Page 14 of 18 FirstFirst ... 41213141516 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 174

Thread: Intel Wants YOUR Linux Questions, Feedback

  1. #131
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    8

    Default external graphic card over thunderbolt

    I don't know if this needs support from intel, but i would like to know what is needed to get an external graphic card over thunderbolt running in the (remote) future.
    If it needs work from intel, is there any plan to support this?

    Thanks for your answers.

    Greetings.

    Markus

  2. #132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eugeni_dodonov View Post
    Full OpenGL 3.x support requires some cooperation from the hardware. It is available on Ivy Bridge, yes, so GL 3.x should be supported on that architecture with hardware acceleration. For previous generations (Sandy Bridge and Ironlake), some parts of it must go through software-only implementations.
    Would you elaborate on which parts require software-only implementations? Will this prevent the hardware from running Unigine Oilrush?
    Last edited by Shining Arcanine; 01-18-2012 at 05:21 AM.

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,630

    Default

    Why should something prevent Oilrush from running? You only need float textures active and s3tc. That game does not require opengl 3.0 at all. If you want to use Unigine engine with TESSELATION you need opengl 4, that could be implemented in theory with ivi bridge. But: tesselation is so slow on lowend chips that you would get a slideshow. When you remember: the first Unigine Heaven releases could use some specific ATI only tesselation engine on older hd 4 cards as well, it worked but was something like 7 fps, i do not expect more from an integrated gfx. Newer Unigine releases did not have got support for that extension, there you need a full opengl 4 card. But oilrush looks so simple, that tesselation will not help at all - for that game you definitely do not need an opengl 4 card.

  4. #134
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    49

    Default Long time brightness problem with GL games e.g. openarena

    It would be great if the drivers could be tested in gaming scenarios. I've a rather new Dell desktop with "Intel Corporation 4 Series Chipset Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 03)" and I'm running kubuntu 11.10 with the i965 driver.
    Desktop effects work fine and I've no complaint with the graphics in most scenarios, but when I play openarena, the screen is very dark and the brightness controls have no effect. Google shows this to be a common problem with gamers using intel graphics, and I haven't seen anything like solution. Needless to say, I've used nvidia graphics cards for gaming and of course the brightness controls work fine in openarena. Is there any hope on the horizon for gamers on intel graphics?

  5. #135
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    69

    Default

    To all people which says that dropping old hardware support is reasonable, since new hardware is so cheap.

    Please note that in many countries, you often buy older hardware because it is very cheap (so one can afford it), have good CPU, good memory, and can be used for browsing, watching movies, office work, etc with just onboard graphics. Such machine can be bought for less than 50$ (often 30$). And spending additional 20$ is often no option economically (because it makes hardware 50% more costly), and physically (because often such computers, do not have AGP/PCIe slots, or needs low-profile cards, which are much harder to buy or more expensive). There is also lots of cheaper and cheaper laptop computers, which have intel graphics, and sorry their graphics cards cannot be upgraded. And despite being old, they have good performance for everyday needs, and because they are cheap, more people can have own portable/personal computers. Not to say by buying new hardware we create more computer waste, so it is good to reuse old hardware. Often in PCs there is no really any difference between using old graphics chip and new one - most of the people doesn't really play games, or needs compositing so much, etc. Also it doesn't really matter if my computer will have graphics card drawing 20W or 50W of energy (we are talking about onboard Intel graphics which is rather 2/5 W difference), because other elements of computer (like CPU, monitor, HDD) takes more energy. Also price of electric energy is different in different places, and cost savings will not be visible immediately - you need more money initially to buy better hardware to save it late - yes it is all clever, but not always possible, because people doesn't often have spare money to do this bigger investment.

    Dropping support for old hardware, even when you think just buying new hardware will be better option is not best idea. And for sure not possible for many people.

    Nobody is asking for running Crysis on old hardware. We are just asking to continue supporting old hardware with same level of features as it exists today, potentially fixing software bugs, and maintaining it even in newer kernels and xorg. For me it is sufficient that 2D acceleration, XVideo, xrandr and suspend/resume is supported. And unfortunately when using VESA driver most of this support will be missing for older hardware!

  6. #136

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by baryluk View Post
    We are just asking to continue supporting old hardware with same level of features as it exists today, potentially fixing software bugs, and maintaining it even in newer kernels and xorg.
    Just to elaborate a bit more on that. Usually such level of support lies upon Linux distribution maintainers/packagers, as it basically only involves backporting patches from newer kernel/X.org/etc releases to the supported ones. In the past, Mandriva and Conectiva were notably good on this, for example, from my Mandriva experiences I recall that we were able to run geode and i810-based machines with 2.6.38 kernel and latest X.org for some OEM configurations. And Redhat also does a truly impressive job with fixes backporting in their distribution. Of course, many other distributions also provide a very high quality backports and support, but I haven't had much experience with other distros on such old hardware.

    And of course, all of us being open-source people, we do try to support those hardware components even if they are no longer officially supported. Daniel Vetter for example still uses his i810-based card, and is able to work with it without much problems (well.. as long as hardware permits) today. Even in 1920x1080 mode for example - it still works .

    But in general, the problem is that this process is extremely time and resource-consuming. So our team's goal is to stay focused on hardware enablement in new kernels and userspace components, which are more critical and need much more attention to be working. So we leave the backporting and support for historic (by historic I mean 'no longer manufactured nor supported by any major customer') hardware to the downstream (in this case, Linux distributions or OEM/ODM companies who provide such hardware). So for such kind of support, asking Intel OTC team directly won't help much, as we work primarily on latest versions of the projects (kernel, mesa, and so on); and with each Intel Linux Graphics stack release we announce which hardware configurations it was tested with and with which ones we guarantee it to work. The best way would be to contact the OEMs or distribution support channels, so they could escalate this via proper support channels and provide us resources needed for such support.

  7. #137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shining Arcanine View Post
    Would you elaborate on which parts require software-only implementations? Will this prevent the hardware from running Unigine Oilrush?
    One example which immediately comes into mind is the GL_EXT_transform_feedback, which needs hardware support to track state changes between different batch buffers. So on pre-Sandy Bridge platform, it works with software-only implementation.

    Other than that, I don't have a full list; I think I'll be able to come with one by the time Mesa 8.0 final will be released.

    As for Unigine Oilrush - I haven't tried it myself, but the game developers have already said that they are *only* focusing on nvidia and amd solutions. So with it being closed-sourced, I don't know what features of GL it uses, nor how it works. My guess is that it should work, but I cannot promise anything without trying it, sorry.

  8. #138

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eugeni_dodonov View Post
    But in general, the problem is that this process is extremely time and resource-consuming.
    Maybe, but nVidia and AMD do that. Intel - not (in general).
    Quote Originally Posted by eugeni_dodonov View Post
    So we leave the backporting and support for historic (by historic I mean 'no longer manufactured nor supported by any major customer') hardware to the downstream (in this case, Linux distributions or OEM/ODM companies who provide such hardware).
    nVidia and AMD doesn't leave backporting and support for historic hardware to the downstream, they working on it itself. From customer point of view result is much better.
    Quote Originally Posted by eugeni_dodonov View Post
    So for such kind of support, asking Intel OTC team directly won't help much, as we work primarily on latest versions of the projects
    Quote Originally Posted by eugeni_dodonov View Post
    The best way would be to contact the OEMs or distribution support channels, so they could escalate this via proper support channels and provide us resources needed for such support.
    It's nothing but the joke. Most of it doesn't care about Linux, most of it doesn't care about support of old hardware, and will answer "install supported OS - Windows XP". In fact this way doesn't work (or work but very rarely). If you doesn't believe me - then try to contact with Acer about work of Intel GPU driver in Linux on your Acer TimelineX and tell us what they will answer to you.

    Pink link.

  9. #139
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eugeni_dodonov View Post
    As for Unigine Oilrush - I haven't tried it myself, but the game developers have already said that they are *only* focusing on nvidia and amd solutions. So with it being closed-sourced, I don't know what features of GL it uses, nor how it works. My guess is that it should work, but I cannot promise anything without trying it, sorry.
    I guess they tried to make it work with Sandybridge.. but diddn't manage to do so on Linux.
    http://oilrush-game.com/forum/index....dpost__p__5514
    Maybe you could contact the developers what the exact problems were, so you can work out a solution.

  10. #140
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    353

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bajo View Post
    I don't know if this needs support from intel, but i would like to know what is needed to get an external graphic card over thunderbolt running in the (remote) future.
    If it needs work from intel, is there any plan to support this?

    Thanks for your answers.

    Greetings.

    Markus
    Multicard is not yet working within the X server - perhaps it'll work with Wayland. A (DisplayPort) monitor connected to Thunderbolt shouldn't be such a problem as it still uses the computer's built-in graphics card.

Posting Permissions

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