Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: Intel Graphics On Linux Still Behind Windows

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    15,104

    Default Intel Graphics On Linux Still Behind Windows

    Phoronix: Intel Graphics On Linux Still Behind Windows

    Now that I finally have Sandy Bridge graphics working under Linux, thanks to another H67 motherboard and Core i5 2500K processor from Intel that don't exhibit the earlier problems, there's many Linux benchmarks available. Overall the Core i5 2500K graphics under Linux with the latest kernel / DDX / Mesa are fast, for being Intel integrated graphics and much improved over their previous generations of hardware. But how do these first-cut Intel Linux Sandy Bridge drivers compare to the drivers of the same age under Windows? In this article are benchmarks comparing the Intel Core i5 2500K graphics performance under Microsoft Windows 7 SP1 and Ubuntu 10.10.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=15690

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    11

    Default

    i have one question regarding the diagrams:

    Why do you always connect the data points? This does not make any sense.

    If you have a value for the resolution 800 x 600 and one for 1024 x 768. Its nonsense to connect the two. Simply because there is for example no resolution of 912 x 684.

    IMO a histogram is the only feasible way of visualizing your benchmarking results.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    231

    Default

    I wish Intel would just implement a Gallium driver. I know it probably wouldn't help their Linux performance, but it would be nice to see their work help mature the Gallium project.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    ฿ 16LDJ6Hrd1oN3nCoFL7BypHSEYL84ca1JR
    Posts
    1,052

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tgui View Post
    I wish Intel would just implement a Gallium driver. I know it probably wouldn't help their Linux performance, but it would be nice to see their work help mature the Gallium project.
    You mean for newer graphics chips?
    Yesterday out of curiosity I took mesa and compiled it with gallium i915 driver and to my surprise it works really good.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    why someone buy intel for linux graphiks?

    just because opensource? why not buy an amd card and enjoy an real good opensource driver?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,641

    Default

    Bad joke, when you buy a 2500K or 2600K then you get the onboard gfx for free if you use a H or Z chipset, with Z68 you can even oc and use gfx the same time. Other cpus have got often a slower gpu part, but not everybody needs that. If somebody is no pro-gamer then why should he add a symbolic ati card to use ati drivers? That's crap. If somebody wants to play games he can add a powerful nvidia card as well - then oss drivers are not important. Also you did never mention that the Intel gpus have got a media ENCODER as well, currently only usesfull with Win but maybe with Intel sooner or later too. There is nothing compared to that in ati chips.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    south east
    Posts
    342

    Default A good driver

    How about Intel releasing a Proprietary driver like they do for Windows.

    Here is an Idea! One version of a Linux distribution supported for 10 years.
    Then that one driver works for 10 years. It's unbelievable!

    You'd have programs lining up to use those I/O towers.
    Drivers from hardware vendors would all become available over night.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    Bad joke, when you buy a 2500K or 2600K then you get the onboard gfx for free if you use a H or Z chipset, with Z68 you can even oc and use gfx the same time. Other cpus have got often a slower gpu part, but not everybody needs that. If somebody is no pro-gamer then why should he add a symbolic ati card to use ati drivers? That's crap. If somebody wants to play games he can add a powerful nvidia card as well - then oss drivers are not important. Also you did never mention that the Intel gpus have got a media ENCODER as well, currently only usesfull with Win but maybe with Intel sooner or later too. There is nothing compared to that in ati chips.
    just drop the intel cpu to and all is fine and you don't pay for bad onboard graphik chips again!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,641

    Default

    It is just the fastest cpu out there for the price. A pity that the refreshed chipsets are not yet available for the boards, but the cpu is certainly much more interesting than any amd solution.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    5,411

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    It is just the fastest cpu out there for the price. A pity that the refreshed chipsets are not yet available for the boards, but the cpu is certainly much more interesting than any amd solution.
    the mainboards are more than 40 higher in price than a am3 board.
    And you save (2500K=190) 15 if you buy an (175,84 ) AMD Phenom II X6 1090T Black Edition, 6x 3.20GHz,
    means for REAL you save 55+you get an better opensource driver+cloused source driver support.

    maybe the intel cpu is faster but you pay for it 55 more.

    on the amd side you can buy 5gb more ram or an bigger harddriver for the same money.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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