Are Some Integrated Garphics Worse Than Others?

Pretty straightforward question. I have a laptop with a 2.1 GHz dual core processor, and Intel HD 2000 integrated graphics. A friend of mine just gave me an old desktop with a 3.00 GHz dual core processor, with Intel G965 Integrated graphics. I loaded up Half-Life 2, which I can nearly max out on my laptop with V-Sync on at a stable 30-50 FPS, and this desktop was getting like 25. Is this just because the desktop, processor, and integrated GPU are so old?

Also, I haven't had a chance to add more RAM to the desktop (came with 2 gigs). Is it just because of that? (My laptop has 4)

All integrated graphics are going to royally suck, but yes, the G965 is worse than the 2000.

Thanks for confirming that.

Yeah, I kinda already knew that about integrated graphics. Going to get a dedicated GPU ASAP.

Actually some integrated graphics chips can be decent performers on laptops. Most manufacturers choose not to bother with them though. I think it's a disgrace when laptop makers put in the greatest cpu and don't bother with even a mediocre graphics chip. Conversely you can get good gaming laptops with poorer CPUs and better graphics chips.

YEs some are better than others. But mostly they're all crap and not worth it for gaming.

What are the actual specs of the desktop? We can help you upgrade it.