Good news for Intel G965 Users who use integrated graphics

[sandman92]

Hi Buddy can any one tell me that DG965RY is support 1333MHZ processor after update Bios, i am waiting your reply

 

[spikygv]

nope . i dont think so. even if u cud , i dont see a reason you would want to do that. . that mobo doesnt support OCing.

 

[nadun]

hi guys..sad to say this but I'm disappointed with GMA X3000 cause I can't get any of these games working like the way you said here. I played COD 4 on vista but it wont run smoothly even if I set all settings to low (I mean everything..resolution also @640*480 ) I dont know what is the reason for this.

My configuration : P4 processor 3.04Ghz
Intel DG965WH
Kingston 1GB ram * 2 dual channel
Hithachi 80 GB HDD IDE
Creative Audigy Value sound card.

Is this problem with my processor..

 

[s18000rpm]

Is this problem with my processor..

maybe, coz i also had samae problem , that is - slow games, even old game like CMR05, GTA VC would run slow, but after the proc. upgrade (c2d e4500), every thing runs really smooth.
P4 cud be the bottleneck.
i have the same m/b & 1GB RAM (2x512)
btw did you get the proc. from HP desktop?

 

[quan chi]

hi guys..sad to say this but I'm disappointed with GMA X3000 cause I can't get any of these games working like the way you said here. I played COD 4 on vista but it wont run smoothly even if I set all settings to low (I mean everything..resolution also @640*480 ) I dont know what is the reason for this.

My configuration : P4 processor 3.04Ghz
Intel DG965WH
Kingston 1GB ram * 2 dual channel
Hithachi 80 GB HDD IDE
Creative Audigy Value sound card.

Is this problem with my processor..

maybe, coz i also had samae problem , that is - slow games, even old game like CMR05, GTA VC would run slow, but after the proc. upgrade (c2d e4500), every thing runs really smooth.
P4 cud be the bottleneck.
i have the same m/b & 1GB RAM (2x512)
btw did you get the proc. from HP desktop?

The onboard gfx may also be the problem.

 

[s18000rpm]

The onboard gfx may also be the problem.

no, my friend, in GTR2 i get 25+ fps & in cod4 (640x480) 20+ fps. (with core 2 duo e4500)
with P4 - GTR2 wud run at 15fps max. & gta vc, sa @15.

the proc. is most probalbly the bottleneck.

btw @nadun, update the BIOS too.

link to intel d/l page

 

[nadun]

maybe, coz i also had samae problem , that is - slow games, even old game like CMR05, GTA VC would run slow, but after the proc. upgrade (c2d e4500), every thing runs really smooth.
P4 cud be the bottleneck.
i have the same m/b & 1GB RAM (2x512)
btw did you get the proc. from HP desktop?

I'll consider having a core 2 duo processor then..In here Sri Lanka Core 2 duo 2.2 is around 14000 i think. But do you think is it a better to have the 2.2 core 2 processor or Nvidia Geforce 8500 GT graphics card cause at the moment I can only buy one of them.. And also I m having latest drivers for all, mobo and latest bios too( but still no change in performance..) I thought that the problem might be with processor cause I couldn't played most games at 1024*768 resolution even when I had Nvidia 6200 TC graphics card..

 

[s18000rpm]

I'll consider having a core 2 duo processor then..In here Sri Lanka Core 2 duo 2.2 is around 14000 i think. But do you think is it a better to have the 2.2 core 2 processor or Nvidia Geforce 8500 GT graphics card cause at the moment I can only buy one of them.. And also I m having latest drivers for all, mobo and latest bios too( but still no change in performance..) I thought that the problem might be with processor cause I couldn't played most games at 1024*768 resolution even when I had Nvidia 6200 TC graphics card..

if you want to go for gfx. card, then DONT go for 8500gt, go for 8600GT.
as you already had this problm. wit a gfx. card, i'd say going for c2d is a safe bet.
my proc. core2duo e4500 (2.2GHz) costs about Rs.5000 INR. (~ 14000LKR)

btw, does the BIOS load slowly when a Transcend USB pen drive is connected.

 

[nadun]

if you want to go for gfx. card, then DONT go for 8500gt, go for 8600GT.
as you already had this problm. wit a gfx. card, i'd say going for c2d is a safe bet.
my proc. core2duo e4500 (2.2GHz) costs about Rs.5000 INR. (~ 14000LKR)

btw, does the BIOS load slowly when a Transcend USB pen drive is connected.

I coudn't test that cause I dont have a transcend pen drive. ( I have a kingston one ) Thanks for replying..I'll try to go for a processor then..

 

[quan chi]

during the year when gta sa, vc etc were released there was no c2d.

btw c2d is best when you dnt have a gfx crd i think.

 

[mmick]

even old game like CMR05, GTA VC would run slow, but after the proc. upgrade (c2d e4500), every thing runs really smooth.
P4 cud be the bottleneck.

Intel drivers put most of the work on the CPU as most C2D can do on software faster than x3x00 do on Hardware. So if you own a good cpu you´ll get good performance. Intel does disappoint on the drivers they have: though best than some years ago, Intel drivers are still buggy and *very* slow. To give you an idea most ATI X700 mobile are faster than my X3100 on everything but video.

Assassin´s Creed does not work on my Vista SP1, it crashes after the inicial video (latest drivers)
Crysis at lowest settings (800x600 all at Low) it is playable (10-20fps) but anything above that it will slowdown *a lot*!

If Intel focus on driver optimization x3100 would perform a lot better but this way (old turtle speed) we´ll get nothing. I sure ain´t buy another intel graphics if intel continues to take this long to improve drivers and optimize speed! My X3100 + C2D 1.8GHz + 667MHz RAM is a lot slower (on DX9 games!) than an older Centrino 1.6 + Radeon 9600/X700 + 400MHz RAM

My cousins laptop (nvidia mobile 7300 + Core Duo 1.6GHz mobile + RAM 533MHz) is about 3x faster than mine on DX9 (intel mobile X3100 + Core 2 Duo 1.8GHz 800MHz bus + Dual RAM 667MHz). Intel is still pushing graphics thru C2D software capabilities (3D bench) but when a game uses the C2D for physics than nothing is left for the drivers and X3100 goes to the ground!

If you have the choice to give 50-100€ more for a low-end discrete graphics instead of a Intel integrated graphics, do it! It does worth it! ATI/NVIDIA drivers, even if the hardware on papers seems inferior, are far better and in the end (games/3D software) it will run games without problems and leave you space to OC.

Intel DOES NOT let you OC or even run games well (X3100 is DX10 + SM3 but DX10 and SM3 games *do not* run even several months after X3100 release). There are no excuses...

 

[yesh1683]

New XP drivers are released

**Windows XP 32 Bit**

**Windows XP 64 Bit**

 

[nehal]

New XP drivers are released

Is there any improvement in performane?
Any ideas when Vista drivers will be released

 

[anshad666]

is this correct for gmaX3100????.....am havng acer 5920....

 

[DavidC1]

If Intel focus on driver optimization x3100 would perform a lot better but this way (old turtle speed) we´ll get nothing. I sure ain´t buy another intel graphics if intel continues to take this long to improve drivers and optimize speed! My X3100 + C2D 1.8GHz + 667MHz RAM is a lot slower (on DX9 games!) than an older Centrino 1.6 + Radeon 9600/X700 + 400MHz RAM

As much as I appreciate your posting, the X3100 also has limited hardware. No driver in the world will let your Geforce 2 MX run like X1900XTX!! G965/GM965/G35 has poor DX10 implementation, low fillrate, and overall poor performance.

The IGP has 8 Execution Units yes, but, no two execution units from different GPUs are alike!! Some are made for low cost and low power and that's what the X3100 is.

One thing I noticed is that for Intel graphics, the first generation of a new architecture is always ehh... Extreme Graphics 2 improved performance significantly and improved compatibility without changing the core clock speed and pipeline. GMA 900 made another strides in that and GMA 950 is acceptable for 3-4 year old gaming. The X3x00 architecture is Intel's first in brand new architecture. X4500 will be naturally be that much better because things engineers learned developing the X3000/X3100/X3500 will go into X4500.

If the X3100 was indeed powerful as we initially thought, we would had much better performance. Yes in some games, refined drivers will bring good performance. But for the most part, the HARDWARE PLAIN SUCKS!!

 

[mmick]

As much as I appreciate your posting, the X3100 also has limited hardware. No driver in the world will let your Geforce 2 MX run like X1900XTX!! G965/GM965/G35 has poor DX10 implementation, low fillrate, and overall poor performance.

You´re right but X3100 is (in theory) better than a Radeon 9600/X700 on hardware specs. X3100 is running on a GMA 950-based driver and Intel is slowly introducing X3100 code as they have plenty of time until the GPU-on-the-CPU (as Nahalem) is released. I almost bet that that GPU will be based on an improved X3100...

 

[DavidC1]

You´re right but X3100 is (in theory) better than a Radeon 9600/X700 on hardware specs. X3100 is running on a GMA 950-based driver and Intel is slowly introducing X3100 code as they have plenty of time until the GPU-on-the-CPU (as Nahalem) is released. I almost bet that that GPU will be based on an improved X3100...

You are mistaken. Radeon 9600 is not only outdated by current standards, but the fillrate of the X3000 is not better than the Radeon 9600, and Radeon 9600 has vastly better Vertex Shader performance and polygon throughput.

ATI Radeon 9600 Pro, 400MHz core clock, 4 pixel pipeline/1 texture per pipeline/2 vertex shader, 600MHz 128-bit memory

1.6GTexels/s single & multi-textured fill rate
9.6GB/s bandwidth

3DMark2001 SE High Polygon Count test:
1 light: 45.4 MTriangles/s
8 lights: 10.1 MTriangles/s

3DMark2003 Vertex Shader: 10.3 fps

Intel X3000, 667MHz core clock, equivalent pixel pipeline is 2 with special case and 1.6 in most cases with 2 texture per pipeline, 800MHz dual channel 64-bit memory in the best case

1.06GTexels/s in single texture fillrate
2.133GTexels/s in multi texture fillrate
12.8GB/s bandwidth

3DMark2001 SE High Polygon Count test:
1 light: 8.9 MTriangles/s
8 lights: 0.9 MTriangles/s

Same test with software mode:
1 light: 19.8 MTriangles/s
8 lights: 7.8 MTriangles/s

3DMark2003 Vertex Shader: 5.72 fps

Radeon 9600 Pro is 5x and over 10x faster in 1 and 8 light polygon test in 3DMark 2001 SE respectively compared to X3000's hardware T&L. It is also over 2x faster and 50% faster than X3000's software T&L.

It is also almost 2x faster in Vertex Shader performance in 3DMark 2003 test. X3000's test was done with software mode so hardware mode will be equal/slower.

Extremely poor vertex shader performance and low polygon throughput is why the X3000 performs poor in older games and the fps in low resolutions is low.

There is much more I haven't detailed. You don't want to even compare to the X700 variants. The versions of X700 has 2GTexels/s fillrate and higher bandwidth not to mention an updated architecture.

 

[yesh1683]

New XP & vista Drivers are released

**Windows XP 32 Bit**

**Windows XP 64 Bit**

**Windows VISTA 32 Bit**

**Windows VISTA 64 Bit**

 

[mmick]

Yeah, I couldn´t post before as my internet was very slow.

15.8.2 for Vista.

- Assassin´s Creed still doesn´t work
- Crysis still incredibly slow
- Test Drive Unlimited a little faster, I suspect a little bump on speed with these drivers but far from good.

Here you have 15.9 (beta) that has not been released yet!

*www.computerbase.de/downloads/treiber/grafikkarten/intel_grafiktreiber

It´s even faster than 15.8.2 and in my Laptop I can now choose the energy savings! If I turn Energy Savings off I got an extra bump on speed! I can assure you that from 15.8 to 15.9 and energy savings off I can have up to 15-20% more speed! (Tomb Raider Anniversary + Test Drive Unlimited). I still can´t run Assassins Creed...

 

[DavidC1]

15.9 driver is coming out by end of this month/early next month and is a minimum required driver for their next generation GM45/G45 chipset with GMA X4500 IGP. 15.9 driver is also DX10 driver, but too bad G965 won't support DX10. GM965 and G35 users will get DX10 support though.

The latest driver is not what yesh1683 posted for XP. The latest driver for XP is 14.33.1. 14.32.4 is the latest driver for 945 chipsets.