HD 2500/4000 graphics driver 10.18.10.4226 from intel

Author	Message
MarkJ Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 1139 Credit: 80,854,192 RAC: 5	Message 1691595 - Posted: 15 Jun 2015, 11:13:54 UTC Has anyone tried the Intel HD 2500/4000 graphics driver 10.18.10.4226 dated the 5th of June 2015? BOINC blog ID: 1691595 ·

KLiK Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 31 Mar 14 Posts: 1304 Credit: 22,994,597 RAC: 60	Message 1691603 - Posted: 15 Jun 2015, 11:31:11 UTC - in response to Message 1691595. I'm still using v10.18.10.3845 on a intelHD2500 why change 4 newer if it works? non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU ID: 1691603 ·

Richard Haselgrove Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 4 Jul 99 Posts: 14650 Credit: 200,643,578 RAC: 874	Message 1691616 - Posted: 15 Jun 2015, 12:43:44 UTC - in response to Message 1691595. Has anyone tried the Intel HD 2500/4000 graphics driver 10.18.10.4226 dated the 5th of June 2015? The third generation (2500/4000) drivers are usually OK, but I'm still not going to upgrade mine. It's the fourth generation ones (4200/4400/4600 and upwards) which they usually break. Use with care, and check validation rates (especially at Einstein), whichever. ID: 1691616 ·

MarkJ Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 1139 Credit: 80,854,192 RAC: 5	Message 1692132 - Posted: 16 Jun 2015, 11:46:39 UTC - in response to Message 1691616. Last modified: 16 Jun 2015, 11:48:38 UTC Has anyone tried the Intel HD 2500/4000 graphics driver 10.18.10.4226 dated the 5th of June 2015? The third generation (2500/4000) drivers are usually OK, but I'm still not going to upgrade mine. It's the fourth generation ones (4200/4400/4600 and upwards) which they usually break. Use with care, and check validation rates (especially at Einstein), whichever. I found 3621 to be the best one so far on my i7-3770 machines. I am running a test on this one now. I suspect it will be slower due to all the WDDM stuff they keep adding but we shall see. I am also running down tasks on another rig so I can run Einstein tasks on it. They quite often will fail unless I use 3621 or 4176 driver. BOINC blog ID: 1692132 ·

MarkJ Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 1139 Credit: 80,854,192 RAC: 5	Message 1692610 - Posted: 17 Jun 2015, 12:08:27 UTC Last modified: 17 Jun 2015, 12:09:37 UTC First batch of results are in for Seti (they ran out of work units to send). I took a simplistic approach. Get the run time and CPU time off the task detail on the website and average them. Compare old with new. I realise that angle range will effect how long they take but I don't have the time or patience to check the AR for each one. Old was a small sample of 11 MB run while the CPU also had 7 CPU tasks going. Average run time was 3,728.82 and CPU time 169.04. New got a slightly bigger sample of 15 MB again run while the CPU had tasks going. Average run time was 3,475.52 and CPU time 150.23 Make your own conclusions but that looks to be slightly faster and less CPU time to me. As they say your mileage might vary. That's on an i7-3770 running at stock speed, no tweaking but was running optimised app r2489 single GPU task at a time. The installer requires .NET runtime 4.5 or later. Link to host here. Tasks done up to and including 16Jun2015 10:46:42 UTC were the old driver and after that its the new driver. BOINC blog ID: 1692610 ·

MarkJ Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 17 Feb 08 Posts: 1139 Credit: 80,854,192 RAC: 5	Message 1692618 - Posted: 17 Jun 2015, 12:55:47 UTC Last modified: 17 Jun 2015, 12:56:10 UTC Second batch of results are in for Einstein BRP4 tasks. They too show a faster run time but slightly more CPU usage. I did the same approach as for Seti (see previous message). Before test, 16 samples with average run time of 813.88 and CPU of 29.00. After test, 18 samples with average run time of 774.41 and CPU of 29.29. There was however one task that took almost 3 times longer so it skewed the averages. Host is an identical i7-3770. Link to host is here. Tasks up to and including 7Jun2015 13:06:18 UTC were using old driver. Tasks after that are using the newer driver. BOINC blog ID: 1692618 ·

KLiK Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 31 Mar 14 Posts: 1304 Credit: 22,994,597 RAC: 60	Message 1692959 - Posted: 18 Jun 2015, 6:25:42 UTC U got me interested...so I'm installing on my work computer with intelHD 2500 a new driver! ;) non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU ID: 1692959 ·

KLiK Volunteer tester Send message Joined: 31 Mar 14 Posts: 1304 Credit: 22,994,597 RAC: 60	Message 1693010 - Posted: 18 Jun 2015, 8:02:28 UTC No different @ my place...still only 0,00135% of CPU time 4 SETi@home v7... ;) non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU ID: 1693010 ·

©2024 University of California

SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.