What is the equivalent of Intel HD Graphics 3000 to Nvidia and AMD graphics?

You do realise this doesn’t tell us anything, right?

What’s the serial number and card model. What’s the GPU clock speed? What’s the RAM size and frequency? What year is the card? Is this laptop or desktop graphics?

And, what programs are you wanting to run? Photoshop? Elements? Reader? Flash Player? After Effects?

Just Answer for: What is the equivalent of Intel HD Graphics 3000 to Nvidia and AMD graphics?
And: Photoshop CS5 & Premiere Pro CS5.5.
Thanks

You are asking about an integrated GPU that is about equal to a Radeon HD4350 or GeForce 8600. In other words, we are talking about graphics worse than any add-on cards made in the last five years. Running the Aero interface on Windows 7 is pushing your luck. The only Adobe program you won’t have trouble with is Acrobat Reader, and even then it’s kind of dicey.

God. *bangs head into wall *

@XOIIO I had it on my old netbook. That thing ran Fable on the lowest settings at 2 FPS. TWO!

Oh god D:

I’m always surprised that there’s so much of a difference between cards that (to me) don’t seem that far apart, series-wise. I have a Radeon HD5750 and it runs smoother than I need for pretty much everything (Adobe CS5 Suite ‘n all!); it’s really that much better than something like an HD4350?

@GrayTax It gets complicated quickly. For instance, my GT240 outperforms most of the 4xx-series.

@jerv The 4xx-series of Nvidia cards? If so wow, that’s… I’m not entirely sure what to make of that.

I run CS5 on a old iMac with a GMA 950 which is a hell of lot worse then the integrated graphics on a Sandy Bridge. You will have no problems with Adobe stuff.

@johnpowell I think it depends on what you are trying to do with it and how fussy you are. Personally, I found them sluggish trying to drive a 1920*1080 monitor, though a smaller screen would likely fare better.