Driver for GMA X3000 (HW T&L)

317 posts / 0 new
Last post
For more complete information about compiler optimizations, see our Optimization Notice.
noxxle's picture

Arch, are the devs aware that the 15.4.4 vista driver gives much better performance for many games than the 15.7? In Galciv2, Homm: tribes of the east, and simcity socities I get over double the FPS with 15.4.4. In most other games that run under both the 15.4.4 and 15.7 driver, the 15.4.4 is often slightly faster too.

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture

Have you tried forcing software TnL? By default the drivers are currently using HW TnL, and in some cases the way the software is written makes itmore efficient to run in SW with a powerful CPU than use the chipset HW.


To enable SW TnL for a specific game, open the registry, do a search for


_3DMark06.exe


In that same area, create a new DWORD entry: "_[name of executable for the game]"


Set it to 1 for SW TnL. Swap it back to 0 for HW TnL.


Note that there are like a billion subdirectories (okay more like 12) which contain _3DMark06.exe and you'll have to create the same new entry in each one, just to be sure.

noxxle's picture

that worked, thank you. But I only had to add the new dward in the first reg entry that came up. Do you think a 'profile' manager could be included in the next driver release so users can control which games use HW shaders?

*edit* Also, i noticed that the games that had graphical texture problems in 15.4.4 still have them when forcing software mode under 15.7. Will the devs be doing anywork on the software mode compatibility in the future?

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture

Unfortunately, I just don't know. I'm in manufacturing. :) I just happen to watch these boards and try to help out where I can.

vak's picture

well, i can't find the realeased drivers neither for mobile nor for desktop chipset. Anyone can post the links? thanks

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture
noxxle's picture

Why is it taking so long for these drivers to appear on the mobile chipset downloads section? Could they be fixing bugs for a 15.7.1/14.32.1 release instead?

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture

This happens pretty much all the time, or used to. There's nothing to it really other than a proliferation delay. The folks who maintain the website are not the same ones who released the drivers and perhaps the message only went out (so far) to the motherboard guys.

davidc1's picture

I wouldn't doubt there is a problem with the 15.7 and 14.32 drivers as Noxxle suggests. You could be right Archibael, but many more people than I thought are having "default screen resolution" problems with the 14.32 drivers. I am one of the lucky people that doesn't have the problem. Soon after the "game-changing"(pardon the pun) 14.31 production drivers, 14.31.1 drivers were released which fixes a major bug on the 14.31 driver, not being able to switch between hardware/software mode properly.

Intel is nowhere near the "stable" level of the drivers yet. They still need a lot more effort.

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture

Put it this way: 14.32.2 does not fix the "Default resolution problem". They're not holding up 14.32 to introduce that one. And my source has no 15.7.x yet (if there's one on the roadmap, it's not yet released internally).


If there were a problem with 14.32 and 15.7 which made these guys think they needed to stop distributing them, they'd yank them from the motherboard sites as well.

noxxle's picture

archibael it just seems absolutely ridiculus that some of these 'simple' bugs have not been squashed. Exactly how 'underfunded' is the team working on these drivers? Would it be possible to communicate with them? Could someone direct them to these forums or something? Perhaps there are good reasons why some of these issues have not been resolved and they can explain it to us.

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture

You've got no argument from me; something as obvious as the "default to 800x600" bug should have been found-- if not by Intel's validation labs, certainly by the motherboard and PC vendors who had the driver for XY weeks to evaluate before it went Production Version.


I've got no answer for the rest of your queries. I don't know if the driver team follows this Forum (closely or otherwise), but I suspect they don't want to deal with the venom. In a way I can sympathize: it's easy for me to sit here and chat back and forth with you guys: it's just my employerand not my particular work being criticized. It stings for me, but not as much.

davidc1's picture
archibael:

Put it this way: 14.32.2 does not fix the "Default resolution problem". They're not holding up 14.32 to introduce that one. And my source has no 15.7.x yet (if there's one on the roadmap, it's not yet released internally).

If there were a problem with 14.32 and 15.7 which made these guys think they needed to stop distributing them, they'd yank them from the motherboard sites as well.



I don't have that "Default Resolution" problem with XP Service Pack 2 and 14.32 drivers. I think the reason they didn't figure out the problem is because it might be just an intermittent problem-it doesn't appear with all computers.
tcdelaney's picture

FWIW, I've had confirmation that the issueI reported (scaling at native resolution) is being investigated, and will be part of a new driver at some stage.


I would think that the 800x600 problem would be considered a higher priority since there's a simple workaround for my issue, but it could well be that they just haven't been able to replicate thethatissue yet.

prashu162's picture

14.32 drivers have disappeared from the downloads section.Where did the drivers go?????

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture

Duplicate Post

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture
archibael:

Put it this way: 14.32.2 does not fix the "Default resolution problem". They're not holding up 14.32 to introduce that one. And my source has no 15.7.x yet (if there's one on the roadmap, it's not yet released internally).


If there were a problem with 14.32 and 15.7 which made these guys think they needed to stop distributing them, they'd yank them from the motherboard sites as well.



Looks like we were both right, DavidC1

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture

Duplicate post

andu's picture

Ok, let's talk about serious matters because i see the people complaining but not answer given from Intel.

The HT&L DOES NOT work, I mean the 3Dmark DOES NOT recognice it, some other games and Everest Ultimate NEITHER.

That is the first of my concenrs, and I'd like a good feed back, because the email to intel support didn't get an anwer. Should i get back my laptop to the shop and get an AMD Laptop with an ATI o NVIDIA card? And all my friends as well?
I'm an laptops shop manager.. Should i say to my costumers NOT TO buy any Cpu with any intel graphic card?

Because is not only me who complains, are the custumers that ask me for an answer and i can't tell them anything.

Actually i don't mind if intel is working in an revolucionary driver that could adjust itself from soft H&L to hard H&L, I'd like to have it working now!!
Then, they can release the fixes to make the dynamic adjustment , but first make it work!!

And the laptop i'm selling right now are the Qwanta Tw7 intel core duo2, 1.5, 1GB ram.
So IS NOT hardware issue, even the Graphics BIOS is the lastest avaliable (1471).

Many thanks for spend your time reading this, and forgive my poor english, i'm spanish.

PD: I hope to get a good answer, this time from Intel itself, because the good archibael is taking to much questions...

Or i'm the only who is thinking Intel is making a not-funny joke about their own costumers?

davidc1's picture

To Andu: It has hardware T&L

To Intel: Lucky me that I am not running most of the games/apps that the X3000/X3100 is bugging out on.

I know the X3000 and X3100 is having problems both in Vista and XP, but from most reports, its significantly worse in Vista. As Vista will be majority of the computers foundation in the next 5-6 years, the driver development priority should be Vista over XP.

Now you guys must be happy that the majority of the graphics sold is IGPs, and the number 1 vendor for the IGPs is Intel. With the problems that plague Vista and X3000/X3100, I can see that marketshare going to zero pretty quickly. Because that XP performs better than Vista with X3000, and because ATI/Nvidia's IGP don't have the same problems in Vista, I can see some fault is related to Microsoft, and I can also put significant amount of that fault to crappy drivers.

Archibael-I am sorry but I do not believe that the "Larrabbee" project will be flawless with drivers unlike the IGPs. I fear that this problem will continue. This is why ATI/Nvidia managed to become a duopoly with nobody else even close. Their graphics driver is top-notch. It's why companies like Matrox with their Parhelia, and SiS with their discrete products failed to make a splash. Unlike CPUs and chipsets which do not require much of drivers to perform to their peak, drivers are critical to success for a GPU.

It'll be only a short matter of time until everyone uses Vista and nobody is using Intel IGPs. I can see if the current situation continues, I can see that X4500 will be a piece of crap like the X3000, but a faster crap.

prashu162's picture

Will Intel ever develop the perfect driver for GMA X3000?????
Archibael please let us know the situation what is happening???

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture
Archibael-I am sorry but I do not believe that the "Larrabbee" project will be flawless with drivers unlike the IGPs. I fear that this problem will continue.


Never said they were flawless, just that it was waypremature to judge this early in the product development. And, again, it's a completely separate team from the IGP developers, working directly with gaming companies (among others). I am cautiously optimistic.



This is why ATI/Nvidia managed to become a duopoly with nobody else even close. Their graphics driver is top-notch. It's why companies like Matrox with their Parhelia, and SiS with their discrete products failed to make a splash. Unlike CPUs and chipsets which do not require much of drivers to perform to their peak, drivers are critical to success for a GPU.


I don't disagree with any of this (well, except the implication that the Nvidia/ATI drivers are flawless-- they have their share of issues), and I bring it up with people internally when possible. I'm not in a position to change anything, unfortunately; it's all I can do just to keep up with assisting people cope with video/resolution bugs-- and that's in my spare time.

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture
Archibael please let us know the situation what is happening???


Sorry. Don't have a clue. My internal sources are silent on this.

davidc1's picture
archibael:
Archibael-I am sorry but I do not believe that the "Larrabbee" project will be flawless with drivers unlike the IGPs. I fear that this problem will continue.

Never said they were flawless, just that it was waypremature to judge this early in the product development. And, again, it's a completely separate team from the IGP developers, working directly with gaming companies (among others). I am cautiously optimistic.

This is why ATI/Nvidia managed to become a duopoly with nobody else even close. Their graphics driver is top-notch. It's why companies like Matrox with their Parhelia, and SiS with their discrete products failed to make a splash. Unlike CPUs and chipsets which do not require much of drivers to perform to their peak, drivers are critical to success for a GPU.

I don't disagree with any of this (well, except the implication that the Nvidia/ATI drivers are flawless-- they have their share of issues), and I bring it up with people internally when possible. I'm not in a position to change anything, unfortunately; it's all I can do just to keep up with assisting people cope with video/resolution bugs-- and that's in my spare time.


(It's not directed just to you, its also to Intel)

It's good thing that it looks positive for the discrete one. I just wish that at least some parts(of success)were carried to the integrated graphics. And since Larrabbee looks like a completely different architecture from the X3000, it looks like they'll need to rewrite new drivers all over again. I wonder why they can't keep basic architectures and build upon it to build a foundation. I have a feeling that after X4500, that Intel might completely abandon their IGP architecture and make a new IGP based off low-end Larrabbee core. It feels like a huge waste of money recreating everything. I can understand that for CPUs, because they are not driver dependent, but for GPUs, its a big thing.

Second one. Well I never directly implied that Nvidia/ATI's drivers are flawless. But from a user's point of view and looking at alternatives, I'd say its about the best you can get. I can tell from formatting my G965WH based computer and reinstalling windows everytime and reinstalling from the Intel driver CD, I can tell that Intel is not a software company. This stupid driver CD always creates problems that looks like it should have been fixed a long time ago. Intel motherboards/chipsets are good, but you won't get a novice user to make a top-notch system.

-Sigmatel sound drivers have a stupidly simple problem that looks like it should be fixed, but never seems to be
-Intel driver CD sometimes messes up, and sometimes it screws up bad enough that I cannot install it from the CD anymore. I don't even know how to fix it because what the hell causes CD autorun to suddenly not load properly?? Huh?? So what do I do?? I format. Eventually formatting is a time saving method than trying to figure out obscure methods for solutions myself on the net that might not exist.
-I can't really bypass the CD because Intel's links about drivers aren't all bunched up nicely like the installation CD. Plus, I can't really get onto the internet without installing the drivers in the CD fir
st.

Stupid problems like these pisses me off. The Sound driver issue is caused because for some reason it makes TWO identical folders and windows gets confused or something like that. The best was back when I had my 865G system. The CD on the 865G system wouldn't just install drivers on the CD, it would also point out the newest drivers by going online and you can download it from the windows utility without ever typing www.intel.com. Now why does a motherboard that came out 3+ years later don't have that feature?? It's DAMN ANNOYING!!!

I can get around the problems because I care about computers and I am more knowledgeable than the average person. But I feel sorry for those who get Intel Desktop Boards for the stability and quality and find out they can't even do simple things without basic knowledge.

Nvidia/ATI does drivers the WAY IT SHOULD BE. We shouldn't expect problems that plagues the X3000 from a company like Intel. They really know not too much outside of CPU/Fabrication/Chipsets(and no I specifically mean the PCI-Express controller+Memory Controller, not the integrated 3D thing with it).

Dealing with Intel's motherboards and graphics almost sounds like raising a kid. You may get a really good person in the end, but the effort required is tremendous and exhaustive.
Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture
DavidC1:
(It's not directed just to you, its also to Intel)

It's good thing that it looks positive for the discrete one. I just wish that at least some parts(of success)were carried to the integrated graphics. And since Larrabbee looks like a completely different architecture from the X3000, it looks like they'll need to rewrite new drivers all over again. I wonder why they can't keep basic architectures and build upon it to build a foundation. I have a feeling that after X4500, that Intel might completely abandon their IGP architecture and make a new IGP based off low-end Larrabbee core. It feels like a huge waste of money recreating everything.


Well, this architecture has at least one more generation coming after the X4500, and beyond that it's difficult to predict.



Second one. Well I never directly implied that Nvidia/ATI's drivers are flawless. But from a user's point of view and looking at alternatives, I'd say its about the best you can get. I can tell from formatting my G965WH based computer and reinstalling windows everytime and reinstalling from the Intel driver CD, I can tell that Intel is not a software company. This stupid driver CD always creates problems that looks like it should have been fixed a long time ago. Intel motherboards/chipsets are good, but you won't get a novice user to make a top-notch system.


No argument. The company seems to operate under the assumption that its boards are going into systems built by OEMs, but that's changed. I think we're going to have to cope properly with this change or watch motherboard/chipset revenues dwindle.


-I can't really bypass the CD because Intel's links about drivers aren't all bunched up nicely like the installation CD. Plus, I can't really get onto the internet without installing the drivers in the CD first.

The best was back when I had my 865G system. The CD on the 865G system wouldn't just install drivers on the CD, it would also point out the newest drivers by going online and you can download it from the windows utility without ever typing www.intel.com. Now why does a motherboard that came out 3+ years later don't have that feature?? It's DAMN ANNOYING!!!


Huh. Could swear the install utility in my G965OT did this but it's been a while since I installed.



I can get around the problems because I care about computers and I am more knowledgeable than the average person. But I feel sorry for those who get Intel Desktop Boards for the stability and quality and find out they can't even do simple things without basic knowledge.

Nvidia/ATI does drivers the WAY IT SHOULD BE. We shouldn't expect problems that plagues the X3000 from a company like Intel. They really know not too much outside of CPU/Fabrication/Chipsets(and no I specifically mean the PCI-Express controller+Memory Controller, not the integrated 3D thing with it).

Dealing with Intel's motherboards and graphics almost sounds like raising a kid. You may get a really good person in the end, but the effort required is tremendous and exhaustive.


Fair enough. I share your frustration, all the more so because I work at the same company as tho
se who are producing them.

davidc1's picture

About the Utility: Well it has menus for links to new drivers. I know the 865G driver CD utility allowed me to download the driver straight from the website. The DG965WH CD would just give me a link.

davidc1's picture

To the IGP driver development at Intel:

You guys are professionals and probably know this already, but let me emphasize. Take your time. I'd rather wait for a polished out driver than a rushed out one that gets released in time.

It does look like 14.32 driver was rushed from the problems being reported: texture corruption in games like CoD4, default resolution for some systems, and more intermittent problems. And it looks like the initial driver was pulled.

sabahmani's picture

Hello all,
i want to clear my doubts( iam a student and i dont know all abt hardware !!!!),
i wanted to know whether GMA X3000 is capable of software mode operation on DIRECTX 10 and upcomming DIRECTX 10.1 games with full texture and lighting???
and whether it supports OPENGL 2.0 completely!!!?? since the description for GMA X3000 is given as OPENGL 1.5+ !!
also whether SHADER MODEL 3.0 CAN BE CHANGED IN HARDWARE using software update to SHADER MODEL 4.0!!??
because i own a DG965RY board and i think i made an mistake because i could have waited for G35 chipset or desktop board to release!!

sabahmani's picture

hello all,
The release of these software updates are not satisfactory,since i ran GEARS OF WAR in windows XP, but i got LOW FPS on low settings too.i think intel driver team should concentrate on optimizing lighting , post processing and Texture filtering for next public test driver release...

davidc1's picture

Welcome to Intel Software Network Forums, sabahmani.

Gears of War is based off Unreal 3 engine. I don't think an IGP can get much faster than that.

OpenGL 2.0 support will eventually come for GMA X3000, but DirectX10/10.1 hardware will only come with the mobile GMA X3100 and the next gen desktop IGP GMA X3500. GMA X3000 will only support DX10 with software mode. I think it has most of the features to meet DX10 support but not all. Though I wonder how they'll meet 2xAA minimum. Do they have hidden Anti-aliasing in the hardware that we do not know??

tormentorduo's picture

2xAA is that a min spec for graphic cards in order to support DX10??


i have GMAX3000 but no AA in it, neither in the GMAX3100, at least games dont recognize it....................... so what now???


got any i idea archi?

tormentorduo's picture
prashu162: 14.32 drivers have disappeared from the downloads section.Where did the drivers go?????


maybe coz 14.31 is better! i instaleed 14.32 no performance improvement, i even believe that 14.31 was better so im going back to it

andu's picture

However the HT&L is not working yet. Not until Intel decide to make it fully functional.

davidc1's picture
TormentorDuo:

2xAA is that a min spec for graphic cards in order to support DX10??

i have GMAX3000 but no AA in it, neither in the GMAX3100, at least games dont recognize it....................... so what now???

got any i idea archi?



No, but its required for DX10.1. And Intel's page reports that the X3100/X3500 will have DX10.1 drivers.

Andu, please stop posting BS.
sabahmani's picture

hello all,
Thankx davidc1,
do u know when will be the NEXT driver with full lighting and texture support for DIRECTX 9.0c and software mode version for DIRECTX 10 will be finally released (atleast an approximation)???and also i think the driver should managed with above features uniformly....(man i am thinking i wasted too much of time for these driver releases and no more interested in it... i think i should switch to other manufacturers for better performance instead of waiting for G35 Desktop board to release, which might again have same problem as GMA X3000 and i dont wanna waste my time any more... and i would like to say to other peoples to buy the things which is properly benchmarked and i suggest the buyers to only belive practically accepted not on theoritical asumptions because they know the value of money...)

davidc1's picture
sabahmani: hello all,
Thankx davidc1,
do u know when will be the NEXT driver with full lighting and texture support for DIRECTX 9.0c and software mode version for DIRECTX 10 will be finally released (atleast an approximation)???and also i think the driver should managed with above features uniformly....(man i am thinking i wasted too much of time for these driver releases and no more interested in it... i think i should switch to other manufacturers for better performance instead of waiting for G35 Desktop board to release, which might again have same problem as GMA X3000 and i dont wanna waste my time any more... and i would like to say to other peoples to buy the things which is properly benchmarked and i suggest the buyers to only belive practically accepted not on theoritical asumptions because they know the value of money...)



It wasn't too long ago that Intel pulled the buggy 14.32 driver. I still have it because I don't have a problem with it but I hope the fixed one is good. Archibael said that the DX10 driver is due in March. From what I read, full support for SM4.0 and OpenGL 2.0 is even later, its like Q3 next year!!

I wouldn't wait for the G35. Initial benchmarks show that it isn't faster than the G965.
ssb_swe's picture

i too dont have any problem with the 14.32 drivers with a fresh install of xp!!!
i used the software opengl extensions viewer 2.32 and it gives
excellent details about our g965 chipset ,it shows that with the latest
drivers only support for opengl v 1.5 is enabled but none of its
functionalities are enabled yet!!!!!!!!!,somebody give that software a
try

agent_j's picture

I just tried it software opengl extensions viewer, here's my result with Vista 15.7 Drivers:

Core features
v1.1 (100 % - 7/7)
v1.2 (100 % - 8/8)
v1.3 (100 % - 9/9)
v1.4 (100 % - 15/15)
*under functions, glPointParameteri/iv not checked
v1.5 (100 % - 3/3)
*no functions checked
v2.0 (10 % - 1/10)
v2.1 (0 % - 0/3)


robertw3d's picture

Dear All,

First of All I would like to say Hi! to all of you :-)
It's my first post here, but I'm definately not newbie :-)
I bought HP 6510b with X3100 and Vista ):-[ for my wife and I see that this graphic processor has several big issues. I'm still in touch with Intel's technical support who's telling me that it has HW T&L unit but after my last tests I clearly see that it's nothing but lie.

Under Everest I see that T&L is not supported, Cinebench shows me exactly the same results no matter if I use software or OpenGL rendering. The same is with 3dmark 03 and 05 (2001 is not the best app to run under Vista) . Besides that I can't get an answer if X3100 has it's own 128MB of memory or not. I get an information that it reserves that amount of RAM, but in system information I see that I have 2048MB ... in my old laptops with 910XX or 950 when I reserved some amount of RAM that is subtracted it from total in system information ... Does anyone knows how it looks in real? It's really pity that Intel can't make just compatible drivers - I know that T&L is old but some apps still use is it instead of VS & PS. BTW - are they supported by HW or SW? ... there are so many doubts here ...
This can be one of the best mobile graphics chipstes (I think it's architecture can be as good as some entry level GFs or Radeons ... ) but so far it's so slooow (sometimes slower then my old Quadro FX500(GF5200)) produces a lot of troubles - in most newer games I have to play at 640x480 with almost no details (NFS:Pro Street, SEGA Rally REVO) or some just doesn't work (NFS:Carbon)
One more "interesting" problem at the end - when Vista's Aero is one then Age of Empires III Demo works much slower and graphics is not ok (textures seems to "overbrightened")

For me Intel should introduce in Vista such features (in that order):
- Full HW support for DX9.0(L) (incl. HW T&L !!)
- HW support for 3.0 (I'm not sure if works now in HW mode ...)
- Full compatibility with DX10
- Full compatibility with OpenGL 2.x (including GLSL which is now not supported)

What do you think about it?
Does anyone made performance comparison between best XP and 15.7 Vista driver - I would like to do it on my own but I would like to avoid making a mess on that laptop.

One more thing at the end - Microsoft Update downgrades 15.7 driver to some older version saying that it has "newer" one ... LOL!

Best Regards,
Robert

davidc1's picture
robertw3d: Dear All,

First of All I would like to say Hi! to all of you :-)
It's my first post here, but I'm definately not newbie :-)
I bought HP 6510b with X3100 and Vista ):-[ for my wife and I see that this graphic processor has several big issues. I'm still in touch with Intel's technical support who's telling me that it has HW T&L unit but after my last tests I clearly see that it's nothing but lie.

Under Everest I see that T&L is not supported, Cinebench shows me exactly the same results no matter if I use software or OpenGL rendering. The same is with 3dmark 03 and 05 (2001 is not the best app to run under Vista) . Besides that I can't get an answer if X3100 has it's own 128MB of memory or not. I get an information that it reserves that amount of RAM, but in system information I see that I have 2048MB ... in my old laptops with 910XX or 950 when I reserved some amount of RAM that is subtracted it from total in system information ... Does anyone knows how it looks in real? It's really pity that Intel can't make just compatible drivers - I know that T&L is old but some apps still use is it instead of VS & PS. BTW - are they supported by HW or SW? ... there are so many doubts here ...
This can be one of the best mobile graphics chipstes (I think it's architecture can be as good as some entry level GFs or Radeons ... ) but so far it's so slooow (sometimes slower then my old Quadro FX500(GF5200)) produces a lot of troubles - in most newer games I have to play at 640x480 with almost no details (NFS:Pro Street, SEGA Rally REVO) or some just doesn't work (NFS:Carbon)
One more "interesting" problem at the end - when Vista's Aero is one then Age of Empires III Demo works much slower and graphics is not ok (textures seems to "overbrightened")

For me Intel should introduce in Vista such features (in that order):
- Full HW support for DX9.0(L) (incl. HW T&L !!)
- HW support for 3.0 (I'm not sure if works now in HW mode ...)
- Full compatibility with DX10
- Full compatibility with OpenGL 2.x (including GLSL which is now not supported)

What do you think about it?
Does anyone made performance comparison between best XP and 15.7 Vista driver - I would like to do it on my own but I would like to avoid making a mess on that laptop.

One more thing at the end - Microsoft Update downgrades 15.7 driver to some older version saying that it has "newer" one ... LOL!

Best Regards,
Robert



To hell with that guy who spewed out BS that the drivers don't have hardware T&L support and Vertex Shaders.

The driver has the ability to switch between hardware & software mode depending on which mode will be faster. DON'T be stupid. And Hardware is NOT always faster. Do you think a Riva TNT(TNT 1 basically) will be faster if it had hardware T&L compared to Core 2?? I don't think so.
tccwin's picture

I have DG965RYCK, E6300, Corsair 2*1GB 800, BIOS 1715,Vista x64 SP1 RC, Driver (Display 15.7) rest all to latest.


I am trying to play Crysis,I can play it for 2 min with 10 fps,but it freeze after every 2 min andI have to start game again.I have no issue with texture even if they are corrupt, but why does it freeze after 2 min. I have the original CD.


Errors in Console on Map load:


[Error] Error: CallMethod - 'gotoAndStop' on invalid object. [Libs/UI/Menus_StartMenu.gfx]


[Error] Error: CallMethod - 'gotoAndStop' on invalid object. [Libs/UI/HUD_RadarCompassStealth.gfx]


WhatI have checked is that on freeze, cpu utilisationis 50% (one core 100%) for crysis.exe, OS is working working fine andI can do ALT+TAB and end task crysis from taskmgr.All temperature in IDU are Green. None of the forums are reporting this. Can any one explain me whats wrong.

davidc1's picture
tccwin:

I have DG965RYCK, E6300, Corsair 2*1GB 800, BIOS 1715,Vista x64 SP1 RC, Driver (Display 15.7) rest all to latest.

I am trying to play Crysis,I can play it for 2 min with 10 fps,but it freeze after every 2 min andI have to start game again.I have no issue with texture even if they are corrupt, but why does it freeze after 2 min. I have the original CD.

Errors in Console on Map load:

[Error] Error: CallMethod - 'gotoAndStop' on invalid object. [Libs/UI/Menus_StartMenu.gfx]

[Error] Error: CallMethod - 'gotoAndStop' on invalid object. [Libs/UI/HUD_RadarCompassStealth.gfx]

WhatI have checked is that on freeze, cpu utilisationis 50% (one core 100%) for crysis.exe, OS is working working fine andI can do ALT+TAB and end task crysis from taskmgr.All temperature in IDU are Green. None of the forums are reporting this. Can any one explain me whats wrong.



tccwin, the reason of the crash is probably related to running out of memory. Download the latest patches for Vista, there's a hotfix that reduces virtual memory usage significantly. However, you can't fix one thing: Vista and Crysis combined uses a LOT of memory. It doesn't happen in XP until I set settings to High or something. Because Vista+Crysis can exceed 32-bit limit of 4GB(2GB physical+2GB virtual), you crash.
tccwin's picture

I understand what you are saying. I have tried to apply that patch, also installed vista SP1 RC, tried on XP, XP with SP3 RC, 2003 with SP2, and Windows 2008 server. Every where its the same issue.

davidc1's picture
tccwin: I understand what you are saying. I have tried to apply that patch, also installed vista SP1 RC, tried on XP, XP with SP3 RC, 2003 with SP2, and Windows 2008 server. Every where its the same issue.



My System:
Core 2 Duo E6600
DG965WH
2x1GB DDR2-800 Transcend(5-5-5-15)
1x36GB WD360GD, and 1x160GB Seagate ST3160815AS
WinXP SP2
14.31.1 and 14.32 drivers

I have played 800x600 low settings for 40 minutes without a crash(I quit the game after that). I only saw a crash after 5-10 minutes when I play with almost everything on High.
prashu162's picture

Archibael can u please let us know when r they going to release the drivers???
Why dont they give us the drivers as a christmas gift??? :P he he just kidding.

Aaron Brezenski (Intel)'s picture

Looks more like a Valentine's Day gift at this moment for 14.33 and 15.8. That's ignoring any .1 or .2 releases which may occur to fix egregious problems.* I've seen 15.7.1 on the roadmap, for instance.



* Your definition of "egregious" may differ from Intel's driver folks'. (Mine sometimes does).

nakp's picture

Hi, Im new here, first you should know it was kinda difficult to find this post, i had seen it a couple of months ago searching for release dates for intel drivers.

It's me or the 14.32 driver is nowhere? I've being searching fot 'em and i cant find it

tccwin's picture

I hope Intel takes care thatX3000 could atleastrun crysis at low specs.

tccwin's picture

What is the progress of the 14.32 dirver which was taken back. Can they release its beta atleast. Someting like nightly or weekly builds. I wish intel also resolves some threading issues.

acidicx's picture

It seems that the 14.32 got a bug (even though I can't find it - runs fine for me) and so they removed the dl. For all those who want to try the 14.32 (even if it has virtually no performance improvements imho) I upped it at rapidshare:


http://rapidshare.com/files/80314095/GFX_XP32_14.32.0.4885_PV_Intel.rar.html


But I remind you: as the 14.32 is not officially released for the X3100 Intel has no responsibilitys to help you on any issues. Neither do I for providing the dl.


Some of you complain about that very HW intensive games are not running properly.
An IGP is not built for games. If you want to game, buy a system with a dedicated graphics card, but you won't get5 hours battery lifetime with a GF8-Series built in.You simply can't complain if Crysis does not run fast on an IGP, even with low settings.It's simply not made for it. IGPs are made to run office apps, just basic stuff, because they should produce virtually no heat or consume a lot of power.


BUT on the other hand, Intel said the X3100 would have DX10 support (which also means SM3.0, as it's part of the DX10 specs).This was a year ago. So, it was kind of an advertisement lie, because we still don't have it.


Even the old game "Settlers 5" bluescreens on XP, so there are also some serious issues with the drivers, even if they don't have the promised support yet.


To Robert:
I've got the 6510b, too. The X3100 can get up to 384mb from the system's memory (RAM). Thats also on the HP website I think.. ;-)

Pages

Login to leave a comment.