I'll be honest: I skipped everything regarding gaming; it's not and never will be my focus”. Intel has never offered much in terms of gaming graphics performance, but it seems unfortunate that consumers will continue to be forced into choosing discrete notebook graphics for anything more advanced then Solitaire. The Centrino 2 platform is still fairly new, and chipset optimizations may come through enhanced drivers. But with even Intel admitting weakness in the platform, you might want to consider discrete graphics if you plan on gaming or even watching blue ray movies on your shinny new Centrino 2 notebook.