1 of 1 people found this helpful
Intel added MSAA support with Sandybridge (HD2000, HD3000) and carried that support forward on Ivybridge (HD2500, HD4000), but only on Windows Vista and later (Win7, Win8) drivers. Intel never added MSAA support for Windows XP drivers.
Why do you want to use Windows XP instead of the newer operating systems? Windows 7 in particular is a great operating system.
Much like the 40 year old BMW 2002tii, center stage in my carport, I've yet to see the exact proportions, quantities, and performance i expect from its manufacturer since this level of perfection was achieved. Add to this, that literally millions of miles of code are still specifically written for the XP32 architecture and require special steps to be emulated to be run properly on newer Operating systems. But i digress, to point out, I am a classic type of person. I won't be upgraded until i see what I want. and the fact i see, is neither my half weight, corner eating, pavement muncher, or the free wheeling, unencumbered XP will ever be achieved again. They were perfect. And I'm just the first of this coming wave to tell you this because the majority of the world's code was written for XP and it won't be denied perfect compatibility so long as there is hardware actively sold that supports it.
Now let's talk details.
It sounds like there is nothing in my hardware preventing me from achieving anti-aliasing (MSAA) and dx11 support, this is good. You say, "Intel never added MSAA support for Windows XP drivers." This seems clear but to dumb it down to my semi-fluent level, the only short coming is Intel's software drivers for Intel's hardware. Intel did not consider that having a post-modern motherboard like the DH61CR (2011) built with its sub-modern SATA III 3.0 and USB 2.0 and serial port features specifically one might say built for full XP compatibility, that specifically supports the i3/i5/i7 LGA 1155 processors that to our point conversely features the ultra modern HD4000 software graphics drivers that are, our problem, written without any consideration for what is clearly being supported by the underlying Intel hardware of the same era, despite there not being any intraversable reason otherwise. It all works together, it all would do more together if only the Intel HD4000 software tried a little harder.
Take a moment and remember what a joy XP was to run, full compatibility of every single ancient program you ever loved and now lost the easy us of, through upgrading, was like. I have all your old friends here one touch away, and now at speeds unimaginable. Perfection would be Intel software that met my needs, like those programs still do. They were perfect. Will they say that of Intel's software support deficit on this issue a decade from now? XP is still a living, progressing OS. There is now unofficial DX10 support (for the dx9.0c ceiling'd XP) with the promise of more to come from independent developers. There is great desire for classic gaming systems, on which to play any-era games and programs without consideration for emulating this, or compatibility mode that. My system plays them all, runs them all. I enjoy a full spectrum of programs in my daily routine that spans 30 years of programming with little to no effort to run everything from MSDOS through win95 right up to today with this one exception of MSAA support binding me from tomorrow, or really even the last decade, despite my thanks to this dynamo of a core, that now flies my old friends at speeds i ever only dreamt of, but like all systems i want everything I can get out of this. I want MSAA support on XP pro. I expect to be able to play every game my hardware can physically manage, which is everything ever written and more, because by what i read when i built this was that this hardware supported XP, supported MSAA, supported DX11. Don't split hairs on this.
Full MSAA support for XP is all I ask, (Still the world's most used PC OS) is what Intel needs to offer us. Am I wrong to ask the fuel to fit the motor if both are the product of the same company in the same era? What little bit more needs to be done to achieve this? And if not, how can I be pleased with hardware that tells me one thing is okay, while the software that runs it fails to achieve that?