Since the topic is now budget gaming and how it will supposedly make Trinity sell like hotcakes, if you read Anandtech's review you'll find this:
The HD 7660G is playable at up to Medium settings and 1366x768 resolution. The HD 4000 is also playable at the same settings.
Battlefield 3, a much more popular game, isn't playable on either the 7660G or the HD 4000 at Medium on 1366x768. You need to step down to low, and then it's playable on both.
Civ V is somewhat playable on lowest settings on the HD 7660G at 1366x768, but completely unplayable on the HD 4000. Notice that this is the first title where there's a difference between the experience a user can get comparing the HD 4000 to HD 7660G.
Same story as in Batman:AA. Both the HD 4000 and HD 7660G are playable at Medium w/DX11 enabled at 1366x768.
Same story as we just saw with DiRT 3. Both platforms playable at Medium and 1366x768.
Both playable but the HD 7660G would allow you to step up to higher settings.
The HD 7660G is very playable, while the HD 4000 may be unplayable to some at Medium.
The HD 4000 will also be featured in the Ivy Bridge Core i3, but it has a lower Turbo frequency than the one in the i7 here. The difference that makes is outlined here in the last graphs, comparing the Compal notebook with the i7-2820QM and the Dell V131 both with HD 3000 graphics and both being typical chassis notebooks. So, for the most part, it will be a 5-10% difference like I've said previously.
Most people here have been saying that Trinity is a good option if you want a "good enough" budget gaming laptop. My question is, how is that any different from Ivy Bridge? In the seven games in the Trinity review, on only two did going from the HD 4000 to the HD 7660G make a difference in terms of how playable the games are at Medium settings. Given the mantra of AMD's supporters here is that Trinity is "good enough" for budget gaming, how is Ivy Bridge not? After all, the HD 4000 is the same speed as the HD 6620G. Or was Llano suddenly not enough for budget gaming?
Another thing: A8 laptops will have the HD 7640G, which is a cut-down and lower-clocked version of the 7660G. The HD 7660G will be 20% faster than the HD 7640G, and the HD 7660G is 20% faster than the HD 4000. What this means is that an a laptop Core i3's HD 4000 will only be 5-10% slower than the HD 7640G. Given this, why would a consumer go for an A8 laptop over an Ivy Bridge Core i3 laptop if they're at the same price point?