PDA

View Full Version : Intel Laptops



glfreak
11-04-2010, 09:05 AM
Which of Intel built-in graphics chips has full reliable support of OpenGL 2.1? I assume Intel already supports Direct3D 9c and it works just fantastic.

Groovounet
11-04-2010, 09:08 AM
"reliable"? I would say none.

Intel even have a good Direct3D 10 support. Saying that it's fantastic is maybe a bit excessive.

randall
11-04-2010, 11:19 AM
Things will improve. OpenGL 3.0 is coming from Intel.

Groovounet
11-04-2010, 01:23 PM
Since when OpenGL 3.0 is an Intel thing? Oo
Intel doesn't care at all about OpenGL

M. Bially
11-04-2010, 02:09 PM
See: http://www.opengl.org/discussion_boards/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=285153#Post2851 53

Alfonse Reinheart
11-04-2010, 02:37 PM
That doesn't guarantee it will be a conformant OpenGL implementation. Merely that it will exist.

mhagain
11-05-2010, 01:38 PM
The Intel 965 reports a GL_VERSION of 2.0 and the 4 series reports 2.1; that doesn't mean that they're reliable, merely that they work in most cases. I've personally run GLSL and VBO code on both and gotten decent enough performance considering, but a general rule of mine with these chips is that if you can't do it in D3D then you shouldn't attempt it in OpenGL. This means that you need to use 4-component BGRA formats all the way, don't write to the front buffer, etc.

Personally if I knew I was going to be targetting one of these, and knew that cross-platform wasn't going to be an issue, I'd just use D3D instead.

Alfonse Reinheart
11-05-2010, 03:05 PM
The Intel 965 reports a GL_VERSION of 2.0 and the 4 series reports 2.1; that doesn't mean that they're reliable, merely that they work in most cases.

Returning a driver version doesn't mean that it "works in most cases."

mhagain
11-06-2010, 04:43 AM
Returning a driver version doesn't mean that it "works in most cases."
Absolutely correct (even if it does make a mockery of the conformance testing process). My own experience of them however is that they do actually work in most cases.