backtop

Hardware Intel Fesses up to G45 Performance Issues
Shane McGlaun (Blog) - August 15, 2008 12:45 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 49 comment(s) - last by Targon.. on Aug 21 at 9:50 AM
Intel blames software partners for one of the most severe issues

Intel launched its G45 chipset featuring its latest integrated graphics only a few weeks ago. So far, the response to the chipset and motherboards using the chipset has been a mixed bag by Intel's own admission.

Aaron Brezenski wrote a blog entry this week on the Intel Software Network that was titled, "Welcome to G45! Better (but still imperfect…)." In the blog, Brezenski wrote that Intel's competition -- AMD -- put together a demo booth stating that HP laptops using Intel's G45 did not accelerate Blu-ray playback. AMD maintains that its integrated graphics were able to playback Blu-ray without issue.

Brezenski points out the fact that AMD fails to offer any specifications as far as the CPUs used in the systems and Intel maintains it was not an apples to apples comparison. Despite that fact, Brezenski acknowledge that the demo showed Intel's CPU to be 100% utilized -- a clear indication that Blu-ray acceleration was not taking place.

Brezenski also talked a bit about review ExtremeTech did of an Intel DG45ID motherboard, which also found that Blu-ray acceleration didn't work. Even after an update to the review, the Intel system was still only able to score 30 out a possible 100 on the HD HQV test performed.

Brezenski says that his sources -- presumably within Intel -- have told him that the low HD HQV test scores were the result of a software player issue. Brezenski says that properly configured advanced de-interlacing would raise scores 20 points higher, and while he admits those scores are still not perfect, he says they are workable. Brezenski hopes driver tweaks will help improve performance even more in the future.

Using Arcsoft Total Media Player, Brezenski says that Blu-ray acceleration is clearly working, as indicated by CPU utilization lower than 20% on all Blu-ray materials. The big issue with G45 according to Brezenski is that stuttering every 15 seconds of Blu-ray playback at 24 Hz is still an issue. The same problem with stuttering was seen in previous Intel products including G965 andG35. According to Brezenski, Intel believed the stuttering at 24 Hz with the G965 and G35 platforms was due to the SDVO chips being used for HDMI with Intel graphics. That has proven to be incorrect since the same chips are not used on G45.

That's not the least of G45 problems. Perhaps the biggest issue of all -- especially considering G45 was expected to be an excellent HTPC chipset -- is that G45 is still unable to send 7.1 surround sound through a receiver. Considering the vast majority of home theater enthusiasts -- possibly the most likely to use the G45 chipset -- will have AV receivers in their home theaters, this one issue will be a deal killer for the majority of home theater enthusiasts.

Brezenski says that this is not a problem with Intel's hardware; rather the problem is that standard COPP protocols used in current software players do not support the use of repeaters. He goes on to say that, software players available don't take advantage of OPM, which does support repeaters.

Brezenski writes in his blog post, "I don't know what we can do at Intel to implore our partners in the software player companies to get this done (implement OPM), but we need them to implement a fix for this issue ASAP. I know we must be engaged with them on this, I just don't see why it's not implemented yet. It's been at least three months, and it's making us, not them, look bad in the marketplace."

Despite all the problems Brezenski still maintains that G45 is the perfect home theater chipset. Intel's inability to get its latest integrated graphics functioning correctly for home theater use -- whether or not Intel is at fault -- may leave many wondering how they'll be able to pull off a more complicated discrete graphics processor based on Larrabee in the future.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Same old same old...
By Amiga500 on 8/15/2008 12:57:46 PM , Rating: 5
Our next graphics chipset will work... honest.




RE: Same old same old...
By Amiga500 on 8/15/2008 1:05:10 PM , Rating: 5
Oh... and Larrabee is an x86 based GPU... which will rely heavily on what to perform to a high standard?

Yeap, you've guessed it... SOFTWARE.


RE: Same old same old...
By michael2k on 8/15/2008 2:13:09 PM , Rating: 2
The good news is that Intel is actually good at that. Witness blu-ray taking 100% CPU, for example :)


RE: Same old same old...
By nosfe on 8/15/2008 2:41:14 PM , Rating: 4
yep, they really know how to write drivers that use 100% of the CPU, no wasted resources from intel


RE: Same old same old...
By MrPoletski on 8/15/2008 9:07:50 PM , Rating: 2
yep not a single cycle wasted (as in left for system idle process). you'd better buy yerself a faster processor (from intel of course) if you wanna get it done quicker though.


RE: Same old same old...
By Penti on 8/15/2008 2:15:00 PM , Rating: 2
Well all hardware does rely on software - the driver. As long as the hardware does the stuff DX/OGL asks for through the driver fast enough it will be fine without specialized instructions/operations. It's not that any hardware run D3D or OGL directly, it's just specialized for the stuff. They won't have standard floating point or vector units (SIMD) anyway.


RE: Same old same old...
By daftrok on 8/16/2008 5:14:24 AM , Rating: 5
Oh please it's just a cop out. When Sony was having lackluster performance on their 2006-2007 Vaios they were blaming Vista. Nvidia blamed software, Intel blames software, SSD blamed software. Just because you make hardware doesn't mean it entitles you to disregard checking if the software works properly. What was Intel's rush bringing out G45 anyways? If these companies just spend an extra month making sure their sh*t works maybe it won't end up screwing over millions of customers.


RE: Same old same old...
By Penti on 8/17/2008 6:55:30 AM , Rating: 2
It doesn't, but it was a Larrabee comment.

However it's not like any of the companies that makes mediaplayers are that good themselfs. And you can't claim that Intel should start writing there own codecs and players. They however failed to work with those companies and that's there own fault.


RE: Same old same old...
By Suomynona on 8/15/08, Rating: -1
RE: Same old same old...
By teldar on 8/15/2008 5:28:41 PM , Rating: 2
It sounds like the sb700 and SB750 are both well worth having. It would just be nice if AMD were willing to include a ethernet controller in their chipset like everyone else does.


RE: Same old same old...
By rudolphna on 8/15/2008 9:33:51 PM , Rating: 4
They are. I own 3 Radeon Chipset computers. (Xpress 1250, AMD 780G, and an AMD 770.) All are completely stable. The 3850 and 2600XTs I have are also completely stable. The only problems I have with any of them are caused by the Crap Netgear Wireless card on one. While I have never had problems with intel, beyond i915G troubles, even you have to admit, that AMD graphics chipsets are far more capable when it comes to gaming. I can play WoW at 1280x800, with 0x AA and otherwise max settings on the Xpress 1250 at completely playable framerates. The intel can barely run it at 800x500


RE: Same old same old...
By voodooboy on 8/15/2008 1:58:05 PM , Rating: 2
Reading this comment right after reading the entire article, it looked as if you'd quoted that Aaron guy saying that...funny stuff :D


RE: Same old same old...
By tallcool1 on 8/16/2008 7:47:35 AM , Rating: 5
Intel graphics have always been horrible, "barely enough" should be their motto.

Funny how all of a sudden when Intel talks about releasing a new graphics chip "Larrabee", Anandtech acts like its going to be the next greatest thing when history tells us, not likely. However when AMD/ATI released the 4870 X2 showing top notch performance, the Anand review made it sound like it was a botched piece of hardware not worth buying.

Anand summerized the first page of their 4870 X2 review by ending it with the following quote:
quote:
Enough with being distracted by AMD's product lineup, let's talk about the competition.


WHAT?!?!


RE: Same old same old...
By inv on 8/16/2008 11:44:39 AM , Rating: 3
When was the last time you read a GFX/CPU review that didn't try and sway its visitors into a bias towards company X, or felt that the numbers were a little odd. It's a shame, I don't know what to believe these days!


RE: Same old same old...
By iocedmyself on 8/19/2008 5:56:04 AM , Rating: 5
No review is completely devoid of bias, but i agree with those who fear anand will go the way of tomshardware. I used to be a loyal reader of THG, but now i just read it to make fun of those who write the craptastic articles. While Anand isn't as biased by any means they still seem to heavly favor Intel/nvidia, their saving grace is well written articles that more often than not are factual with the bias being kept to the obvious form of the writer opinion.

However the shameless pimping of Nehalem/larrabee and to a lessar extent the GTX260/280 proves that no matter how well informed the hardware journalists may be, they still pimp what they're paid to and that makes them whores.

Intel IGP's up until very recently struggled to display the desktop animations in WinXp, and more depressingly Win2K. When intel was asked about this chipsets support of Blu-ray/HD video playback they always skirted the question by rattling off it's features and an indirect comment indicating that it would support it though they couldn't officially say so. Pretty much a "well what would be the selling point of the IGP if it couldn't go up against AMD's version" wink wink, nudge nudge.

The Nehalem silcon is a carbon copy of AMD's with a die shrink and the same poor 64bit performance. That's what no one seems to acknowledge, AMD doesn't care about 32bit performance it's focused on 64bit, and Intel is using AMD's x86-64 code on their chips so they know it's futile to try and compete in 64bit thus they downplay it's benifits and push 32bit.

After reading the review of the Nehalem on here I clocked my 9850 phenom to 2.66ghz and ran the 64bit version of cinebench and compared the results to the 32bit results of Intels new baby. In single core performance intel had a 5% lead, in multicore intel's lead went up to just under 15%. 15% clock-for-clock performance gain for a chip that will most likely cost $1000-$1300 MORE than an AMD chip. Granted the test board and drivers weren't mature, that's still not hugely impressive, by no means worth the fact that you can build 2 high performance AMD rigs for the cost of an Intel flagship cpu that will be replaced in 3 months by something that has near identical performance, half the cache and half the cost.

The larrabee just makes me laugh. Its design team is the same guy's that are responsible for netburst, and one of the industry's high level players has the opinion of

"well i think larrabee is the result of the same guys that brought us the pentium 4 needing something to do, and larrabee is the kind of thing they do well. Bringing you the best 1996 had to offer..."

Intel has already released the info that announces their impending doom,

"The larrabee will be capable of UP TO 16 FLOPS / per clock/per core."

while people ignore the creative wording of the performance even under the best circumstances the math is still straightforward. For a single 65nm core the performance will be
1 GHZ clock = 16 Gigaflop/sec
2 GHZ clock = 32 Gigaflops/sec
3 Ghz Clock = 48 Gigaflops/sec

It's easy to see how larrabee will be so ground-breaking. The top performing GPU core is only putting out a measely

750mhz clock = Teraflop/sec (1000 Gigaflop/sec)

Doing so on a 55nm core, with 512mb - 1024mb of GDDR5 running at speeds of 3600 - 4400mhz with no hardware modifacation.

To even make par Intel would need to have a 32 core larrabee with a clock of 2ghz, and they are still at least a year and a half away from doing that. The first release is claimed to be an 8 core chip, which means that it's computation power will be

2ghz clock = 32 GF/s x 8 = 256 GF/s
3Ghz Clock = 48 GF/s x 7 = 384 GF/s

Well i should say that is the peak performance, ya know when it launches in another 6+ months it will have UP TO BETWEEN 1/4 and 1/3 the performance of a gpu that's already near 2 months old.

Intel can't get a single core IGP to work properly, doesn't have the greatest track record with multi-core cpu's...but they'll get it....this time. Riiiiggghhtt

In regard to Nvidia, they have just been milking the G80 core for the past 2 years, die shrinks, memory upgrades, different cooling and small tweaks that should have been nothing more than a refresh released under the same GPU nane, Probably has something to do with the fact that the 8800 GTX ultra was still $550+ a month ago.

I prefer AMD/ATI, i admit my bias, i used to be a die hard intel/nvidia fan, until they stopped making progress but kept raising prices. I had a 2900xt for a year and a half, just traded it in for 4870. I used it in 64bit Vista ultimate with a 939 dual core toledo and could play Crysis in ulta high setting in 1280x1024 with 40 FPS minimum. As i got the card for free, i had no complaints. There were alot of features that never got used that would have increased performance hugely, but i didn't find it lackluster enough to covet an 8800 ultra.

Intel is great for 32bit enviorments, and for those who count the frame rates when they play games, and don't mind blowing a couple extra grand on their system every 6 months. AMD is better for 64bit enviorments, multitasking and workstation 3D rendering apps/ video editing, and for those that like to build a computer every 6 months but don't want to spend more than $600 or $700 to get high performance.


RE: Same old same old...
By ICE1966 on 8/17/2008 8:30:01 PM , Rating: 2
I agree, I get very annoyed by people always trying to put down a product because they are biased. Botton line is the Intel chipset has problems, be it software or hardware. AMD intergrated graphics are plainly just better, thats all. AMD cpus are great cpus. They may not over clock like the intel, but who cares. If you must buy a lesser clocked cpu that will over clock just so you can say you have a 3ghz processor, then maybe you should wait till you have enough money to afford the properly clocked cpu. Intel is not the "do no wrong" company people think they are. the 4870 X2 is a great card, with great performance. The visual look of the ATI cards have always been better than Nvidia. nvidia just cannot seem to get rid of the "washed out" look to thier color. I am going back to ATI now that they have a very strong video card out there. I really should have never left using thier graphic cards just gain a few frames per second in performance.

I hope that Anandtech does not get like Tom's hardware. I never read the biased website of Tom's hardware anymore.


RE: Same old same old...
By tedrodai on 8/18/2008 10:37:42 AM , Rating: 4
You're being sarcastic right?

quote:
I get very annoyed ...because they are biased.

quote:
AMD intergrated graphics are plainly just better, thats all.

quote:
They may not <blah blah>, but who cares.

quote:
The visual look of the ATI cards have always been better than Nvidia


Forgive me, I know this topic is beat to death constantly, but sometimes I just can't help but make a time-wasting response.


RE: Same old same old...
By ICE1966 on 8/19/2008 10:15:43 PM , Rating: 2
Why would you think I'm being sarcastic?

AMD intergrated graphics are better than Intels.

The color and sharpness of ATI cards have always been better than Nvidias.

If you are a benchmark freak, then a C2D is what you need in an cpu, but if you want a workhorse thats stable{one that you don't have to overclock} to have great performance, then AMD is the way to go. Maybe you need to waste your time somewhere else,LOL.


Huh?
By jtesoro on 8/15/2008 1:03:25 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Despite all the problems Brezenski still maintains that G45 is the perfect home theater chipset.


Huh? Am I missing something here?




RE: Huh?
By Brandon Hill (blog) on 8/15/2008 1:04:36 PM , Rating: 2
His words, not ours :)


RE: Huh?
By joeld on 8/15/2008 1:36:17 PM , Rating: 3
hurrah for marketing!


RE: Huh?
By waltzendless on 8/15/2008 3:02:55 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Huh? Am I missing something here?


That's what she said. Or is it he said?


LOL
By Chadder007 on 8/15/2008 1:02:53 PM , Rating: 2
Good ole Intel EXTREME Graphics. :D
I still don't see them competing with the high end card market when they come out with Larrabee.




RE: LOL
By djc208 on 8/15/2008 2:31:01 PM , Rating: 5
Well, they're EXTREMEly cheap, EXTREMEly underpowered, EXTREMEly buggy, and EXTREMEly over-hyped, so the name fits, sort of.


RE: LOL
By SiliconJon on 8/17/2008 9:12:16 AM , Rating: 2
Don't forget EXTREMELY FULL OF CRAP: "Despite all the problems Brezenski still maintains that G45 is the perfect home theater chipset."


RE: LOL
By Donkeyshins on 8/18/2008 1:31:43 PM , Rating: 2
Cue Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle :

quote:

Extreme Sports Punk #1 : Dude, that was SO not extreme!
Cole : I know, Extreme Sports Punk Number One...


By kilkennycat on 8/15/2008 1:23:39 PM , Rating: 2
Following up on the last paragraph in the above article...

Intel has repeatedly demonstrated their inability to write reliable graphics drivers for any of their various "GPU" implementations. Or care very much about timely updates when graphics-driver bugs are found with major applications. How then are they going to write correctly-operating graphics drivers for Larrabee when legacy support for hundreds of previously-released games (and professional graphics applications) is mandatory? Consideration of the release notes from both nVidia and ATI confirm how much effort is put into thoroughly verifying that new driver releases do not break backward compatibility with existing titles. And even with this attention, a few still fall through.... With Larrabee, Intel has to start from scratch with no execution history on hundred of titles... Because of the software challenge and the obvious lack of graphics-driver expertise, it will probably take Intel a couple of years at least to establish Larrabee as a true GPU contender, as nVidia and ATi will not wait for Intel to catch up. I would hate to be an "early-adopter" of a Larrabee graphics-card.

So, where is Intel's true near-term focus with Larrabee? It's pretty obvious looking at Larrabee's architecture... going after all applications using the various current Cell-processor implementations, and why not take a swipe at IBMs 3-core x86 implementation in the Xbox360 too... Expect to see Larrabee as the core power-house in all future high-end consoles and in all other professional applications where the various Cell implementations are currently making in-roads. No need to worry about graphics drivers for these core tasks, plus the x86 implementation trivializes porting the software.

Intel is having fun giving nVidia and ATi bouts of worry-based indigestion while cleverly hiding the true near-term focus of the Larrabee program.




By greylica on 8/15/2008 10:08:06 PM , Rating: 2
Perfect !

Intel wants to be in military stuff, some people are still trying to expand the lifespan of their computers, slowing down sales, but every missil will destroy a "special" larrabee processor in a single crash !

Larrabee Boom ! = :-) Intel

Cell eXploding ! = :-) IBM


By Flunk on 8/15/2008 10:16:09 PM , Rating: 3
Both the Cell and Xbox 360's Xenon processor use simplified versions of the Powerpc instruction set, not x86. It's one of the "benefits" of Larabee over these architectures Then again this is also a major handicap because x86 is a much more complex instruction set so it brings much greater overhead.


Intel and AMD should team up...
By wingless on 8/16/2008 9:40:38 AM , Rating: 2
Intel has fast CPUs and slow IGPs.
AMD has fast IGPs and slow CPUs.

Intel should license all their sockets to AMD so AMD can get some i790GX action headed their way. Intel's hype is ridiculous. These are the same people that said P4 was the best choice on the market at the time. They're asshats.




RE: Intel and AMD should team up...
By HotdogIT on 8/16/2008 4:26:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
These are the same people that said P4 was the best choice on the market at the time.


As opposed to AMD claiming their X2s are the best choice in the market now? When has any manufacturer of, well, ANYTHING, not said just that?


RE: Intel and AMD should team up...
By Targon on 8/21/2008 9:50:41 AM , Rating: 2
For the money, the Athlon 64 X2 6000+ isn't a bad chip. This is why AMD has been doing well in the $500-$600 computer range.

AMD is more of a platform company these days, being focused on making processors that are acceptable for the needs of the average consumer, and an overall system architecture that is more advanced than Intel.

Intel is about making each component in a system go faster, but without spending a lot of effort to update and improve the overall system architecture.

If AMD were to release a CPU that can properly compete with Core 2, the overall system design of an AMD system would give AMD a clear advantage. That is the thing that is holding AMD back right now.


Ugh.
By therealnickdanger on 8/15/2008 1:03:36 PM , Rating: 2
I guess I'm not ever really expecting IGP to operate as well as discrete, but please don't insult my intelligence. Graphics is and has been the area that Intel has consistently FAILED in since I can remember. G45 is a FAILURE - even if the software truly is to blame. I am ever-inspired to learn that Larrabee is not being built by the same people.

Eventually it won't really matter... there was a time that just trying to watch DVD on my K6-2/400 was a challenge. Blu-Ray will be no different.




RE: Ugh.
By StevoLincolnite on 8/15/2008 6:53:45 PM , Rating: 2
IGP's can perform fairly decent if it uses a decent GPU to begin with, Like what AMD has done, the sad thing about Intel is they are hardly able to out perform High-End Discreet for several years ago. (The 965 Express Mobile is on par with a Radeon 9550 in most cases).

Some think it's the poor drivers, or in the X3100's case poor Vertex and Driver performance which in turn hits TnL performance which was a "Great New Feature" that Intel was advertising about which took them a long time to enable anyway.

And even then they use "Profiles" which disable TnL in certain games to increase performance.

I managed to run DVD's just fine on an old K6-2 300 when I Paired up a Voodoo 2 with a Matrox MGA which would hardware accelerate it, but then again back then you could actually buy "DVD" accelerators to improve DVD performance anyway.


Incorrect!
By aheck on 8/15/2008 5:21:20 PM , Rating: 2
"Perhaps the biggest issue of all -- especially considering G45 was expected to be an excellent HTPC chipset -- is that G45 is still unable to send 7.1 surround sound through a receiver."

This is untrue. G45 /is/ able to send 7.1 LPCM over HDMI to a receiver with the use of gray-market software (AnyDVD HD). This workaround is necessary due to the lack of OPM support in the software players.




RE: Incorrect!
By foolsgambit11 on 8/15/2008 6:51:33 PM , Rating: 2
The next paragraph in the article goes on to say:
quote:
Brezenski says that this is not a problem with Intel's hardware; rather the problem is that standard COPP protocols used in current software players do not support the use of repeaters. He goes on to say that, software players available don't take advantage of OPM, which does support repeaters.

I do agree it's a little cheap to make a statement in an authoritative voice that is contradicted in the next paragraph, but at least he did mention it.


RE: Incorrect!
By aheck on 8/15/08, Rating: 0
That's how I see it.
By crystal clear on 8/16/08, Rating: 0
RE: That's how I see it.
By crystal clear on 8/16/08, Rating: 0
RE: That's how I see it.
By psychobriggsy on 8/17/2008 12:05:34 PM , Rating: 3
I think that the facts are clear here:

1) Intel's integrated graphics have always been under-performers.

2) Intel have always over-promised on their next generation integrated graphics. Usually to take attention away from their current generation.

3) Intel have always released graphics products that don't implement all of the promised features.

4) Intel have taken months, or even years, to get all the features implemented for their integrated graphics. E.g., vertex shading on G35.

5) Intel have continued this with G45, this time in the video decode portion of the chipset.

6) Intel supposedly have excellent developer relations, yet somehow have not seen fit to get third party video player software to use their hardware acceleration. Never mind the historical issue of games simply not running on their hardware (not even at 1fps) due to driver and hardware failings, yet Intel hasn't worked with the game developers to fix this. Game developers often talk about the pain of supporting Intel graphics.

7) This all bodes badly for Larrabee, which is generic hardware running software for graphics, physics and other computing tasks. Intel clearly has issues with software for graphics products, and this must be a worrying aspect for Intel. We can only hope that they have learned from their past mistakes, yet they've had time and time again to get things right and continually mess up.

Can you blame Intel's competitors from jumping on this? I can't.

Still don't understand why the Intel apologists are rushing to defend Intel's integrated graphics though.


RE: That's how I see it.
By crystal clear on 8/18/2008 7:53:15 AM , Rating: 1
Your presentation certaily is impresssive & factual.

Points 1 to 5 - Response

"When you arrive at your future, will you blame your past?"

As for the chipset under discussion-

"If things do not turn out as we wish, we should wish for them as they turn out."


Point 6 - Response

Even microsoft had plenty of driver issues with 3rd party hardware/software when it introduced Vista into the market.
It took many months upto a year(in some cases) for these drivers to be available.

I dont have to give you examples, we all know them very well.

Also this-

Working directly with some of the world's top 3-D graphics experts, Larrabee will give developers of games and APIs (Application Programming Interface) a blank canvas onto which they can innovate like never before.


http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20...

Point 7 - Response

Intel took on Larrybee with this attitude-

"Experience is a jewel, and it had need be so, for it is often purchased at an infinite rate."


"The best buy by way of management is brains - at any price."


As for me-

"I like the dream of the future better than the history of the past."


I focus on the fact that this bloggers views were exploited....

No company tolerates their employees speak/write criticizing its own products or exposing their weakness or lack of ...etc.

Every company welcomes suggestions/solutions/opinions etc from its employees through their internal channels of communications, certainly NOT by going public.


By Staples on 8/16/2008 6:59:32 PM , Rating: 2
I have been really trying hard to wait for an Intel platform that has decent integrated graphics but I now think AMD is the only way to go. I have been waiting for benchmark numbers on the video of the G45 forever but I have seen zero. Everyone has been silent about the video and that is exactly what I have been chomping at the bit forever. Glad someone has finally reported on this issue.




In a Nutshell
By Zeevious on 8/18/2008 9:47:03 AM , Rating: 2
From the blog entry: "While most of their criticisms concentrated on gaming, they threw in a paragraph about Blu-ray playback as well. I'll be honest: I skipped everything regarding gaming; it's not and never will be my focus . But they brought up a couple of troublesome issues: they, too, did not see hardware accleration on G45 Blu-ray playback."

Hrm... "gaming; it's not and never will be (Intel's) focus"




G45 works great for me
By archer75 on 8/18/2008 1:51:51 PM , Rating: 2
HQV really only matters if your talking about interlaced content. If you are using 720p or 1080p it doesn't matter. However the G35 scored very well and since this is just an upgraded version of that i'm sure it's just a driver and/or player thing. I do use interlaced content on a 119" screen and it looks fine to me.
AVC acceleration works just fine. For me I only have 7%-9% utilization. Extremetech obviously didn't know what they were doing when they set it up. And were using an older version of PowerDVD. A newer version works well. And total media theater works even better.

"is that G45 is still unable to send 7.1 surround sound through a receiver."

Not true at all. Who is this guy? 7.1 works just fine. I have tested it myself. If he's talking about protected content, well the board supports PAVP but you need the player to support it as well and right now no software player does. Break that copy protection though.....




great chipset with a few problems
By CSMR on 8/15/08, Rating: -1
RE: great chipset with a few problems
By wetwareinterface on 8/15/2008 2:08:32 PM , Rating: 2
what planet have you been living on recently...
intel has repeatedly failed at releasing driver fixes for the features they advertised in their onboard chipsets that don't seem to work.
hd decode on g35 failed to this date.
full dx 9 support to allow aero on vista failed on supposedly fully compliant dx9 hardware from 965 and g35.

if you think intel will fix this you're crazy. they are already asking thrid parties to fix their issues for them, like they did with microsoft on vista certification. the problem isn't the software thrid parties have made. the problem is the hardware intel released.

amd/ati aren't the greatest at drivers yet their 780 chipset works just fine with said supposedly bad software.
it's a hardware fault and intel as is typical is trying to blame others instead of doing a redesign and recall like they should to fix the obvious problems they found in validation but decided to overlook because it favored them to sell faster cpus again to fix the problem of hd playback.


RE: great chipset with a few problems
By finalfan on 8/15/2008 2:23:58 PM , Rating: 2
what planet have you been living on recently...

Intel never said G35 support HD decode,
Aero works flawlessly on 965 and G35.


By Slaimus on 8/15/2008 5:57:54 PM , Rating: 3
By StevoLincolnite on 8/15/2008 6:47:36 PM , Rating: 2
I have a 965 Express with the X3100 GMA, Yet the sad thing about that IGP is that it can run Newer games at fairly low FPS, and older games made 5-10 years ago at low FPS, Heck my first Intel IGP ever which was the GMA 855 could run games like Freelancer and WarCraft 3 better than the 965 Express!

I'm a gamer, it wasn't what I bought the machine for though, but it would have been nice if Intel Clear Video actually worked though with the latest drivers, Instead whenever I load up a movie in PowerDVD or WinDVD it's just a simple black screen until I turn Intel Clear Video off, or I revert to an older set of drivers.

Comon Intel, if you *are* going to succeed in the Graphics Industry there is one thing you haven't learnt that ATI and nVidia have, and that is Quality Drivers! (That work as advertised) Probably why Companies like S3, SiS, XGI, Matrox have all failed with any of there relatively "Latest" offerings.


"I'm an Internet expert too. It's all right to wire the industrial zone only, but there are many problems if other regions of the North are wired." -- North Korean Supreme Commander Kim Jong-il











botimage
Copyright 2010 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki