Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Intel failing at windows 7.

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
a b $ Windows 7
October 27, 2009 9:42:04 PM

I'm running windows 7 (still the RC) on my eee, with an Atom N270 and Intel GMA graphics, and honestly, it runs just fine. It's not slow and clumsy at all.
October 27, 2009 9:54:52 PM

cjl said:
I'm running windows 7 (still the RC) on my eee, with an Atom N270 and Intel GMA graphics, and honestly, it runs just fine. It's not slow and clumsy at all.

But Jenny said so so it must be so.
Related resources
a b à CPUs
a b $ Windows 7
October 27, 2009 9:59:19 PM

Stupid AMD fanboyism!!!!!!
a b à CPUs
October 27, 2009 10:00:51 PM

I didn't say it, the review did. Don't put words in my mouth.

The review also raises some *very* important points that would-be intel buyers should be aware of if they are going with windows 7.
a b à CPUs
October 27, 2009 11:06:10 PM

What's with the random websites...
a b à CPUs
a c 209 $ Windows 7
a b å Intel
October 27, 2009 11:13:27 PM

I'm actually perplexed by the whole Aero vs. GPU performance thing. I bought a passively cooled Asus EAH4350 card because I'm not a gamer and I can't see any of the programs I use taxing the graphics card at all. What I really don't get is that WEI shows a lower score for "Desktop Performance for Aero" (3.7) than for "3D business graphics and gaming performance" (5.7).

Despite this supposed inferior Aero performance, I've never, ever noticed *any* hesitation or slowdown *at all* running or switching between normal programs, not even in Photoshop, and yet the one "gaming" test that I ran was (unsurprisingly) absolutely abysmal.

I mean really, what is it that Aero is supposed to do that's so taxing anyway? Let's face it, it's really nowhere near as demanding as a 3D photorealistic 60fps game.

Edit - I should note that I'm still running Win 7 RC, and perhaps the WEI's I get would be different in the RTM version.
a b à CPUs
October 27, 2009 11:32:07 PM

Well I guess it depends on a few factors like what resolution you are at, and what apps you are using.

Your graphics card probably operates at much lower frequencies in 2d compared to 3d too. If you start searching through a bunch of videos using aero then it will grind most low end systems to a near halt. I tried out the Fusion Media Explorer still using my onboard igp (HD 3300 - the best available), and it was pretty brutal to be honest. An igp just cannot display multiple instances of video media at acceptable standards - and that's the 3300 HD - intel GMA's must be horrible.
October 27, 2009 11:35:31 PM

jennyh said:
I didn't say it, the review did. Don't put words in my mouth.

The review also raises some *very* important points that would-be intel buyers should be aware of if they are going with windows 7.

Im rubber your glue whatever you says bounced off me and sticks to you.
October 28, 2009 12:38:25 AM

So, does this mean that AMD is doing something Intel is not? If so, what is it?
a b à CPUs
October 28, 2009 12:46:34 AM

xl7zandy said:
So, does this mean that AMD is doing something Intel is not? If so, what is it?


AMD's integrated graphics are much better than intels. Are they good enough for win 7 aero? I don't know, all I know is that AMD's HD integrated graphics are good enough to play games like WoW on medium settings while intels generally aren't.

AMD also have discrete graphics, I think that was the main point of the article. As graphics become more important, intels lack of prowess in this area becomes more apparent. Attempting to run a large touch-screen display on an intel igp would be about as useful as a solar powered torch. They simply cannot do graphics, not even to a mediocre standard.

Intel sucks terribly at graphics, yet the industry is catapulting towards bigger, more demanding screens and realism. The gap isn't closing either - intel are falling further and further behind AMD and Nvidia.
a b à CPUs
October 28, 2009 1:56:28 AM

This is a load of BS. I got windows 7 running a new dell laptop with an intel IGP. Aero runs just fine. Intels graphics are terrible yes, but they handle Aero just fine. Now if you got a igp from when vista 1st came out then that may be a different story.

That entire article is crap.

Integrated graphics of the kind that Intel currently offers just doesn’t cut it with Windows 7. It would be far too slow and clumsy. =false

That is going to change quickly. With those changes in the taskbar, the evolution of multi-touch, and the need to see clearly what is happening in that small space of the taskbar, monitors will grow, and graphics memory to feed them will grow by leaps and bounds. HAHAHA epic fail. So people are going to upgrade to big monitors so they can "see clearly what is happening in that small space of the taskbar? This person is a buffoon.
a b à CPUs
October 28, 2009 2:06:11 AM

There could be a little bit of truth in it though. We all know that intel igp's are terribly strained doing the most menial tasks on average systems.

If you consider 30" touchscreens could be about to become more common, it doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to figure out that the current GMA's might not be up to the task.

Clarkdale is supposed to be a lot better, at least as good as ATI's last generation - that will be a big increase for intel but I'm still not convinced it will be good enough.

It might not be a huge issue yet, but you can see why it could start to become a big issue pretty soon. The last thing intel wants is Windows 7 being plastered with ATI or Nvidia graphics simply because they aren't up to it. Microsoft are the driving force behind this 'visual' change btw - not AMD. If intel aren't up to the task the microsoft wont wait like they did last time, vista burned them too badly for them to allow progression to be held back again.
a b à CPUs
October 28, 2009 2:41:02 AM

30 Inch touchscreens are not about to become more common. It should not matter anyways if the screen is touch or not anyways to the gpu.

This has nothing to do at all AMD or nvidia. Its about somebody nobody ever heard of with a "review" on a site nobody ever heard of speaking true nonsense.

Intels current igp worked fine with vista+aero and are able to play 720p. And they can do the same on windows 7.

So you're are telling us that Clarkdale will be as good as ati's last generation but you think that wont be good enough? Good enough for what? To run 7 with aero? .

Just stop this BS already. Intels igp's terrible compared to the competition. But they can run Vista or 7's aero no problem. They are not strained to do so. And I know it can also play 720p also without a problem since I did that on the laptop with the IGP.

Bottom line is yes Intels graphics do suck. Do they suck so much they cant deal with aero. NO.

And this is from somebody that has NEVER had an Intel igp in a desktop machine I built or purchased. Nor do I ever see myself doing so. Well not unless my next machine has a igp on the cpu die itself but never mind that for now. My laptop has one simply because the one and only task I got the thing for doesn't need any more graphics power.
a b à CPUs
a b $ Windows 7
October 28, 2009 3:14:54 AM

jennyh said:
If you consider 30" touchscreens could be about to become more common, it doesn't take a huge leap of imagination to figure out that the current GMA's might not be up to the task.

An Intel IGP on a touchscreen doing the kind of thing people who buy these things do.

a c 127 à CPUs
October 28, 2009 4:51:35 AM

cjl said:
I'm running windows 7 (still the RC) on my eee, with an Atom N270 and Intel GMA graphics, and honestly, it runs just fine. It's not slow and clumsy at all.


i also heard this from an IT at work. He even says his older Pentium 4 system runs great with Windows 7. Not suprising as it seems to love most any hardware.

jennyh said:
I didn't say it, the review did. Don't put words in my mouth.

The review also raises some *very* important points that would-be intel buyers should be aware of if they are going with windows 7.


You mean the people who don't game? Most gamers I know buy a discrete GPU. this has nothing to do with that. Windows 7 will run fine on a Intel IGP for those who actually buy it.

jennyh said:
AMD's integrated graphics are much better than intels. Are they good enough for win 7 aero? I don't know, all I know is that AMD's HD integrated graphics are good enough to play games like WoW on medium settings while intels generally aren't.

ATI also have discrete graphics, I think that was the main point of the article. As graphics become more important, intels lack of prowess in this area becomes more apparent. Attempting to run a large touch-screen display on an intel igp would be about as useful as a solar powered torch. They simply cannot do graphics, not even to a mediocre standard.

Intel sucks terribly at graphics, yet the industry is catapulting towards bigger, more demanding screens and realism. The gap isn't closing either - intel are falling further and further behind ATI and Nvidia.


Sorry had to. Until AMD actually creates a GPU, they have nothing to do with it except they own ATI thus they take the glory.

And as said many times before, most gamers do discrete. IGPs are normally used for the necessities. Most buyers are of the baby boomer age. Think they worry about games? not really. They need a PC for work, school and possibly entertainment.

Until that changes, your hatred towards Intels IGPs for gaming is quite useless.

BTW, a friend at work who I sold my old HD2900Pro 1GB to is currently using Intels 4500 series integrated graphics on Windows 7 since the 2900 runs to hot in his small case. He says it runs great and even plays Left 4 Dead and WoW at max settings 30FPS. Gotta love how the article claims one thing yet tons of people who have these so called "crappy" IGPs claim another....
a b à CPUs
October 28, 2009 5:05:49 AM

The amd trolls will search every corner of the net for some BS.
a b à CPUs
a b $ Windows 7
October 28, 2009 6:22:04 AM

OK, I just looked at the article, and honestly, it's a load of crap. The author is claiming that due to windows 7, the average GPU will have over 512 MB of video RAM soon, which is completely ridiculous and unnecessary. One of the great things about 7 is that aero and most of the other features run perfectly on older and/or slower systems.

The best example of this that I can think of is my eee - it has an Intel GMA 950 generation graphics chip, which is shockingly bad even by Intel standards. It is less than half the speed of a modern Intel IGP, and does not even support hardware accelerated decoding for HD video (or any similar features). Even this rather horrifyingly terrible chip runs 7's Aero interface without a hitch.

Don't get me wrong - there are a number of excellent reasons to get a better GPU than an intel IGP, but 7 running slowly is certainly not one of them.
October 28, 2009 7:23:43 AM

Intel should just acquire nVidia and get some decent graphics, sure 2D works fine but some people want more. VDPAU & CUDA are sexy too.
October 28, 2009 3:53:52 PM

How effective is CUDA?
October 28, 2009 5:03:04 PM

Inspired silliness-- both this thread and the original article. Aero's run perfectly fine on Intel GMA on everything after the 915G. That's, what, 3 years now?

FAIL
a b à CPUs
a b å Intel
November 25, 2010 8:43:53 AM

I just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in here. I was doing some laptop comparos for a couple of people in my "Advice from an old pro" thread and I came across some interesting statistics. It seems that the Mobility Radeons are roughly 2.3x as powerful as the Intel GMAs that compete with them. I found this at two separate price points. The HD 4250 is 2.34x as powerful as the GMA 4500M and the HD 5470 is 2.32x as powerful as the GMA HD. In the case of the HD 5470 and GMA HD, the system with the 5470 was actually $50 less and had free shipping from newegg. If you don't think that these numbers are significant, keep in mind that this is like comparing a Radeon HD 5830 with a Radeon HD 5970 at the same price point! Sure, not everyone's an enthusiast but I'm sure that doesn't mean you don't want the most for your money. Being a non-enthusiast is not synonymous with moronic as I'm sure that even enthusiasts would rather have the superior part if it didn't cost extra and in this case, the Intel GMAs get absolutely SMOKED. Don't believe me? Compare the 4250 with the GMA 4500M and then compare the GMA HD and the 5470 at notebookcheck.net.

Intel Graphics Media Accelerator Family ====> Failure beyond epic.
November 25, 2010 9:27:04 AM

Id start a new thread, reviving old ones is just a no no, no necroes
!