| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Intel graphics vs. ATIIntel graphics vs. ATIPosted Jun 14, 2007 8:08 UTC (Thu) by drag (subscriber, #31333)In reply to: Intel graphics vs. ATI by dark Parent article: R500 initial driver release
The Intel X3000 should compare quite favorably versus the ATI 9250. If the 9250 performs better, it's because of the maturity of the drivers and not anything to do with the hardware.
The Intel onboard realy does well with 3D desktops. So if you want that, then Intel is the way to go. Also since Intel now employs a number of high profile X hackers, then if you want things to have the best chances of 'just work', then Intel is the ticket.
For gaming performance it should be adiquate for the vast majority of Linux games, but the lack of dedicated RAM for the video card hurts it.
Within a couple years Intel should have dedicated video cards out. High-end versions that are intended to compete head-to-head with the best from Nvidia released first, then cheaper models as time goes on. Huge 16-core monsters with completely programmable and x86-like. Something like that.
Of course the long-term situation is that eventually all but the very high end will be integrated directly into the main proccessor as a specialized core.
(Log in to post comments)
Intel graphics vs. ATI Posted Jun 15, 2007 11:45 UTC (Fri) by leoc (subscriber, #39773) [Link] But will the high end Intel cards have open source drivers supported at the same level as their low end cards now? From what I have heard, the reason we will never see open source drivers from ATI and Nvidia is because of all the third party licensed code they rely on. Will Intel be able to develop all this code on their own?
|
|
||||||||||||