The problem is that the Intel GMA 950 has no ,,hardware transform& lighting" and ,,hardware vertex shading" capabilities and since (as Scawen said) LFS's graphics are all about vertexes, you would get low fps at full grid or at heavy racing traffic.
Check out this review about the GMA 950's gaming performance:
http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2427
As you can see, the ATI Xpress 200M (thanks to its hardware T&L capabilities) performs much better than Intel's solution.
I had an Acer Laptop with a Celeron M CPU (OC'ed to 2 GHz for testing) with X200M graphics card. At 1024x768 screen resoltion in wheels view(medium graphics settings were applied) the system produced 18 FPS with a full grid of FZRs taking (and some of the racers crashing) 1st turn at an Aston North GP replay. The performance normalized at across 50 FPS when the drivers pulled away from each other.
Than I bought an Asus laptop which has an AMD Mobile Sempron 3400+ CPU and nVidia Go6100 VGA (with hardware vertex shading capabilities).
As I enabled hardware vertex shading option, the CPU offloaded from counting graphics, this way the new system produced 24 FPS at 1280x800 with the same Aston replay. Naturally this machine performs much better too when I see more cars front of me.
OK, so what to do?
1. Testing! Ask someone who has an Apple product with the same specifications to the one you desire to buy, for running LFS on it with a full grid of AI. Maybe the Core2Duo's performance is enough to produce acceptable performance (at least 24 fps) with the GMA 950.
2. How about collecting some more money, and buy your model with ATI x1600?
Sadly, dedicated VGA's are eating too much power compared to the integrated solutions, so prepare for qucikly depleting battery.
3. Most notebooks and laptops are not really designed for gaming (ok, so why I play on it? The answer is simple: I care only about LFS and I don't need gaming desktop PC which eats more power in idle, than my notebook at full throttle).
Using 3D applications requires powerful hardware. But more power= more heat (and more weight because of advanced cooling system) and the last but most important: poor battery performance. The result: a not really portable equipment.
4. Get the product, bulid a desktop PC for ,,backup" and playing games. Remember, a notebook is hardly (and expensively) upgradeable, unlike a desktop machine.
5. Finally let's see what happens on the integrated video market:
Intel released the GMA X3000 which could perform much better than its predecessor (4 pixel pipelines, 2 vertex pipelines, DX9 Shader Model 3).
Sadly the drivers are not really optimized yet, this way the new GMA's gaming performance is poor, but it can become better with new driver releases.
ATI started to manufacture the 690G integrated VGA (this is a half X700 with 4 pixel pipelines, no vertex pipelines, and only DX9 Shader Model 2).
I can't really recommend this product.
Nvidia will release the 7050 on the integrated VGA market, I don't know about the specifications yet.
I think IGP's will never reach the ,,horsepower" of budget dedicated VGA's, because who would buy an ATI X1300 or an NV7300 if the performance level were equal?
Good luck for making your choice, hope I could help a littlebit. (:
(And sorry everyone for my not so well english, I learned the language 12 years ago).