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.
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.
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?
Originally Posted by Tgui
Yesterday out of curiosity I took mesa and compiled it with gallium i915 driver and to my surprise it works really good.
why someone buy intel for linux graphiks?
just because opensource? why not buy an amd card and enjoy an real good opensource driver?
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.
I've been waiting for SB b/c of Anand's tests that showed the 12EU version beating the low end discrete chips in almost all instances and being competitive with a few of the next level up cards. In my experience (with Nvidia and Intel), Intel has been the only one to provide a tear-free desktop (though not with regards to video on my 945m) without resorting to OGL. I'm going to buy an SB chip (specifically a socket 1156 xeon when it is released) b/c the graphics have been good and I don't have this ridiculous instability that is partly caused by, IMHO, Nvidia's driver. I will buy AMD cards and look forward to Bulldozer and Fusion in general, but I want the gallium drivers to be in better shape and the state trackers be available for off-loading some of the video playback (cpu is simply not fast enough on high bitrate even with threading).
Originally Posted by Qaridarium
Tags for this Thread