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.
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.
just drop the intel cpu to and all is fine and you don't pay for bad onboard graphik chips again!
Originally Posted by Kano
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.
Originally Posted by Kano
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