What? A Graphics Software Developer Community at Intel?

By Steve Pitzel (Intel) (31 posts) on September 13, 2007 at 10:18 am

Intel Software Network Graphics Developer Community  

I come from the land of beefy workstations. When I first began animating and training cel animators to use digital tools, workstations cost about the same as animators and trainers. It's a different, thankfully cheaper, world these days. I can now proudly say I am worth more than the machine I work and play on.

A lot of innovations have gotten us to this point. In some cases, the technology at the top has trickled down to more inexpensive parts, in other cases, mass-market ideas have moved the entire industry upwards.I was skeptical of Integrated, mass-market solutions, I still am. If I'm going to create my own animation on Softimage|XSI or Maya, or play the latest video game at full res with all the graphic bells and whistles turned on at a smooth frame rate -- I'm going to shell out some decent money for a high-end graphics card. No question.

But what about the other 90-odd percent of graphics-dependent applications out there? What about the games that don't require all those ray-traced, HD-everything bells and whistles to be enjoyed? And what about the photo-editors, the word processors, and even a lot of the consumer video-editors? As a consumer, does it really make sense to pay extra for something that might just be onboard for free? As a developer, does it make sense not to open your application up to the widest possible audience?

The Graphics Developers Community is officially live! Along with making available all the developer information I can find inside Intel's walls, I'll be scouring the web for interesting graphics news and info and I'll post as much of that info as I can on the site as well.

Have a read! I look forward to your comments!

All the best,

- Pitz

Tom's Hardware -- Bruce Gain -- Are Intel Integrated Graphics Good Enough for Gaming?

http://www.tomshardware.com/2005/09/15/are_intel/

Softpedia -- Alexandru Pancescu - Intel Integrated Graphics Receive a Performance Boost

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Intel-Integrated-Graphics-Receive-a-Performance-Boost-63105.shtml

Steve Pitzel, Graphics Community Manager, ISN

Categories: Intel® Software Network 2.0, Visual Computing

Comments (28)

September 21, 2007 10:56 PM PDT

archibael
 Where do you want to go with this, Steve? I can fill these pages with commentary from the home theater PC community regarding the suitability (or lack thereof) of IIG for media applications, and what exactly Intel needs to provide to make it the coveted solution there... but are you planning on attempting to push solutions back through Intel product teams or just have one long beeyatch session?
September 24, 2007 9:38 AM PDT

Steve Pitzel (Intel)
Total Points:
4,956
Status Points:
4,956
Community Manager
 Archibael,
Hey you wouldn't believe the initial knocks I took for bringing up 64 bit awhile back :) But in the end, folks realized we hadn't done a great job getting the word out. So absolutely what's said in these Blogs goes back to the product teams. Will you see an immediate change - not always, this is a laaaarrge company and not always as nimble as any of us would like. But the word does get back, and it does make a difference. I can tell you with absolute certainty that we are very interested in making our graphics solutions work, and work well. As an artist - I'm personally invested in making them work. So please blast away - and tell us where we're right too...the product teams do like a little encouragment now and again... - Pitz
September 24, 2007 12:21 PM PDT

archibael
 That's great, Pitz. Expect to hear back from me over the next few weeks. I have lots of input, and am an Intel employee, as well, so if you need to take something offline to discuss it in more detail I'm all about that.
September 24, 2007 12:44 PM PDT

Steve Pitzel (Intel)
Total Points:
4,956
Status Points:
4,956
Community Manager
 Good deal! I look forward to the conversation!
- Pitz
September 28, 2007 12:53 PM PDT

archibael
 I've been swamped and so haven't had the time to dedicate to this that I'd like, but it's a start... here goes:

Intel Graphics: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly

The Good
-- Excellent video quality algorithms. Comparable to discrete cards in standard definition (difficult to assess HD, see below), according to some recent benchmarks best in class. SD HQV scores with latest drivers >100.
-- Intel graphics with an HDMI ADD2 card and an audio header currently provide the only LPCM multichannel surround solution. This is not trivial and much coveted and should be a huge selling point; everyone else is using analog or downconverted/compressed sound over HDMI.
-- Support for MPEG-2 HW acceleration in ClearVideo fantastic, making Intel graphics an excellent choice for HDTV
-- Recent improvements to the CUI include writing the EDID data to a file, vastly improving monitor resolution debug
-- Ability to create custom resolutions down to the single pixel level via DTDs very powerful and only recently present on the competition's discrete cards (which were limited to modulo-8 resolutions).


The Bad
-- Little to no control over video quality algorithms. The home theater community is (justifiably) paranoid about Denoise and Detail, as the former has the potential to soften the image or eliminate source-accurate film grain and the latter can add ringing. Permitting the user to turn these on or off in the CUI should be the minimum functionality supported. Stretch goal should be a slider permitting several settings from None to Max.
-- No control over Deinterlacing mode. Should be able to select Bob/Weave/Advanced, default to Advanced.
-- Only one HDMI ADD2 solution (Prolink) and their customer support refers everyone to Intel for support. Intel support refers customers to Prolink. You can see where there might be confusion. :)
-- Support for non-standard resolutions like 1360x768 and 1680x1050 still rough, especially when EDID from the monitor is wrong or misleading.
Intel's position on this is typically: fix the monitor EDID-- that's the problem. It certainly is, much of the time... but Intel's competitors have made many other resolutions available to the end user. When you click off "Hide modes my monitor cannot display" on the competition's CUI, you get everything. Even stuff that probably won't work. When you click off "Hide modes my monitor cannot display" on Intel, some mode pruning is still going on.
-- Intel drivers are still permitting the vendor to completely shut off certain resolutions with the BIOS. Why is this necessary? When the customer's new 1680x1050 monitor doesn't work on Intel graphics, the end customer doesn't see "Forbidden by BIOS" printed next to the resolution, they just don't see it show up at all. They don't blame Dell or Toshiba. They see the Intel logo next to their graphics CUI and figure it's Intel at fault.
-- AddUnderscanPercentageHDMI registry setting doesn't seem to do anything. For the vast majority of HDMI displays out there, overscan compensation is a pretty big issue (TVWizard could mitigate, but see below)
-- No one understands DTDs except me and a few insane friends. :) Perhaps some GUI tool for creating custom resolutions ("Expert Mode")?


The Ugly
-- HD DVD/Blu-ray support a mess.
Cyberlink claims G965, GM965, G33, and G35 are supported in PowerDVD. No discussion of external decoder.
Intel claims they are supported with a supplemental Broadcom decoder.
OEMs (Gigabyte and Shuttle) claim they are supported. No discussion of external decoder.
Actually works well on Aero 32- and 64-bit on G965 with leaked 15.4.50.1 drivers with no external decoder.
Neither 15.4.50.1 nor 15.6.1 currently work on BD; whether this is because the disk is H.264 is unknown-- but who do we even ask for help? Intel's Channel Sales (in the UK) deny that the Intel chipsets can even do it; Cyberlink blames the drivers, and the OEMs (Gigabyte, Shuttle) just respond with "It should work". This is a problem.
HD DVD/BD-enabled drivers are so far only available on platformsw.intel.com, which is an internal and vendor website.
Bottom line: despite the fact that Intel and their ISV/IHV/OEM partners have issued press releases as far back as June that there is a working solution for HD disks on IIG, the solutions only showed up a couple of weeks ago and are still handicapped at best.
-- TVWizard poorly defined/documented/implemented.
What does it do?
It looks like it's supposed to correct for Underscan with simple +/- buttons, and that's a great feature. However, that feature has never seemed to work, making it of limited utility. Looks like it's removed, now... that or it's disabled on HDMI?
Why no TVWizard on G965? For a chipset originally billed as a high-end "Media" motherboard solution, this would seem to be a slam dunk. Yet it's enabled for the mobile solution (GM965) and for the mid-level G33 on the next generation as well as the high-end G35. Is it really a hardware limitation, or was this a marketing decision to differentiate G35?
-- The Broadcom decoder solution is completely MIA from a customer standpoint. It's a beautiful promise (complete HW decode of H.264/VC1 for 2 watts and a PCIe x1 slot), but it appears Broadcom is completely uninterested in selling this to end users. Which means a customer who wants the Blu-ray/HD DVD solution that Intel promises has to buy an entirely new system rather than picking up a $50 card which will make things happen in an older or DIY solution. This is getting into another pet peeve of mine (we are getting more and more "customer"-focused here, but our idea of "customer" seems to mean "OEM/ODM" and not "end-user"), so I'll leave it at that for now.

This is a start. While Home Theater PCers are sometimes gamers, they're really just in love with a simple plug and play solution which gives them the interfaces their TVs like (DVI/HDMI), which push pixel-perfect video, and which are configurable to elminate annoyances like overscan.

There's no question the G(M)965 and G33/35 solutions are powerful enough to do this (though everyone would love to see more HW decode of VC1 and H.264), but it seems as if our SW/driver concentration has focused on the really tricky bits (accomodating a huge plethora of games that we think we can do at the acceptable but not stellar level) and we are ignoring the low-hanging fruit that a couple of improved user-interface algorithms and some better communication with our partners in ISV/IHV/OEM could harvest and turn into a win.

The competition is scorching us here, where they have an advantage: their integrated graphics architectures get to leverage ten years of software infrastructure from the discrete market. When they wanted to add Blu-ray/HD DVD support for their IGP, it was just a matter of throwing a couple bits into a pre-existing driver; sure, it may have run in a less than smooth fashion (since the processing requirements swamp their CPUs as well as their IGPs), but it beat the heck out of our answer-- "PowerDVD Error: Unsupported Hardware".

I'll stop now.
September 28, 2007 2:18 PM PDT

archibael
 Sorry about the almost unreadable manifesto. It looked great in the ASCII box before I submitted it.
October 1, 2007 8:56 AM PDT

steve pitzel
 Hah! Thanks for the great post! Wow - it's going to take me awhile just to decode it :) !
- Pitz
October 1, 2007 1:07 PM PDT

archibael
 I guess if you want a couple of summary bullet items for a PowerPoint foil:

I'm not arguing that gaming is less important than media; that's for Marketing to figure out. I'm just saying that, in my view, Intel could do a handful of relatively simple things and capture a huge segment of the whole IGP market, and even some of the discrete. Our competition still doesn't have it totally right, and there is room for us to wedge our way in before they figure it out.

Whereas with gaming, you've got an unholy number of games to support, a sizable chunk of the market who are fundamentally opposed to integrated graphics processors for gaming, and two very well established players in this space who just have to tweak their drivers to support new products, not develop them from the ground up.
October 11, 2007 2:33 PM PDT


Art		 Multi-core... We need to write our GRAPHICS programs in a new way, for RIA, et al (it ain't about the graphics pipeline).
http://msdn.microsoft.com/msdnmag/issues/07/10/futures/default.aspx see Parallel Ray Tracer


Multi-processor machines are now becoming standard while the speed increases of single processors have slowed down. The key to performance improvements is therefore to run a program on multiple processors in parallel. Unfortunately, it is still very hard to write algorithms that actually take advantage of those multiple processors. In fact, most applications use just a single core and see no speed improvements when run on a multi-core machine. We need to write our programs in a new way.
November 11, 2007 10:47 AM PST


Nam		 Nice good bad ugly story - rest assured this will get back to the product teams....
December 5, 2007 8:36 AM PST

Steve Pitzel (Intel)
Total Points:
4,956
Status Points:
4,956
Community Manager
 All of you Second-Lifers using Vista on 965, check out Gael Holmes hack (http://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2007/11/29/there-is-a-.....5-chipset/) posted in the Graphics Blogs.

Also - if you haven't seen it - a new whitepaper on creating a Multi-threaded Real-Time Deep Ocean Simulation (http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/real-time-deep-ocea.....itectures/) has been posted on the Graphics Developer home page (http://software.intel.com/en-us/visual-computing/).

And one more thing :) - if you haven't taken our survey yet - take a minute or two and let us know about you! Hey...you'll even get a gift! Yes, we're just that shameless!

- Pitz
December 7, 2007 6:02 AM PST


fatmir		 I want to run my game CoD2..i have a GMA 950...haw can i made a driver for this?..if i can?
February 3, 2008 9:56 PM PST

archibael
 Intel Graphics in Home Theater PCs:
The Good, The Bad, The Ugly
--Three Months Later

Figured I'd update with the most recent information. In case someone is reading this who didn't read the original: I'm not touching gaming here. That has its own problems, and I can only assume someone is coping with them. This is strictly about Intel graphics used in the home theater.

My apologies for including some HDMI Audio stuff in here; I realize that this is a graphics developer page, but since HDMI carries both video and audio it's intimately wedded together. If you can suggest a better place to discuss it I'm all ears.

The Good:
-- Intel finally released official Vista drivers which support AACS protected path requirements. Thank you for enabling Blu-ray and HD DVD on G965, G33, and G35. It was killing me to know the hardware could do it but that software and paranoia were in the way.
-- ATI and Nvidia have still dropped the ball on integrating HDMI video with HDMI Audio and the sound card designers have not stepped up to the plate yet. Intel remains the only HDMI solution which can accurately reproduce Dolby TrueHD or DTS HD-Master without dropping down to two channels or lossy compression, and it looks like it will only get better on G45. There are people who are buying the Asus P5E-V(M) G35-based motherboard for this reason and this reason alone. I'm not sure I can elucidate how much of a victory that is. Whoever got Chrontel and SiI to build Azalia into their HDMI SDVO chips deserves RSUs. Lots and lots of RSUs.
-- Clearvideo still very competitive with discrete cards in the standard-def regime. So far spanks the competition's integrated chips as well (though the new stuff from ATI is something to watch out for).
-- My observation of the SDK for some unreleased drivers implies that some of my comments in the last edition of this message were either anticipated or noticed. Frankly, I don't care which: I don't want the credit, I just want functionality. :) There appear to be APIs for Detail/Denoise sliders! And for custom resolutions! Didn't see any for deinterlacing mode, but I only looked briefly. Very cool, guys.
-- New HDMI motherboards (G33 and G35-based) demonstrate that Intel can compete with ATI and Nvidia on a Blu-ray/HD DVD level.
-- If G45 lives up to its specs, it should kick serious ass in home theater PCs.
-- Our competition tends to use panel fitting to solve the underscan problem; the Intel DTD solution is GREAT because it does not use scaling for the desktop, but does for full-screen video. This is totally the right behavior: desktop text remains good-looking, video fits the screen perfectly. Don't change it!

The Bad:
-- Cyberlink marketing seems to be a clue-free zone. They claim on their website that Blu-ray and HD DVD can run on Intel graphics in WinXP-- but since Intel has not released a driver yet (and evidently don't plan to) which protects the video path enough to satisfy AACS requirements, people are buying Intel integrated graphics motherboards and getting annoyed when it doesn't work on XP. And since the error message is something along the lines of "Your graphics card is not HDCP compliant"... well, you can see who customers will blame.
-- Jury still out on HD HQV scores. Only one reviewer tried to run them, and the results were less than stellar (http://www.ocworkbench.com/2007/asus/p5e-vm-hdmi/b6.htm)
-- 24Hz video generates periodic microstutters. To most mindsets... who cares, right? What nutjob would run their screens at 24Hz? HTPC nutjobs, that's who-- that refresh rate exactly matches film's frame rate, and is how the film is stored on HD DVD and Blu-ray. It generates a judder-free image instead of a 3-2 cadence effect at 60Hz. And as more and more TVs are starting to add support for this framerate, it's growing in importance. People are noticing that ATI can generate this without stuttering, and it is something Intel should prioritize.
-- Underscan still difficult, and TVWizard still a big question mark. Does it work? On which hardware? What is it supposed to do, exactly... and does it yet? It seems almost self-serving to mention DTDCalculator, a 3rd party freeware application I helped design for Intel graphics which does what I imagine TVWizard is supposed to do. Hopefully Intel's got something similarly useful coming which uses the APIs I mentioned in The Good.
-- Broadcom decoder finally surfacing on laptops, but too little, too late, IMO. Never manifested as a card you could buy for your desktop, so wasn't useful for HTPCs. Easier and cheaper just to buy a Q6600 and take the compute hit of the full decode.

The Ugly:
-- HDCP repeater mode broken, meaning playback of Blu-ray and HD DVDs through a receiver is completely busted. ("Repeater mode" is essentially the abilty for the sink device to retransmit the video data to another sink farther down the stream). This isn't trivial: this is a very common configuration-- hooking devices to a receiver and having the receiver send to a TV is how 90% of home theater folks have their stuff set up. Plugging directly into a TV: fine. Adding a receiver in the middle causes playback software to throw an HDCP violation. I can't imagine the chipset guys don't know about this bug yet, but it cannot possibly be fixed too soon.
-- HDMI Audio works sporadically. Some customers have remarkable success at it (once they get around the repeater mode issue above by installing grey market software which removes the AACS protection from high-def disks); others struggle to get it working at all. One oft-repeated complaint I hear is that the PC throws a BSOD any time you change the receiver inputs... in other words, the HDCP-detection routines in the Intel drivers aren't robust enough to cope with the sink device switching away from Intel video (presumably breaking the HDCP handshake) and to another HDMI source. Scary. Also, our HDMI drivers are extremely picky; while other HDMI audio devices (HD DVD players, the Sony PS3) force 8-channel audio, Intel drivers are very picky and refuse to send anything more than
-- Intel 1st Level support sends people with HDMI Audio problems to the motherboard vendor, since "Intel doesn't support audio". Well, yeah, we do: we wrote the audio driver for the only two SDVO chips used and include it with our graphics drivers. The motherboard manufacturers are mystified and telling people to talk to Intel, and people are getting the runaround. This does not engender trust and other good feelings in the customer.
-- Many customers impacted by "default to 800x600" bug since driver versions 14.32 and 15.7. This is (perhaps not) coincidentally when the "Windows XP Persistence Mode" settings were proliferated from mobile to desktop and Vista. It's killing us. On every reboot or resume from Standby the desktop, the resolution defaults to 800x600 and has to be changed back manually. This is awful, and hasn't been fully resolved in 14.32.3 and 15.7.3, despite several bug fixes which address what appears to be similar issues with 800x600.

I'll close with this: is there someone I can send these issues to? 1st Level customer support serves their purpose in shielding the drivers guys from idiotic "is it turned on? is it plugged in?" questions, but I'm out there in the field (okay, cyber-field, anyway) encountering legitimate issues which I'm helping people troubleshoot... and in some cases, I'm afraid the answer is narrowed down to Intel drivers.

And while I've got access to some internal information, I don't have the ability to generate a sighting, so in the vast majority of cases I don't even know if the developers are aware of the issues, let alone working on them. HDMI Audio, in particular is a black hole from whence issues cannot seem to escape, but video, too, is spooky.

I'll be a guinea pig, a translator... heck, you can change my name to "Level 0 Support". It just pains me to see our decent hardware disparaged (and in many cases abandoned) in the marketplace because of driver issues. If we can get them fixed now, Eaglelake and Other Lakes Whom I Shall Not Mention will be solid solutions in the HTPC space. Help me help us win.

Regards,
AB
February 3, 2008 10:05 PM PST

archibael
 Sorry, lost this bit. Should read:

Also, our HDMI drivers are extremely picky; while other HDMI audio devices (HD DVD players, the Sony PS3) force 8-channel audio, Intel drivers are very picky and refuse to send anything more than 2-channel if the EDID on the end-device is even slightly unexpected. I'm not talking about no-name brand sink devices, here, I'm talking about top of the line Denon receivers, which work fine in glorious 7.1 channel sound for everything except Intel graphics... where the drivers refuse to send more than stereo. Bad!
March 6, 2008 4:01 PM PST


Kenneth Burns		 Archibael is a champion for intel on the avsforum.

The holy grail for HTPC right now seems to be a motherboard with an HDMI output that the user can connect to their reciever and then to their HDTV and pass 1080p Blu-ray video and high resolution bitstream or LPCM 7.1 audio.

I would buy any motherboard right now that could do this reliably.
March 6, 2008 7:06 PM PST

Michael Shadle (Intel)
Total Points:
373
Status Points:
323
Green Belt
 Don't forget the open source community. I'd like to run an HTPC type setup (like XBMC) on a Linux box and the more robust the drivers are the better something like that would work.

I tried for fun on my latest Shuttle XPC and I did not have the patience to mess with proper driver setup, if it was even possible to begin with. Getting the drivers out there, getting people testing them and getting easier configuration tools will help tremendously.
April 1, 2008 3:00 PM PDT


Andre Bernier		 I'm not sure if it will fix your denon highend receiver's EDID but the latest version of Powerstrip was able to write an EDID config to my optoma hd72i (to its eeprom) and i think it deserves to be mentioned even if its out of topic.
Should you try it, please post a clue on the result to other denon users.

Mr Burns: Couldn't agree more, I've been looking for this holy grail a long time too.
Most of us would want a silent Bluray HTPC doing all the goodies over HDMI.
I do not wish to buy any greywares from slysoft or others to play my well paid for bluraydisc collection. This should just work, smoothly.

I bet that if Intel makes this happen, and delivers the quality drivers we need, they will surprise the stockmarket with very high volume sales of small motherboards / chipsets in Q2.

Nice posts btw, enjoyed reading this blog.
April 27, 2008 6:58 PM PDT


melissa		 how do you tweak the registry on a computer?
May 12, 2008 10:04 AM PDT


JuMz		 Do you have anything new to add / remove from your post which was made in Sept 2007? Any changes? Improvements? Breakthroughs?
May 13, 2008 12:25 PM PDT


Steve Letsom		 Here here on the holy grail!
AND why isn't XP being supported for this? XP embedded is the perfect place to make this all work together, and yet, it can't be done with INTEL. Why not?

Need more updates!
May 13, 2008 5:22 PM PDT

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)
Total Points:
2,420
Status Points:
2,420
Black Belt
 All the same pieces are there for Intel in XP except the content protection. Difficult for me to assess whether this was a Vista/hardware interaction or a strategic decision to focus resources on the new OS rather than the old.
May 27, 2008 6:21 AM PDT


Mike Bonello (intel)		 I am trying to make an Intel chipset based laptop drive an external monitor that is basically PAL timing.
Works very well using other Gfx Cards and Powerstrip.

My question:

I have heard that there are a bunch of 'Development Drivers' for intel integrated gfx that will work with powerstrip (embedded PC drivers i believe) - do you know if this is true?

It's pretty simple for me to build an EDID circuit that will send monitor parameters to the PC's VGA socket.
IF i just added the weird PAL timings would the integrated graphics set up all the parameters (porch, vertical timing, horizontal blah blah etc) correctly?

thanks!
May 27, 2008 9:00 AM PDT

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)
Total Points:
2,420
Status Points:
2,420
Black Belt
 I don't think those IEGD drivers will work with Powerstrip per se, they just allow the construction of timings in a similar fashion to Powerstrip's Advanced Timings menu. You can so the same thing with a 3rd party application called DTDCalc (http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/isn/Community/en-US/forum.....44730.aspx) on the "normal" Intel drivers (14.25 and later), or hack the registry yourself (http://softwarecommunity.intel.com/Wiki/Graphics/239.htm).
June 12, 2008 4:20 PM PDT


Steve Letsom		 Back to XP (embedded)...
The problem is that the XP drivers won't work with blu-ray players, even if there is an HDCP compliant motherboard. I can run the same system under Vista with a G35 chipset and it works fine, but the player says it doesn't support protected content under XP. Please support XP embedded for this....

Thanks!
Steve
June 16, 2008 6:09 PM PDT


smoke123		 my gawd intel g35 needs to understand .....TO CALL URE SELF A HD MOTHERBOARD AT ALL GIVE ALL native resolutions of LCD HDTVS OUT THERE...

HOW ON earth can u get 1360 by 768 on a sony bravia now....DTS....if programs are out why the hell isnt it there in the first place....
December 23, 2008 10:02 PM PST


SSS		 I'd like to develop video decoding hardware acceleration support of G45. Is there any special requirement besides DXVA2? How can I implement it on windows XP?

Is there any development guide for G45 video decode acceleration?

Thanks!
March 9, 2009 5:44 PM PDT


Alban Hemery		 I'd like to comment the update from Archibael on February 3, 2008 8:56 PM PST regarding "The Good" about Vista drivers for Blu-Ray support on Intel G33: it seems it does not work !!!

I have a HTPC with
- motherboard Gigabyte GA-G33M-S2H (Intel G33 chipset)
- CPU Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo E6550 @ 2.33GHz
- 2048 MB memory
- VISTA Home premium 32bits (SP1 - up to date - French language)
- latest Intel G33 driver 7.15.10.1637 dated 16/01/2009
- LG HL-DT-ST BDDVDRW GGC-H20L ATA Device (newly installed)
- Power DVD v7.3.4617.0 (newly installed)

when playing a blu-ray disc, I get the message "graphic card not supported". I'm not the only one having this problem: look at the following link on the Cyberlink forum:http://forum.cyberlink.com/forum/posts/list/5800.page

Archibael, I hope you can support to stop such bad advertisment about Intel...

Thanks in advance!



May 5, 2009 7:48 AM PDT


Andy Banks		 Hi,

Exact same problem. I'm trying 1666 drivers.

Andy

Trackbacks (0)


Leave a comment  

To obtain technical support, please go to Software Support.
Name (required)*

Email (required; will not be displayed on this page)*

Your URL (optional)


Comment*