Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Graphics Continues Seeing A Lot Of User Interest In Linux Support & Gaming

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Graphics Continues Seeing A Lot Of User Interest In Linux Support & Gaming

    Phoronix: Intel Graphics Continues Seeing A Lot Of User Interest In Linux Support & Gaming

    Similar to Intel Graphics user metrics shared last December, user/customer interest in Intel graphics continues to lean heavily in favor of seeing continued Linux improvements...

    Phoronix, Linux Hardware Reviews, Linux hardware benchmarks, Linux server benchmarks, Linux benchmarking, Desktop Linux, Linux performance, Open Source graphics, Linux How To, Ubuntu benchmarks, Ubuntu hardware, Phoronix Test Suite

  • #2
    A minor correction: 'integer scaling' refers to the ability of a GPU or monitor scaler to perform nearest neighbour scaling where it makes sense to do so (e.g. 4K/3840x2160 can render every pixel of a 1920x1080 image precisely as a 2x2 pixel square, or a 1280x720 image with 3x3 pixel squares). As it stands AMD, NVIDIA and Intel GPUs all apply something like bilinear or bicubic filtering, which can have the perverse effect of making 1080p monitors look better than 4K monitors for certain content. There's a good summary of the issue here: http://tanalin.com/en/articles/lossless-scaling/

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
      So slow that toms hardware does not list intel iGPUs anymore.
      We've run hundreds of GPU benchmarks on Nvidia, AMD, and Intel graphics cards and ranked them in our comprehensive hierarchy, with over 80 GPUs tested.
      Tom's hardware is a shit site, their data means nothing.
      They list ancient AMD integrated graphics there like the HD4200 or even the Xpress chipsets, which suck very hard even if compared to Ivybridge HD4000 iGPUs.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
        Intel users should get a graphics card for gaming. Gaming with intel iGPUs is not fun because intel iGPUs are slow. So slow that toms hardware does not list intel iGPUs anymore.
        https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews...rchy,4388.html
        iGPUs are faster than some old flagship models from Nvidia. You know games did exist when PC had only monochrome or 4 color graphics?

        Comment


        • #5
          I'm not a high-end gamer who plays stuff like the latest Assassin's Creed for example (but I do play games every now and then that require a bit more power than a 2010 GPU), but I don't ever feel like my iGPU is slow. For the games that I play with it, it's fast and feels on par with nVidia and AMD in the same scenario (again: for the games that *I* play with it). Not sure about Windows though as I only game on Linux

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
            Intel users should get a graphics card for gaming. Gaming with intel iGPUs is not fun because intel iGPUs are slow. So slow that toms hardware does not list intel iGPUs anymore.
            We've run hundreds of GPU benchmarks on Nvidia, AMD, and Intel graphics cards and ranked them in our comprehensive hierarchy, with over 80 GPUs tested.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by debianxfce View Post
              Intel users should get a graphics card for gaming. Gaming with intel iGPUs is not fun because intel iGPUs are slow. So slow that toms hardware does not list intel iGPUs anymore.
              We've run hundreds of GPU benchmarks on Nvidia, AMD, and Intel graphics cards and ranked them in our comprehensive hierarchy, with over 80 GPUs tested.
              Shit, I've been having fun playing the games that I like on my intel igpu. I'm sorry debianxfce for failing you by enjoying games on my intel only system. From now on I will no longer have fun playing any of the games that I like.

              Comment

              Working...
              X