Most PC gamers know that a laptop with a discrete GPU from AMD or (most likely) Nvidia is a must-have for playing modern PC games on a portable machine. Yet, despite that, many people find themselves forced to accept an integrated graphics processor (IGP) bundled as part of an Intel, AMD, or Qualcomm Snapdragon processor. GPUs are expensive, tend to run hot, and require a lot of juice, and these problems can make a laptop with a GPU undesirable or unaffordable.
So, if you want to game on a laptop with integrated graphics, which should type you buy? To find out we tested five laptops toe-to-toe in eight benchmarks, six of which are popular real-world games you’ve heard of and might even play eagerly. The results show why you need to choose an IGP carefully: it can mean the difference between playing your favorite PC game at a smooth, fluid 60 FPS, or suffering through an unplayable sideshow.
We tested five laptops, all with different integrated graphics solutions. They include:
We selected these laptops because we feel they are popular, mainstream models representative of common configurations. With that said, it’s important to note performance can vary between laptops with the same IGP, depending on the particulars of how a laptop is configured by its manufacturer. Our laptop reviews can provide insight into how laptops other than those tested here perform.
All tests we conducted on external power with the default performance profile and fan mode.
The Asus ProArt P16 also has an Nvidia discrete GPU. It was disabled for our tests.
Finally, keep in mind that very few games available on Windows have an Arm version available, including the games we used for testing. Because of this, the Qualcomm chip (which uses the Arm instruction set) ran games developed for x86 processors through Microsoft’s PRISM emulation. The only exception to this is 3DMark Night Raid, which does offer an Arm-native version. PC game developers currently make little effort to develop games for Windows on Arm, and this is unlikely to change until Steam, GOG, and The Epic Games Store add support for Arm-native PC games.
We tested integrated laptops with two synthetic benchmarks from popular benchmarking tool 3DMark alongside a roster of popular PC games. The games were selected to represent a variety of genres that stress a laptop in different ways. We also wanted to test games you’re likely to play, so we stuck to games that are currently popular on Steam.
3DMark Night Raid and Time Spy are wonderful synthetic benchmarks from UL Solutions. Night Raid is a less demanding benchmark, but notable because it has an Arm native version available on Windows. Time Spy is a more demanding benchmark, though several times removed from the most demanding benchmarks available in 3DMark, and does not have an Arm native version.
IDG / Matthew Smith
These results immediately suggest we’ve got a close competition on our hands. The 3DMark Time Spy results are a near thing, and the Night Raid results are even more competitive. On the whole, though, it’s a fight between Intel Arc and AMD Radeon 890M for the top slot. While Arc was quickest in Time Spy, the Radeon 890M took a substantial win in Night Raid.
I also want to call out the Qualcomm Adreno’s Night Raid score of 26,553, which is the second-best result from this pack. That indicates Adreno can deliver competitive performance when running an Arm native app. Unfortunately, this is the only Arm native test we ran. Adreno of course performs more poorly under emulation, as shown by the Adreno’s score of just 1,909 in Time Spy.
Civilization VI is an older game, but it remains extremely popular. It’s also a good fit for integrated graphics, as the game’s visuals don’t overtax integrated GPUs and don’t demand a lot of video memory.
IDG / Matthew Smith
Because of that, every integrated GPU except for Qualcomm’s Adreno was able to exceed 60 frames per second, and most were able to deliver that level of performance consistently.
AMD’s Radeon integrated graphics sprint away from Intel Arc, however. The Radeon 780M’s lead over Intel Arc is small, but the newer Radeon 880M springs ahead to a result just shy of 90 frames per second. AMD’s top-of-the-line Radeon 890M is quicker still and manages to exceed an average of 120 frames per second.
These improvements are meaningful. They could allow smoother gameplay on high-refresh displays or, alternatively, provide headroom to turn up a few detail settings.
Valve’s DOTA 2 definitely fits in the ranks of “biggest games no one seems to talk about any more,” but make no mistake: it’s still massive, with hundreds of thousands of simultaneous players every day. It’s also light on hardware, which perhaps contributes to its ongoing popularity.
IDG / Matthew Smith
AMD Radeon and Intel Arc deliver even performance here. While the Radeon 880M and 890M score a win over Intel Arc, it’s not a major victory. And that win is somewhat counterbalanced by AMD Radeon 780M falling behind Arc. Importantly, all of these options prove capable of playing the game well in excess of 60 frames per second.
Qualcomm Adreno unfortunately falls behind once again. DOTA 2 is playable, which is impressive given the game is running through emulation, but it’s roughly half as quick as the AMD Radeon and Intel Arc options.
Square Enix’s popular MMORPG Final Fantasy XIV received a graphics update in a patch related to the new expansion, Dawntrail. The update doesn’t drastically increase its hardware requirements, but it’s significant enough to once again make Final Fantasy XIV a challenge to run on integrated graphics at the High (Laptop) setting.
IDG / Matthew Smith
The field is surprisingly even here. The AMD Radeon 890M, 880M, and Intel Arc solutions all deliver playable performance, although the minimum framerates dip into the mid-20s. In my opinion, players looking to dive into the more difficult content, like raids, would want to change to the Low detail preset for smoother gameplay. AMD’s Radeon 780M falls a bit behind, however.
Qualcomm Adreno is behind the pack, but this is in some ways a good result. Again, the game is running under emulation here, and despite the almost painfully low minimum framerate I would call it “barely playable.” However, Adreno is noticeably behind the competition, and I wouldn’t recommend it for this game.
Total War: Warhammer III is a grand strategy game like Civilization VI, but it’s newer and rather demanding on laptop hardware even with graphics detail kept to the Low preset. The game proves too much for some integrated graphics solutions.
IDG / Matthew Smith
The Qualcomm Adreno and AMD Radeon 780M fail to deliver a playable experience in this game, as both deliver roughly 24 frames per second. I suppose that might be tolerable in a strategy title like Warhammer III, but the choppiness is pronounced. Intel Arc was only marginally better; though it hit 30 frames per second on average, the minimum framerate was a disappointing 19 frames per second.
However, the AMD Radeon 880M and 890M solutions score wins, as both exceed 30 frames per second on average and deliver an adequate minimum framerate. It’s not the best experience, to be sure, but it’ll do.
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Special Edition is an interesting title. Though over 10 years old, the game’s beautiful visuals can still challenge integrated graphics at 1080p and the game’s High detail preset (Ultra is still generally too much for IGPs).
IDG / Matthew Smith
This game is a win for Intel Arc, which manages to slightly defeat even the AMD Radeon 890M. It’s also a big loss for Qualcomm Adreno, which suffers from rather serious framerate drops. The same is true of the AMD Radeon 780M, at least in the Acer Swift Edge 16, though the issue is less severe.
Cyberpunk 2077 is now several years old, but it remains among the most demanding games for modern PCs and, despite a rocky launch, has enjoyed a resurgence in popularity thanks to numerous patches and a successful expansion.
IDG / Matthew Smith
This game does us a favor and delivers a nice, readable graph. Qualcomm’s Adreno is obviously at the rear of the pack, as the game’s average of nearly 21 frames per second is nowhere near playable. Intel Arc and AMD Radeon 780M trade blows north of 30 frames per second, but Arc takes the win between them. AMD’s Radeon 880M roars in and provides a major improvement over the 780M. While the latter is just sorta-kinda playable with these settings, the 880M requires no caveats.
AMD’s Radeon 890M, meanwhile, blows away the pack with an excellent average in excess of 60 frames per second. That’s not just playable. It’s truly enjoyable. And it’s the 890M’s most significant performance victory among all the benchmarks and games tested.
The results present a few takeaways anyone shopping for a laptop with integrated graphics should know before making a purchase.
It’s clear that AMD’s Radeon 890M is the victor, as it delivers a significant performance increase over the Radeon 880M and the best Intel Arc solutions. In some games, such as Cyberpunk 2077 and Civilization VI, the performance increase was large enough to deliver a boost to fluidity that’s immediately noticeable outside of a benchmark. It’s just a shame the Radeon 890M is only found in the AMD Ryzen AI 9 370HX and AMD Ryzen AI 9 375HX. I expect many laptops with these chips will also have a more performant discrete GPU, which makes the IGP’s performance less relevant. With that said, the Ryzen AI 9 370HX and 375HX could become popular options for mini-desktops.
The less powerful, but more common, AMD Radeon 880M is another great solution, but Intel Arc is nearly as good. AMD and Intel fought to an exact tie in these tests: each won four out of the eight tests we ran. If you’re looking for a tie-breaker, I would point out that two of Arc’s four wins were in 3DMark synthetic tests, which arguably hold a bit less weight than real-world game tests. Shoppers should also keep in mind that not all versions of Intel Arc are the same, and some less powerful Intel Core Ultra processors have fewer cores or lower graphics core clock speeds. However, Intel strikes back with availability, at least for now: the Radeon 880M is available only on AMD’s Ryzen AI 9 365 in a handful of machines, while Intel Arc graphics is available in hundreds of mid-range laptops.
It’s clear Qualcomm’s Adreno is in a tough spot, as nearly all Windows games lack an Arm native version and must run under emulation, which saps performance. Adreno has a lot of potential, and I’m actually a bit surprised by how well it does in some games. Performance in Final Fantasy XIV and Total War: Warhammer III, for example, was not that far off the AMD Radeon 780M. But whatever the reasons, the reality is Adreno can’t match AMD Radeon and Intel Arc in real-world scenarios. That won’t change until PC game developers decide to support Windows on Arm.
On the whole, integrated graphics performance is in a good spot in 2024. A capable IGP, like the AMD Radeon 880M or Intel Arc with eight Xe cores, can play many modern games at 1080p resolution, 30 to 60 frames per second, and low to high detail. Even games like Cyberpunk are playable (if not fluid) thanks to upscaling technologies like AMD’s FSR and Intel’s XeSS.
There’s still reason to be wary, however. Some IGPs available in modern laptops, including older generations of AMD Radeon integrated graphics and Qualcomm’s Adreno, are unlikely to provide a good experience. Fortunately, the most recent AMD Radeon and Intel Arc IGPs aren’t difficult to find and available at affordable prices: the Dell Inspiron 14 Plus with Intel Arc is just $1,000 with 32GB of RAM and a 1TB SSD, and Asus’ Vivobook S delivers the Radeon 880M for $1,200 alongside 24GB of RAM and a 512GB SSD.
