Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Intel's Driver Gains 16k+ Lines Of Code For New IGP

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,906

    Default Intel's Driver Gains 16k+ Lines Of Code For New IGP

    Phoronix: Intel's Driver Gains 16k+ Lines Of Code For New IGP

    Almost two months ago we talked about Intel adding support for an unreleased, next-generation IGP to their X.Org driver. This new part still has yet to be released and within the code-base is simply referred to as IGDNG (Intel Graphics Device Next-Generation)...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=NzQwNQ

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    122

    Default

    I would love to see an Intel based PCI-e add-in card, and a GPU capable of driving a 30" (2560x1600) display-port based LCD.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Toronto/North Bay Canada
    Posts
    877

    Default

    intel would first need to make a card worth putting into my system. They do a good job at keeping things on the cheap but im afraid the add in is going to need to be very beefy.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    122

    Default

    I still (sadly) keep a console and separate Windows box for gaming, so I just want an add-in card for my WORKstation that runs out of the box with open source drivers and is beefy enough to write code, browse the web, and maybe watch video.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Paris
    Posts
    432

    Default

    Michael, there is already VA API support for Gen4 GPUs. Currently, only MPEG-2 VLD is implemented but the rest is still being developed.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,630

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hubick View Post
    I still (sadly) keep a console and separate Windows box for gaming, so I just want an add-in card for my WORKstation that runs out of the box with open source drivers and is beefy enough to write code, browse the web, and maybe watch video.
    Then again, the main benefits of their UXA and GEM implementations come in IGP side...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
    Posts
    122

    Default

    I guess I don't mind the IGP that much, I'm just so used to the added flexibility of a standalone card.

    It just requires more careful planning when I initially purchase a board for use gaming with a high end PCIe card, I have to look ahead for something with an Intel IGP so I can then use it as a Linux workstation system a year or two later. If they released a PCIe card, I could throw one in my current workstation so it could drive the 30" LCD it's 965 IGP can't (forced to use old NV card) - whereas with IGP's, I'm basically sucked into buying a whole new system

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    4

    Default

    We Intel Chipset Users would be delighted if Intel Could improve PERFORMANCE within new xf86-video-intel. Because I can't even play Nexuiz on my HP Compaq 6730b laptop(with intel graphics) but when Using Vista i can play Even Portal on high-mid.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hubick View Post
    I guess I don't mind the IGP that much, I'm just so used to the added flexibility of a standalone card.

    It just requires more careful planning when I initially purchase a board for use gaming with a high end PCIe card, I have to look ahead for something with an Intel IGP so I can then use it as a Linux workstation system a year or two later. If they released a PCIe card, I could throw one in my current workstation so it could drive the 30" LCD it's 965 IGP can't (forced to use old NV card) - whereas with IGP's, I'm basically sucked into buying a whole new system
    I don't have such a big screen to test, but with current xorg, mesa and kernel my 965 reports a default virtual desktop of 8192x8192 and I'm using my laptop with a second screen wich gives me a total of 2560x1024 - all of it fully accelerated with compiz looking good.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    37

    Default

    Intel IGDNG is Clarkdale and Arrandale as everybody already guessed:

    - {PCI_CHIP_IGDNG_D_G, "IGDNG_D"},
    - {PCI_CHIP_IGDNG_M_G, "IGDNG_M"},
    + {PCI_CHIP_IGDNG_D_G, "Clarkdale"},
    + {PCI_CHIP_IGDNG_M_G, "Arrandale"},
    http://cgit.freedesktop.org/xorg/dri...922c3c525eeeea

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •