Changelog for Patch #5 - January 31st

  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Basically, intel integrated graphics are not designed for any type of gaming whatsoever. They are at best capable of playing crap like Farmville or something. They are not designed to handle any type of 3D gaming unless it's from the year 2000 or so(Starcraft or other old sprite based games)

Look at it this way, whatever year your Intel Integrated Graphics is from, the only games it is going to be capable of playing is stuff from 5 or 6 years before it was made. DX11 and SM4.0 or not, it's just a gimmick to get people to think it is good and thus buy their products.

Example:

A bottom of the line "gaming" video card costs at least $100 unless it is several years old, and even those aren't capable of gaming very well. Look at their components though. One of the most common mistakes your "average joe" makes though is that thinking more ram means good performance. It does not. Ram is just the frame buffer size the gpu has to store data before processing it. Of course a high end gpu needs high end memory but everything eventually has to go through the gpu(graphics processing unit) core before you get your end result, and if that core is extremely cut down and incredibly slow(like Intel IGPs are) then amount or speed of the memory is meaningless.

Even the most basic "gaming" video card has several hundred stream processors(difference in design but the more the better) which process all the data from your games, an Intel IGP has about 12 of them. Several hundred....down to twelve....you can guess what kind of performance you are going to get from such (extremely) low specs.

Intel IGPs were only designed for web browsing or flash games or watching HD video, and that HD only includes 720p as even the latest models struggle with 1080p video unless the cpu is a quad core.

This isn't about the game's developers not supporting your hardware. It is your hardware physically and technologically not being capable of running their game. It is just too weak and slow, there isn't much they can do. You can't power your family sedan with the engine from your lawnmower. It just doesn't have the power necessary to get the job done.
 
Last edited:
khan and crash

Alright, so I was kinda happy when the patch came out but was surprised about the size. 12 mb? But anyway, I started playing the game expecting it to run better with no problems. Now when I started the game I went to my saved game and skipped the cutscene for chapter 5. After that it didn't load anything! just a black screen. So after maybe 2 minutes I decided it's not gonna load. So alt-del and closed the game. Opened it again and loaded my save game and it actually loaded. yay. So the game was running a bit better. Not incredible since I hear it doesn't support integrated IGPs. (I have an Ati Radeon 3200 HD). So I got through quite a bit of chapter 5 and made it to Khan! Yay! However I got my butt kicked was pretty pissed that the battle wasn't designed at all with single player in mind. I was almost able to beat him though after, I would guess, 20-30 deaths! I was actually excited because I thought I was gonna finally get him! Sadly the game decided to crash! >:O. I was seriously pissed. And I knew that the game had very poor checkpoints which it doesn't decided to start you off at when you reenter the game! But I tried anyway and started the game and loaded my saved game. But alas and alack, I had to restart from the BEGINNING OF CHAPTER 5!!!!! And chapter 5 isn't easy if you're playing singleplayer. UGGGGHHHHH!!!
Anyway, that was my rant of my frustration with this game.....
 
Me and a friend have, in Challenge games (haven't tried Adventure today) been getting random crashes since Patch #5. We haven't been able to pin it down, because often he crashes but not me and so on. This is in open multiplayer matches, so there have also been other people, but we haven't actually been able to verify if they have been having problems.

Crashing on wave 20 twice makes me a sad Panda. Challenge at least is off the table until a patch fixes this. :(
 
From what I can tell mine can share 1.68g of the ddr3
and it supports pixel shader 4.0 and open GL 2.1
The thing most people don't realize about DirectX 10 and higher (which is what SM4.0 appeared in) is that DirectX 10 specifies that all GPUs have to support a certain feature set. That feature set has SM4.0 as one of the requirements. What it doesn't specify is a minimum speed requirement. Thus your Intel integrated might support all the features, but it won't have the speed to run it.

The other issue is that you're using shared memory. That means the GPU and the CPU both have to share the same memory bus and the same memory controller. Most video cards don't have a single memory controller, they have several. Not only that, but DDR3 is much much slower than GDDR3 which most low-end cards ship with. The speed difference between DDR3 and GDDR3 is that DDR3 is about 1/6th the speed of GDDR3. Thus you end up with two major limitations - a shared bus and extremely sluggish memory. Very bad for gaming but more than sufficient for video playback (which is really the best Intel integrated can do).
 
The thing most people don't realize about DirectX 10 and higher (which is what SM4.0 appeared in) is that DirectX 10 specifies that all GPUs have to support a certain feature set. That feature set has SM4.0 as one of the requirements. What it doesn't specify is a minimum speed requirement. Thus your Intel integrated might support all the features, but it won't have the speed to run it.

The other issue is that you're using shared memory. That means the GPU and the CPU both have to share the same memory bus and the same memory controller. Most video cards don't have a single memory controller, they have several. Not only that, but DDR3 is much much slower than GDDR3 which most low-end cards ship with. The speed difference between DDR3 and GDDR3 is that DDR3 is about 1/6th the speed of GDDR3. Thus you end up with two major limitations - a shared bus and extremely sluggish memory. Very bad for gaming but more than sufficient for video playback (which is really the best Intel integrated can do).

bummer,
thanks for taking the time to explain something.
 
Ok, so your telling me that whatever developpers does, i will not be able to play properly this game in fullscreen 1366x768 with shadows on but i'm able to play Starcaft2 in medium/high, DragonAge in med/high graphics and many other games, but it will never work with a 500 mb game that i bought 10 dollars?

This requires one big thing >>>> lol

Hope someone will tell me that one day it would be able to work...
 
Well, I used my integrated graphic card to play eg. Witcher, Eve and many more, but magicka isn't working.
Actually Witcher didn't want to launch, but i used 3DAnalyse and then it ran smoothly...
Is there a possibility to 3d analize magicka?

[Edit: card IS intel]
 
Last edited:
Ok, so your telling me that whatever developpers does, i will not be able to play properly this game in fullscreen 1366x768 with shadows on but i'm able to play Starcaft2 in medium/high, DragonAge in med/high graphics and many other games, but it will never work with a 500 mb game that i bought 10 dollars?

So you're telling me an Intel integrated graphics machine can run Dragon Age & Starcraft 2 on med/high? I think that deserves a lol...

Granted, if you've got some sort of nvidia/ATI integrated graphics card in your laptop, then yes it's a possibility, but we're talking about the intel integrated graphics.