Also, I just hope there is a tremendous improvement over V1.1E in regards to video playback, as watching videos from steam completely butcher my performance, as well as some hd flv, like this (viewed in hd, obviously): http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/crysis2/video/6274035/crysis-2-heros-journey-multiplayer-trailer#toggle_video It shoots cpu usage to 100%, and it plays with quite a lot of stuttering :S
On Nov 4, 5:27 am, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, that's a first :) Yay for us poor bastards :D > I imagine that anything that goes from the absurdly slow PCI bus to > PCIe must gain tremendous performance in comparison. But I thought MSI- > X used PCIe while regular MSI used PCI alone. > And I'm still hoping a lot that the new driver fix the flickering I > have in both 2D and 3D, and the slow performance in 2D (not GUI > performance) > > On Nov 4, 5:24 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > > lol, im not sure...the MSI-X feature itself is an existing feature, exist > > within the linux driver (bleeding edge setting) for the 954 / 965... > > to give out the idea on what do it do.. > > > the tech will use the existing MSI-X renderpath for the PCI-E bus, (exist in > > both 945 and 965 PCI-E) but will emulate it to another render path, making > > it less latency and thus giving out more performance...the conversion > > between graphic data and GPU binary codes will take place there thus making > > transfer / bandwidth more efficient than the MSI-X which process and then > > transfer it to the cpu via PCI bus.. > > > the good / bad news will be, the GME and GSE users will experience it first > > hand, the tech will not available for other 945 users (they will still use > > the traditional MSI-X... > > so good news for the GSE / GME users...^^ > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 1:13 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Well, if you want both a tester and name suggestions for the tech, > > > give me a ring and we'll get right back on it :) > > > But I'm curious, there must be anything even slightly similar to what > > > you're developing, hence giving a better idea on what to call it ;) > > > > On Nov 4, 5:10 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > lol, ROFL... > > > > > erll, it's kinda hard when i dont have the hardware to test it...but, im > > > 80% > > > > sure it has the same performance as MSI-X > > > > the technology it self is making use of the MSI-X bandwidth > > > > architecture...hardware based that is.. > > > > > saying that, making a new tech to substitute the MSI-X is a veery hard > > > work, > > > > but still possible...although not to brag, im sure this is the first > > > > time > > > > attempt to literally change the driver to a whole new level,..i mean, if > > > the > > > > new tech developing in a good phase ( i still not have a name for it , > > > lol) > > > > it will improve performance up to 150% more than MSI-X...and if that's > > > > succeed, then it will substitute all MSI-X codes on the up coming > > > release. > > > > meaning all major 945 and netbooks plus embedded will use the same tech > > > ^^ > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:57 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > This is all about that coffee pot, right? I'm on to you! *googly > > > > > eyes* :) > > > > > About a substitute for MSI-X, if you're saying it has similar > > > > > performance, then I guess it won't be the end of the world, sitting on > > > > > a toilet reading yesterday's newspaper, I hope... > > > > > > On Nov 4, 4:51 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > lol, well, it's still under testing and im not 100% sure that it's > > > not > > > > > > compatible, but if it is not compatible, then i would try and > > > implemented > > > > > a > > > > > > new substiture to the MSI-X...which gives on par performance with > > > MSI-X > > > > > > features, but still , more reliable ..^^ > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 12:48 PM, tribaljet <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Wait, MSI-X doesn't for both GME and GSE chipsets? You know I > > > haven't > > > > > > > used V1.2 due to the install bug that occurred before the modded > > > inf > > > > > > > for V1.1/1.1E. Don't tell me such a thing. You're just saying that > > > to > > > > > > > make me cry a river... > > > > > > > > On Nov 4, 3:20 am, AngelicTears <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > owh, almost forgot, thanks for Adrien for helping me confirmed > > > and > > > > > test > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > MSI / MSI-X bug for me ^^ > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 11:19 AM, AngelicTears < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi guys, sorry for lateness... > > > > > > > > > there are some news i wish to announce... > > > > > > > > > > the first would be about the GME and GSE compatibility ...it > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > confirmed > > > > > > > > > (although need more testing) thatGME and GSE version of the > > > > > > > > > 945 > > > > > cant > > > > > > > use the > > > > > > > > > MSI-X / MSI feature.. > > > > > > > > > MSI / MSI-X is a feature that started in the V1.1 project, and > > > > > > > responsible > > > > > > > > > for most of the performance boost in most > > > > > > > > > games..unfortunately, > > > on > > > > > the > > > > > > > rev 3 > > > > > > > > > , it will have to be disabled..for overall stability for > > > netbooks, > > > > > and > > > > > > > GME > > > > > > > > > embedded chipsets... > > > > > > > > > > but a similar technology will be implemented to substitute the > > > MSI > > > > > / > > > > > > > MSI-X > > > > > > > > > architecture..still in testing stage, the new tech will > > > > > > > > > provide > > > a > > > > > more > > > > > > > > > stable bandwidth management minus the "netbook bug" ^^ > > > > > > > > > > other than that, im still working on it, and plss be patient > > > > > > > > > ^^ > > > a > > > > > > > > > revolution is coming > > > > > > > > > > cheers ^^ > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:29 AM, MaxiJazz <[email protected]> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> Any news? :) > > > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > > > >> 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Laptop: > > > > > > > > > Acer Aspire > > > > > > > > > Core Duo T2300E @ 1.67GHz > > > > > > > > > Intel GMA 950 IGP > > > > > > > > > Intel 945 Chipset > > > > > > > > > 1GB RAM (512MB*2) Dual Channel DDR2 > > > > > > > > > 80GB standard PATA HDD > > > > > > > > > Win7 Ultimate 32bit / Ubuntu 10.04 > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Laptop: > > > > > > > > Acer Aspire > > > > > > > > Core Duo T2300E @ 1.67GHz > > > > > > > > Intel GMA 950 IGP > > > > > > > > Intel 945 Chipset > > > > > > > > 1GB RAM (512MB*2) Dual Channel DDR2 > > > > > > > > 80GB standard PATA HDD > > > > > > > > Win7 Ultimate 32bit / Ubuntu 10.04 > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Laptop: > > > > > > Acer Aspire > > > > > > Core Duo T2300E @ 1.67GHz > > > > > > Intel GMA 950 IGP > > > > > > Intel 945 Chipset > > > > > > 1GB RAM (512MB*2) Dual Channel DDR2 > > > > > > 80GB standard PATA HDD > > > > > > Win7 Ultimate 32bit / Ubuntu 10.04 > > > > > > -- > > > > > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > > > > -- > > > > Laptop: > > > > Acer Aspire > > > > Core Duo T2300E @ 1.67GHz > > > > Intel GMA 950 IGP > > > > Intel 945 Chipset > > > > 1GB RAM (512MB*2) Dual Channel DDR2 > > > > 80GB standard PATA HDD > > > > Win7 Ultimate 32bit / Ubuntu 10.04 > > > > -- > > > 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS > > > -- > > Laptop: > > Acer Aspire > > Core Duo T2300E @ 1.67GHz > > Intel GMA 950 IGP > > Intel 945 Chipset > > 1GB RAM (512MB*2) Dual Channel DDR2 > > 80GB standard PATA HDD > > Win7 Ultimate 32bit / Ubuntu 10.04 > > -- 9xx SOLDIERS SANS FRONTIERS
