Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intel says HD4000 update 10% better

When people download the update in early April when it is available (according to the article).
 
So Mac users should benefit as well, assuming ML gets an update right?
 
fatlardo said:
So Mac users should benefit as well, assuming ML gets an update right?
Click to expand...

Well, we have the 4000, so why not? And since it is just drivers, it shoud be downloadable right off the Intel website.
 
dukebound85 said:
are drivers os independent or does intel provide the OS drivers?
Click to expand...

drivers are OS dependant. The version that should come out is for windows, Im not up to par in how is their relationship with linux, but if it was what I was seeing for that as well.

Regarding OSX, it comes out when apple makes it
 
I guess thats what I mean, we probably wont see it unless an update rolls out for ML right?
 
Mr MM said:
drivers are OS dependant. The version that should come out is for windows, Im not up to par in how is their relationship with linux, but if it was what I was seeing for that as well.

Regarding OSX, it comes out when apple makes it
Click to expand...

Intel has a good relationship with Apple; why won't they "rework" their drivers to make them updatable in OSX without a software update?
 
vatter69 said:
According to the Intel Driver Page it's windows only.

The HD4000 driver is integrated in ML and Apple will have to release an update themselves.
Click to expand...

Shoot. Get ready to wait for 5 months while Apple goes through 13 revisions...again.

I hope they can push it out as soon as possible though. I don't know why they would, though; it would hinder their advertising for the new Haswell iGPU (30% better becomes 20%, for example).
 
Here is a screenshot of the past release dates.
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2013-03-29 at 5.14.23 PM.png
    Screen shot 2013-03-29 at 5.14.23 PM.png
    68.7 KB · Views: 226
If Apple decides the update 4000 drivers are worth it, they will issue an OS update with the new driver. Since OS X is based off of Unix, all the drivers are in the kernel the kernel will need to be updated.
 
stchman said:
Since OS X is based off of Unix, all the drivers are in the kernel the kernel will need to be updated.
Click to expand...

This is not true. Drivers are modules which are loaded into the kernel space. It's not different from how it works in windows.

That said, apple does update drivers as part of an OS x update. They don't usually have separately downloadable drivers. Although, nobody hinders anyone from getting the intel developr docs (it's all free) and writing an open-source driver for OS X. I guess nobody was interested in such a project yet.
 
leman said:
This is not true. Drivers are modules which are loaded into the kernel space. It's not different from how it works in windows.

That said, apple does update drivers as part of an OS x update. They don't usually have separately downloadable drivers. Although, nobody hinders anyone from getting the intel developr docs (it's all free) and writing an open-source driver for OS X. I guess nobody was interested in such a project yet.
Click to expand...

nope and I hardly think it will be relevant until intel gets a much better gpu
 
leman said:
This is not true. Drivers are modules which are loaded into the kernel space. It's not different from how it works in windows.

That said, apple does update drivers as part of an OS x update. They don't usually have separately downloadable drivers. Although, nobody hinders anyone from getting the intel developr docs (it's all free) and writing an open-source driver for OS X. I guess nobody was interested in such a project yet.
Click to expand...

You are correct, I know this. My aim was that for *ix systems, drivers are kernel based. It is not like windows where you can go get the .exe driver and double click it.

I think Apple kernel modules are referred to as kexts (Kernel Extensions) by using a kext utility like the Hackintosh folks do.

In Linux they are commands like lsmod, rmmod and you can blacklist certain modules from loading.
 
stchman said:
You are correct, I know this. My aim was that for *ix systems, drivers are kernel based. It is not like windows where you can go get the .exe driver and double click it.
Click to expand...

But its really the same thing. In windows, drivers are special binaries loaded into the kernel, in OS X and Linux its the same. OS X may call its drivers 'Kernel Extensions', but the way it works is really almost the same. The Windows .exe driver file is just an installer which copies the modules into the appropriate location and configures the OS to load them. One could easily distribute a driver for OS X in the same way (using a pkg installer) - and this is what people actually do if they want to introduce additional functionality to the OS X kernel. The only reason why you don't usually deal with drivers on OS X is because it already comes prepackaged with virtually everything you need. And its also more user-friendly than Windows in that regard, hiding the concept of the 'driver' far enough that the average user doesn't need to worry about it.

BTW, Nvidia has custom OS X drivers for some of their professional GPUs
 
Intel 4000 isn't that bad at all. I am able to play SimCity in Boot Camp windows running at 1920x1200 with 35+ FPS. I had issues on my nVidia 330M playing at 1680x1050, got less FPS then an Intel Integrated graphics.
 
ayeying said:
Intel 4000 isn't that bad at all. I am able to play SimCity in Boot Camp windows running at 1920x1200 with 35+ FPS. I had issues on my nVidia 330M playing at 1680x1050, got less FPS then an Intel Integrated graphics.
Click to expand...

What settings do you play it at to achieve those frames?
 
ayeying said:
Intel 4000 isn't that bad at all. I am able to play SimCity in Boot Camp windows running at 1920x1200 with 35+ FPS. I had issues on my nVidia 330M playing at 1680x1050, got less FPS then an Intel Integrated graphics.
Click to expand...
In low settings the HD 4000 does really quite well especially against older chips and AMD APUs because it is supported by a fast CPU. When you go to medium/high settings its performance drops realtively much more.
It still remains a very useful GPU because it is good enough where it is of any use at all. It totally fails at higher settings but even if it did as well as some APUs and not drop quite that low it would still not reach anything playable. Whether you get 15 or 7 fps doesn't really matter.

Intel delivered the most useful thing possible in that low end with little energy use and die space use.

@op This thread seems slightly pointless given that Apple handles their GPU drivers entirely independent of Windows versions. Up to 10% is also not very much given that usually AMD and Nvidia claim up to 30 or 50% at times with new drivers.
Newsworthy would be when Apple actually got around to open up quick sync so Handbrake for Mac could use it like the Windows version can.
http://anandtech.com/show/6864/handbrake-to-get-quicksync-support
That would work wonders and speed things up multiple times.
Apple doesn't do that though. They lack acceleration and openesss for so many more modern hardware instruction sets it is a schame. Sometimes they use it in their own products like facetime with Quicksync but don't allow any other apps to make use of it by opening the damn thing up.

Given all these complete failures in GPU driver support, I wouldn't hold my breath for a "up to 10%" driver update for Intel HD 4000.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back