Remember, that Intel aims for the broadest markets and on the technical side, there's a transistor budget and CPU TDP to think of. This is also why Intel doesn't push its graphics harder than 12 shaders and add more support than DirectX 10 - that's all the shader horsepower it feels it needs for casual gaming and video postprocessing. Admittedly very popular games, but what we here at bit-tech want to play? Not really. Most of its graphics slides in the presentation here were geared that way, with only a dip into The Sims and World of Warcraft. Intel is very clearly concentrating on its video playback performance, not its gaming. It connects to the 32nm CPU die directly via an internal QPI link, precisely the kind of modular design Intel (and AMD) have been talking about. The graphics chip is architecturally interesting it's actually a 45nm chip which contains, along with the graphics, the memory controller, PCI-Express and DMI link to the PCH too. Intel's newly launched Clarkdale CPUs - the Core i3 and lower end Core i5 models - feature integrated Intel graphics, branded GMA HD.

The best part about it was Intel's awesome Clear Video that clearly exceeded the competition in terms of picture quality and had features like de-interlacing and inverse telecine that actually worked.

On the upside though, since the more recent X4500HD for LGA775 Core 2 CPUs (which was developed from the X3500), Intel finally had graphics that could cope well with video playback: real h.264 acceleration at HD resolutions and with later updates, proper 24Hz support. It goes without saying that enthusiasts and gamers give Intel a tough time for its integrated graphics, and for the most part it's entirely justified: Intel has never produced integrated graphics worth gaming with, and driver updates occur more infrequently than we get sun in London.

Intel GMA HD Graphics: Is It Any Good? Manufacturer: Intel

Intel graphics integrated