Intel Core i3 w/ "HD Graphics" - OK for gaming?

First, my apologies for the noobish question, but I'm having some difficulty finding the information I need.

I recently purchased a brand new Dell Laptop with the Intel Core i3 (w/ integrated "Intel HD Graphics") and 3Gb of RAM. I want to purchase Starcraft 2, but I'm reluctant to do so for performance reasons.

Blizzard's official minimum system requirements for Starcraft 2 call for either a 128 MB PCIe NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT or ATI Radeon 9800 PRO which seems fairly accessible, however I have no basis of comparison with Intel's latest integrated solution. Does anyone with a similar rig (Core i3, HD Graphics, 3Gb RAM) have any experience with Starcraft 2? If not, does anyone have any information that might help me makes a more informed decision?

Thanks!

Thanks for the reply, I'll definitely look into those resources.

Has anyone out there been able to play SC2 on an laptop without a dedicated (not integrated) GPU?

@sorax et al: After running the spec-check on DaveFi's link, it gave me a "fail rating" because my GPU did not match the minimum listed, which was a direct cut-and-paste from Blizzard: "128 MB PCIe NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT or ATI Radeon 9800 PRO."

Oddly, when I clicked the for more details to see why my set-up was incompatible it listed the following:

- GPU Memory Min: 125Mb / Your GPU: 1.7Gb (pass)
- GPU Minimum: 128 MB PCIe NVIDIA GeForce 6600 GT or ATI Radeon 9800 PRO / Your GPU: Intel Core i3 Intel HD Graphics (fail)

More over, it passed the rest of my system with flying colors, CPU, RAM, HDD space, etc. It makes me wonder if the system checker was simply looking for keyword matches instead of, say, clocking out my GPU.

Unsatisfied, I continued my search and I came across this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87j42huC8XI

In this video, you see Starcraft 2 running on an inferior CPU/GPU (Intel Pentium T440) and integrated Intel GPU (GMA 4500). While gameplay did not look ideal (visible slowdown / low fraps) it's encouraging as gameplay was at least serviceable.

That said, wishful thinking and impatience pushed me over the edge and I ordered SC2 via Amazon last night. It should arrive early next week. In the meantime, I am going to look into overclocking options and other registry hacks to squeeze every little bit out of what little I have (anyone have any tips?!). I'll be sure to post my findings here once I'm up and running. Wish me luck and, again, if anyone has any overclocking tips, I'm all ears!

Still waiting on the game to arrive. Expecting it today or tomorrow.

In the meantime, another example of SC2 beta running on integrated Intel GMA... In this case, a 2007 Apple Macbook (not Pro) with 2.0 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo w/ Intel GMA 950 and 1Gb of RAM (Windows 7 OS via Bootcamp):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2aTsLlKgO4

OK folks, the verdict is in...

I'm about 5 hours into the single player campaign thus far and I must say that my set-up is working great. I have all video settings set to "Low" with my only concession being the native "full-widescreen" aspect ratio of my laptop screen. Audio settings are all set to "High."

All FMV/CGI runs flawlessly, as expected. Most in-engine cut-scenes (with the exception of only one so far) and ship decks run at or near a constant 60fps. All game play (thus far) runs solidly between 30-60fps depending on map size and unit activity.

Also, at boot I take the extra step of killing nearly all task-tray applications and other ancillary processes in the task manager. While this may be overkill, it makes me feel better about things

So, bottom line, if you have a newer Intel Integrated GPU (in my case, the Intel Core i3 with HD Graphics) and at least 3Gb of RAM, you should be just fine running SC2 with "Low" video settings.