http://www.osnews.com/story/16250/Intel_GMA_3000_Linux_Graphics_Performance Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:06:37 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread?173721 http://osnews.com/thread?173721 They really should have thrown a GMA 950 into the mix so we can see how it performs against the last generation. Sat, 21 Oct 2006 23:27:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Dirge) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173725 http://osnews.com/thread?173725 Intel beginning to take their graphic chips more seriously and to position themselves as the graphics alternative for the open source community, or does it only demonstrate how horrid the ATI drivers for anything non-Windows are? Sun, 22 Oct 2006 00:05:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (meianoite) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173732 http://osnews.com/thread?173732 I think the FOSS camp have had plenty of beef with Intel over the years, and they aren't out of the woods yet (specs for some chipsets are still being withheld in limbo, unfortunately for my chances of ever getting decent TV-Out). But they are certainly seeing a lot more love on the back of these recent efforts.

Personally, when I bought my current lo-fi laptop (4 years ago approx.) I was a humble Windows user, and the Intel Graphics board was the downside of the purchase. Now, as a Linux user, it's probably the BEST part of the package Sun, 22 Oct 2006 01:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Havin_it) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173746 http://osnews.com/thread?173746 I'm just saddened by the fact that notebook users will have to wait on Intel for a whole year before they can experience a similar GPU boost with the Santa Rosa platform. 'Cause frankly, as it is right now, gaming stuff like UT2k4 with all the bells & whistles on integrated graphics is pretty much non-existant, regardless of what Intel wants us to believe. Sat, 21 Oct 2006 22:13:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (1c3d0g) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173750 http://osnews.com/thread?173750 tainting the concept of Open Source. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 04:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (hhcv) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173769 http://osnews.com/thread?173769 and arent we forgetting the little matter of the real openness of these driver? something about intel_hal.so? Sun, 22 Oct 2006 07:22:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Redeeman) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173773 http://osnews.com/thread?173773 acording to intel's website, EVERY piece of the graphics drivers are licensed under an OSS license. check it out. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (spikeb) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173774 http://osnews.com/thread?173774 Not a super fast gfx driver for 3d, but its opensource and saves money for a low cost linux box.
And you cant play many linux 3d games, but it should at least support xgl/aiglx.

Not really impressed. You are not playing unreal 2004 on that thing. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:08:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (IronWolve) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173777 http://osnews.com/thread?173777 You don't even need this hardware for AIGLX - I have it running very nicely thankyou on an 855GM board, and my CPU fan is less busy than it's been in my 4 years using Linux Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:40:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Havin_it) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173778 http://osnews.com/thread?173778 meianoite: Intel beginning to take their graphic chips more seriously and to position themselves as the graphics alternative for the open source community, or does it only demonstrate how horrid the ATI drivers for anything non-Windows are?

The article specifically said that the ATI card was driven by the FOSS R300 driver. There was a reference of another article comparing the propritary ATI driver to the FOSS alternative, however. I didn't read it, i don't care for limited-rights software. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 09:41:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (B. Janssen) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173782 http://osnews.com/thread?173782 This is even a better proof that Wintel couple is parting. Intel releasing Linux drivers and Microsoft starting to design their own chips is a clear signal that Intel and Microsoft are on their own now. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 10:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (TBPrince) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173791 http://osnews.com/thread?173791 The driver can work completely without intel_hal.so. See http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg/2006-September/018437.ht.... Sun, 22 Oct 2006 12:07:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (nick8325) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173797 http://osnews.com/thread?173797 I *think* he's referring to Theo's argument about writing device drivers with an NDA so that only the NDA agreer can really fix bugs in the device driver. See here for more details:
http://lwn.net/Articles/203562/

I'm not sure it applies to these drivers though, and I'm not a kernel developer so I can't tell if it has the issues listed in LWN.NET, but even if it does, it's definitely a step above the NVIDIA maintainened but closed source XGL drivers and two steps above the unmaintained closed source ATI XGL drivers. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 12:59:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (g2devi) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173799 http://osnews.com/thread?173799 No.......Microsoft is designing there chip for the console (XBOX) not the PC. If they're successful at doing that, they might get into the vgfx department or but a vgfx company......NVDIA? Sun, 22 Oct 2006 13:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Accident) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173800 http://osnews.com/thread?173800 Is this integrated into the current x.org 7.1? Will it be in 7.2?

Or is this something that will forever be downloadable from intel's site? Sun, 22 Oct 2006 13:12:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (halfmanhalfamazing) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173801 http://osnews.com/thread?173801 XGI drivers. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 13:16:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (fithisux) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173803 http://osnews.com/thread?173803 yeah, but if you want the optimizations you go closed source.. then how can this driver be truly considered open? Sun, 22 Oct 2006 13:47:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Redeeman) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173806 http://osnews.com/thread?173806 who needs it? beryl and compiz work without XGL or AIXGL. i don't really think these projects will be very important. maybe aixgl, but nog xgl. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 14:14:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (superstoned) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173815 http://osnews.com/thread?173815 Intel can't open things they do not own, there is probably 3rd part code in that blob, hence it is still closed. Lets give credit where credit is due, instead of complaining about what they didn't do. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 15:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (BluenoseJake) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173833 http://osnews.com/thread?173833 Among other things, it contains the macrovision code, and a program optimizer for shaders. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 17:51:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (rayiner) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173894 http://osnews.com/thread?173894 Is this integrated into the current x.org 7.1? Will it be in 7.2?

With the recent modularization of Xorg version numbers no longer matter. You don't have to wait for a new version of X to come out. The drivers are all separate now. Drivers should be compatible with the current version of X. Sun, 22 Oct 2006 22:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (abraxas) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?173905 http://osnews.com/thread?173905 http://fapomatic.com/show.php?loc=0643&f=stfunoob.jpg Sun, 22 Oct 2006 23:21:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (wetnose23) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?174053 http://osnews.com/thread?174053 Compiz/Beryl without AIGLX? How and when did this happen? I think you're forgetting that AIGLX is a part of Xorg 7.1. Mon, 23 Oct 2006 10:24:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (miscz) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?174060 http://osnews.com/thread?174060 well, I have xorg 7.0, no xgl or aixgl, and the latest NVIDIA beta driver. and beryl works fine... there are plenty of how-to's on how to do it, so i won't bother you with them ;-) Mon, 23 Oct 2006 10:44:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (superstoned) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?174508 http://osnews.com/thread?174508 That is because the beta nvidia drivers have their own implementation of GLX_EXT_texture_from_pixmap that doesn't require XGL or AIGLX. Note that this isn't a very good way of doing things. Tue, 24 Oct 2006 03:38:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (SEJeff) Comments http://osnews.com/thread?174573 http://osnews.com/thread?174573 why isn't it? Tue, 24 Oct 2006 09:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (superstoned) Comments