Link copiado
ralph121:
I have to say that the graphic cards that Intel supplies with most average price range computers ($800-1000) are crap. They dont play most games that are even a few years old. I am very dissatisfied that my $900 laptop that came with an Intel video card andis for the most part useless. It doesnt run design programs sufficiently either(cad, sketchup, ect.) If I wanted to play a new game that comes out, I have to spend additional funds just to get a standard Nvidia card in a computer with equal specs. I believe if you are spending over $800 on a computer, it should be able to play a computer game and run a few design programs. What good is an Intel graphics card when nothing supports it. 32mb of video memory is barely enough to support the operating system. In hind sight I should have gotten a decent video card to begin with, but cannot afford to pay for the Nvidia name. A computer with identical specs but with a Nvidia card would run $250-500 over the price. I just dont understand why Intel cards are so crappy? I mean why integrate a useless video card into the motherboard? I cant change it out, so I have to live with it. This is a terrible situation going on with video card right now. I hope it improves soon. Im more than pleased with my processor, its just too bad that Intel lacks so much in the graphics department.
LOL. Your post is pretty funny. Intel's graphics only suck because they don't do anything other than integrated graphics. ATI/Nvidia's integrated graphics aren''t miles ahead either. It's there for the people who doesn't even touch 3D, there are lots of people that does that, which is why integrated graphics sells.And they have more than 32MB memory. You are mistaken. It only shows 32MB because it allocates more when the application needs it, pretty smart, rather than using 384MB permanently. And it gives the memory back when the application closes and you are doing things like surfing the web.
Never heard of you get what you pay for?? Integrated graphics adds $4 to a system. It's rest of the components that make it cost $1000. The cheapest discrete graphics cost 10x more.
Buying a computer is like everything else. You don't research about it, you get a one that you don't like. Integrated graphics are for people like:
1. Like me, who can stand playing games at 20-30 fps or lower, who likes a quiet computer and doesn't waste money on a graphics card that'll be obsolete in a year anyway
2. Laptop users who like to save money and have bettery battery life. Hey, $100 saved is a $100 saved
3. People who doesn't do anything 3D.
David,
Thanks for clarifying and elaborating on the subject. I agree with you on you get whatyou pay for. I just think it would be nice to get a video card that could atleast play a new game or two, and as I look at the specs of most new games, Intel is not a compatable card. Being able to upgrade a laptops video card hopefully will soon become a viable alternative to having to shell out another $1000 for a new computer. Lessoned learned on my part. But the question still ponders my mind; why cant Intel's cards be more compatable with games and design applications? How much more money would it take to expand the memory to atleast 64mb and add some pixel shaders? A new computer that includes a Nvidia graphics card is definately going to run me up to $500 over the price of an intel card. I have an old Nvidia card in my desktop that runs games my brand new laptop cannot. So I dobelieve a middle of the line Nvidia or ATi cardwould significantly benefit the users of new laptops only because they can support most games for atleast 2-3 years, which is the average shelf life of most laptops. My laptop being only 6 months old can only support a handfull of older games. Im also reluctant to buy a stand alone gaming system, when I use my laptop for everything else, it just makes more sense to me to play games on it. More than likely I will be purchasing an external graphics card when they hit the market, as Im sure it will solve this problem all together.
Well, technically Intel graphics don't have any video memory, because it shares with system memory. The latest Intel integrated cards can support up to 384MB shared between your CPU and the graphics.
The reason that Intel doesn't do much more is because its an IGP-Integrated Graphics Processor. The graphics chip is built in the same chip your memory controller and pci express controller is in. People would call that MCH, or Northbridge. Intel sells the IGP MCH's $4 more than the ones without the IGP. Certainly on Intel's part, there's not much financial benefits of spending to make a better graphics(well, other than the fact that people may buy AMD instead).
Currently, Intel only makes integrated GPUs. Now if they made a dedicated GPU it would perform much better. But because its integrated with the core logic chipset, it costs them extra transistor budget and die size budget. How far they are willing to go with the $4 they make, I don't know, but its probably not a lot.
What's your laptop??
Could you tell me at least how could I make the card use those 384 MB
It does already use the entire 384MB if it needs to. You can see the current usage of memory in the intel GMA taskbar tool by clicking information.
and work with any version of sketchup without basic errors such as unabilty to select a face or dissapearing translucent faces?
Let me first say: Yes, please let intel fix this issue.
However I'm here for the unconvential and quick solutions. Here we go:
a) [EASY] Try installing a pure software OpenGL library known to work flawless. Performance won't be that great as with an hardware assisted solution - however if the scenes are not that complex it'll work. Your faces won't disappear. Try Mesa 3D for Windows:
http://mesa3d.sourceforge.net/
You might want to try MesaWinBinaries-6.0.zip since other releases are source code only:
http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=3
b) [MEDIUM-HARD, has some issues] We're talking about this SketchUp, right? Although in a different version:
http://sketchup.google.com/intl/de/products.html
http://www.sketch3d.de/
In that case you probably discovered that it requires a 100% OpenGL compatible graphics card and interestingly it links to IEGD (Intel Embedded Graphics Drivers). They include a more updated and probable more direct Mesa derivative:
http://sketchup.google.de/support/bin/answer.py?answer=36254
http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Product_Filter.aspx?ProductID=2159
c) [HARD] As the company Psystar shows, there are some ways to install MacOS on a regular PC. This will also run SketchUp
d) [BEST] If're very honest, you probably have to admit that you bought the wrong hardware or you had some very bad consultants. ATI and nVidia consumer products may be better in this respect since they can draw many features from their professional counterparts due to the Unified Driver Architecture. Intel doesn't offer any professional OpenGL solutions and probably also lacks some certification processes in this respect. Nvidia and ATI do - and probably even their consumer productline is sufficient. The right graphics card solution in your application domain is an nVidia Quadro NVS and nothing else:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/quadro_nvs_notebook.html
Buying a Dell Latitude D630/D830 with such a graphics are is a damm' bargain and you should sell your current notebook and get one of those. That's the cold hard truth. By saying this I mean: If you're going to install IEGD drivers you're probably getting even more mad than you already are.
