On 12/17/2014 10:35 PM, Steven Haigh wrote:
> I have to chime in here... Windows support for Optimus and ATI Hybrid
> Graphics seem to work quiet well. I have a Dell Inspiron with onboard
> Intel & an ATI card. I haven't been able to fault it.

I don't use Optimus myself, so i can not say from my own experience - 
but if you just use a search engine and look for 'windows optimus 
troubleshooting' you'll see a good handful of hits.

> Most of the time when I'm running desktop apps, the Intel on-cpu
> graphics does everything needed - but when firing up OpenGL or DirectX
> stuff, the ATI card takes over the panel seemlessly. This is running on
> Windows 7 - I hear Windows 8 does this even better - but its Windows 8 :\

I work for Car design company (meaning CAD apps), we work for all big 
brands - VW group (Skoda, Volkswagen, Seat ..) Mercedes Benz, BMW - so 
i'm used to 'see' good VGA cards in work every day.
If i take a computer screen that was connected previously to HP 
workstation with Nvidia Quadro VGA and connect it to laptop with Intel 
VGA - the difference is *huge* in colors, contrast etc.
So for me, Intel VGA is simply no-go, because i know how much better it 
can be.

> I don't know where you get this 'bad pictures' part. It'll throw pixels
> at the screen just as quick as the ATI card for general desktop use. The
> only real difference is in OpenGL / DirectX where the discrete card
> kicks in.

I don't know where the difference is, but as i said above, it just can 
not be that simple as "throw pixel at screen" the difference in picture 
stunning.
If i open linux terminal with my favorite 'green on black' and i have it 
on my laptop with Nvidia Quadro VGA, the picture is sharp, 'eye 
pleasing' (:D) while on Intel VGA the text conture is more blurry .. 
etc. It simply is not same.

> The problem is, Linux support for this is just awful. We can throw blame
> games all you like, but yeah - it just doesn't work properly. I tried
> everything from Fedora to Arch to EL6 and nothing was happy to do
> switching as it should.
>
> It isn't the fault of the technology - but the software implementation
> to use it.

It might be, but as said, Intel doesn't cut it for me even on windows, 
it still is horrible. AMD Radeons are better in 2D.

> I'm still not sure why you think Intel graphics are ugly. As I said,
> it'll throw 1920x1080 to a laptop screen all day and hardly be noticed.
> The only bad part is the linux implementation of switching between cards.

Oh, it is noticed - why should i buy laptop with subpar Intel VGA, if 
there is better VGA vendors.
Particularly, why should i buy Optimus and then use 95% time Intel .. 
blargh! :D :D

br, :]

-- 
*Karel Lang*
*Unix/Linux Administration*
[log in to unmask] | +420 731 13 40 40
AUFEER DESIGN, s.r.o. | www.aufeerdesign.cz