Comments on: Poor Spore Performance on Your New Notebook

By: Patrick Moorhead

Patrick Moorhead — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 16:34:28 +0000

Equalizer, on “do users care and how are they supposed to know there are differences.”

Users do care about their graphical experiences, but unfortunately they might only realize after they have made the purchase. Then they can either return the unit or just be dissatisfied with their purchase as there is no way to upgrade notebook graphics.

One simple way end users can identify a decent graphical visual experience BEFORE they buy is to look for branded graphics, not generic graphics. By branded, I mean looking for ATI Radeon graphics. Radeon 3000 is good, Radeon 4000 is better. As graphics aren’t core to Intel’s business, the graphics are truly generic, optimized for business versus consumers.

By: Xavier

Xavier — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 22:20:08 +0000

I haven’t played Spore at all yet. I haven’t bothered to put any video games on the Lenovo S10, Mini 1000, etc. because I have other computers for gaming that have dedicated graphics.

Netbooks (at least the ones available today) aren’t built for gaming. They have trouble playing back some video.

By: GraphicsViper

GraphicsViper — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 13:37:10 +0000

Equalizer, are you insinuating that it’s “OK” to have crappy graphics and as long as users are in the dark it’s also “OK?”

By: GraphicsViper

GraphicsViper — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 02:13:43 +0000

Xavier, how does Spore run on some of the netbooks you have been testing? I know graphics and would bet that the G965 performs worse than the GM45.

By: Equalizer

Equalizer — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 00:30:43 +0000

We get that Intel sucks in graphics. That has been the case as long as they have been in the business. Question is, do users care and how are they supposed to know there are differences? I am a high end user so I get it, but what about “average Joe?”.