Running L4D on Intel GMA 4500 Series

**Mayo** · 09-04-09, 10:49 PM

Anyone run L4D on Intel GMA 4500 graphics? I do on my laptop

Vista Home Basic
Intel Pentium t4300 2.0ghz
2gb DDR2 ram
Intel GMA 4500M

Runs fine on all low settings + High performance battery mode, 10's-20's FPS.

Also, it seems like L4D runs better on Intel C2D's (tried it on a friends) because it has GMA 4500MHD, and Intel Pentium systems only come with GMA 4500M. Is this true?

**bobk982** · 10-21-09, 10:44 PM

Awesome! i have a windows xp pc with a Intel GMA 4500MHD and i was wonder if i would be able to play left 4 dead! with atleast 20 fps!

but i still might not my set up is

2 gigs of ram

250 gig hard drive

windows xp pro

Intel GMA 4500MHD

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T6570 2.10GHz

Thanks

**CharlesBryan** · 10-25-09, 12:38 AM

Hi I have these specs:
Processor: Intel Core 2 Duo CPU @ 2.10 GHZ
RAM: 4.00 GB
System type: 64-bit OS
OS: Windows Vista Home Premium
DirectX Version: DirectX 10

I also have a "Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 4500MHD" with 1759 MB.

**Tuningcarman** · 10-25-09, 01:27 PM

Yeah, I have GMA 4500M.
Just ordered the game and I'm very excited of how it'll run on my platform.
10-20 fps sounds nice, and it can be improved by some console commands, giving over 10 fps more (at least people say so).
I just wanted to know if it's 10 fps even when a horde of zombies appear etc.
Also wanted to know if -dxlevel 80 (or 85) transfers blood black or makes water white... Usually the -dxlevel 85 gives more quality than 80 but now I just don't know (because haven't tried out yet).

Someone reply pl0x

**imported_Target Practice** · 10-27-09, 08:26 PM

The intel GMA cards are NOT SUPPORTED BY LEFT 4 DEAD.

That doesn't mean it definitely won't work, but from reading the problems and errors forum (which incidentally I'll be moving this thread to now), your chances aren't very good. Save your money and buy a decent graphics card. They're not expensive these days for an entry-level one.

**Spritanium** · 10-27-09, 09:20 PM

Do not game with integrated graphics.

Ever.

For any reason.

No matter what.

Ever.

**Tuningcarman** · 10-28-09, 09:00 AM

Actually, it will work pretty good as I just found out.
So being it can run all the games I need it to run - almost all Valve's games (Well, only some for sure. Source is pretty good game engine) & a few from EA (Need for Speed for example)

10+ fps doesn't sound so bad and it can be improved with some console commands, so it will be playable.

And I WOULD have changed my graphics, but integrated cannot be changed. :rofl:

Thanks for everyone!

**Spritanium** · 10-28-09, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by Tuningcarman

Actually, it will work pretty good as I just found out.
So being it can run all the games I need it to run - almost all Valve's games (Well, only some for sure. Source is pretty good game engine) & a few from EA (Need for Speed for example)

10+ fps doesn't sound so bad and it can be improved with some console commands, so it will be playable.

And I WOULD have changed my graphics, but integrated cannot be changed. :rofl:

Thanks for everyone!

10FPS is unplayable.

Anything under 30 is considered bad.

You CAN change your graphics, just add a dedicated video card.

**imported_Target Practice** · 10-28-09, 09:36 AM

I'm going to chip in here and say that performance isn't quite the issue here. I'd say the issue is that people have reported the game won't even start up with GMAs.

**Tuningcarman** · 10-29-09, 09:49 AM

In fact I consider 10 fps as playable.
It's not playable in some games but fps games it is usually playable.
I CAN get the framerate much higher if I want, but I'm gonna first see if I prefer it as it is.
And I'm 90% sure it'll start up just nicely