Published
By
Editor: Julio Franco

Read user comments (2)

Gaming Performance

This is where the X460's weak memory bandwidth performance will come back to haunt it. Compared to the CoreHT, which is also using the Intel HD Graphics 3000 engine, the X-Slim X460 was 39% slower, rendering a meager 12.6fps when using the lowest possible in-game quality settings.

Having churned out 39.7fps in Far Cry 2, the X460 was still able to deliver playable performance despite being 22% slower than the Asrock Core HT.

MSI's notebook blasted through the Company of Heroes benchmark using the lowest possible in-game quality settings. With an average of 157.9fps, it was just 8% slower than the Asrock CoreHT.

We also witnessed playable performance in StarCraft II as the X460 delivered 43.2fps, about 12% slower than the CoreHT.

The X460 remained 17% behind the CoreHT in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 with an average of 37fps using the lowest possible in-game quality settings.

Battlefield: Bad Company 2 was quite a load for the X-Slim to handle as it barely delivered a playable framerate of 34.5.