We continue to wait for the OpenGL driver to get out of beta and either be added to Windows Update or be posted in the Download Center, or both. Like AMD and Nvidia did last month, this should happen sooner rather than later.
Hi, I am having problem installing the drivers. I am currently using the "microsoft basic display adapter". when I use the "update driver" button in the device manager, it will either tell me that the driver does not support this version of windows or the driver i am using is up to date. Also, I cannot find any updates about driver in the windows updates.
1 of 1 people found this helpful
In case anyone missed it, I should point out that some good news was posted here. The full version of the driver is coming in early May:
@yfnew, what specific graphics do you have (what's your CPU)? I'm not sure how you're getting both messages that you mentioned.
You definitely shouldn't need to do this, but you can download it manually from the Microsoft Update Catalog. Note that you'll have to visit that URL with IE, and in some cases, IE run as administrator. The larger one you see is x64, assuming you have HD Graphics, which I have my doubts about because Windows Update should have given it to you directly. You can click on the name of the driver for more information, such as hardware ID strings.
I have Intel HD 3000 graphics.
If I start a fullscreen 3D game, play it a bit, and then exit it, visual corruption of Windows interface elements appears. To get rid of this corruption I have to restart the graphics driver by disabling and enabling it in Device Manager.
I have an Acer TimelineX 3830T with video BIOS v2119.
Also, it is unclear from the previous posts whether there will be an OpenGL driver for Intel GMA 4500 series for the final release of Windows 8. Will there be one?
My CPU is Core i5 M540, and the device id for my graphic is PCI\VEN_8086&DEV_0046. When I first using the device manager to update the driver, it told me that the driver does not support my windows. Then I deleted the original driver (igdlh11.inf), and I used the device manager again to update. This time it said that the driver (Microsoft Basic Display Adapter) is up to date.
That may be it for now. If you look at the HD Graphics driver listed in the Microsoft Update Catalog mentioned earlier, you won't find your hardware ID in the list, so that driver won't install, as you found. Yet the link I have above to the other thread does show the "inbox driver" for 1st-gen HD Graphics on the Consumer Preview available "now," but I find it hard to believe by that they mean the Microsoft Basic Display Adapter. Perhaps mobile graphics is not included in that chart?
I have a Lenovo 3000 N100 computer. The system properties show Intel Core Duo T2350, and the Intel 945GM chipset (Driver Date: 10/4/2011, Version 220.127.116.118, Provider: Intel Corporation).
The Husdawg driver update utility doesn't seem to run on Windows 8 ("your operating system is not supported by this utility"), so I ran this installer anyway. It gives an error message saying that my system doesn't meet the minimum requirements, so I presume the driver I have is the latest.
The Vista driver for this chipset had Open GL support, but from this it seems that the Windows 8 driver doesn't. Can anybody there please let me know where I am going wrong, and if am not, please could you share the thinking behind dropping support for Open GL?
I don't have Win 8 installed currently. On Win 7 I noticed a couple of game bugs with the driver 18.104.22.168.2729, some directx games doesn't start and some OpenGL apps like Furmark, GL 2.1 - HW Geometry Instancing in Geeks3d or Cinebench 11.5 OpenGL produces a blank screen on Sandy Bridge HD3000. But maybe it works properly on Windows 8. The OpenGL game Doom 3 starts properly, "timedemo demo1" Benchmark some frames per second slower. Directx performance is slightly better compared to the native 22.214.171.12412 Win 7 driver. But as I said this is tested on Win 7, take it with a grain of salt...
For the new HD2500/HD4000 Ivy Bridge graphics it looks like the driver added some OpenGL 4.0 extensions and fixed the spikes seen in the AF flower in dx9 mode.
Once again 915 graphics (GMA 900) isn't supported even on lowest 2D level with power management. Failsafe VGA shows some picture, but power management is ruined because of no Video driver exists.
Bye-bye cheap thin workplaces and office notebooks. Welcome creditors and bankruptcy appraisers. And 915 platform is still on the market. Intel is not just stilling customer's money, but ruining the wide segment of of business and management that made a stake on Intel's Hardware.
What a disgusting attitude to customers.
There's a lesson. If you don't want to have compatibility problems in future - never purchase Intel hardware for your business.
GMA 900 is dead old and slow and outdated, it's not important anymore. It's the right decision to kill this GMA version.
Is it older than Matrox chips that are still an industry standard?
Is it slower than S3 Trio/Virge that perfecly run in VGA and SVGA modes under Linuxes and even Win8 ?
Windows 8 is especially marketed as an OS capable to run on weak hardware. But Intel's politicks is a general drawback here.
I can playback Full HD video in VGA mode on GMA 900 and you still saying that ridiculous thing about performance?
Though, it can be 3-4 times faster with appropriate drivers.
Slow and old for what? For GAMES ?
Actually, how many workers are allowed to PLAY GAMES in office?
How many users play 3D games on Atom laptops? And GMA 900 is not slower
"It's the right decision to kill this GMA version."
It would be a right decision to kill the fraud who offer business level mass-market solutions and then cut support unexpectedly.
Are you idiotic? GMA 900 was launched in 2004, therefore a couple of years older than the first Atom generation. Furthermore Atom carries a PowerVR GPU. Stay on your current OS with your dead old integrated graphics and be happy or buy new hardware. Even AMD did not provide an official Windows 7 driver for their X1800/X1900 series and they are much much faster than your slow and feature old GMA 900. At some point it makes no sense to spend ressources on something unimportant and outdated hardware. Maybe you can use the Vista driver for Windows 8 if available and get a picture with disabled Aero, that's it. It doesn't matter what you would like to have. Your whining attitude is pure spam in this topic.
"Are you idiotic? GMA 900 was launched in 2004"
It seems that you are idiotic. GMA actually WAS launched in 2004 for wide range of business, system and embedded applications and the lifetime of such applications usually extends beyond 10 years period. (In contrary to game and entertainment applications that it was never assigned for)
Once again, why don't you complain on Matrox graphics industry/administrative level cores launched in 1994 and still online?
"Stay on your current OS with your dead old integrated graphics and be happy or buy new hardware."
So, give me a budget to replace the network of 400 office clients and I will happily replace them with... nVidia or AMD based platforms that never cut support that dishonorable way.
Actually, there's not much difference between GMA 900 and 950 (and later), so the support is cut artificially. Earlier 950 drivers were supporting 900 chips perfectly. That was just a marketing trick to own customers.
"Furthermore Atom carries a PowerVR GPU"
Ha-Ha-Ha! You are acquitting that castrato from 90's ? LOL
"Maybe you can use the Vista driver for Windows 8"
You are completely out of . Beter keep shut up, or examine the problem.
There's no Vista drivers for GMA 900 ! Thats the treachery!
And You didn't even tried to read specs of Win8!
Latest 900 driver is XPDM and Vista(7) had limited support of XPDM (with countless bugs). In win8 there's no XPDM. And rumors say WDDM 1.0 also will be cut or removed from W8 final.
And once again. STOP BURBLING ABOUT 3D Performance! It is not that GMAs were designed for from the first place and that is not 9xx series were widely used for. 2D, common interfaces, simple cheap one-chip and low power applications. It was almost perfect and it is still not bad, .excepting artificial driver problem.