Ivy Bridge - Z77/H77 - is the Quicksync still broken with a Discrete Graphics card.
Despite being aware for the past few months that Ivy bridge would be barely faster than Sandy Bridge, I decided to wait.
I wanted native USB3 and Quicksync to work when I plug my screens into my GFX card.
I've not seen the quicksync thing mentioned in any reviews. Is it fixed or do they still use some lucid bodge to make it work?
Re: Ivy Bridge - Z77/H77 - is the Quicksync still broken with a Discrete Graphics car
Needs Lucid AFAIK - just buy a Lucid board?
Re: Ivy Bridge - Z77/H77 - is the Quicksync still broken with a Discrete Graphics car
I hope not but I guess continuing an existing bodge is easier than making the hardware work properly in the first place.
Re: Ivy Bridge - Z77/H77 - is the Quicksync still broken with a Discrete Graphics car
Works for me with the screens plugged into the motherboards ports.
Take it you have more than 2 screens?
Re: Ivy Bridge - Z77/H77 - is the Quicksync still broken with a Discrete Graphics car
I believe the trick with quicksync is that because it uses the iGPU shaders you need to have the iGPU active, and if the computer detects a discreet card and no screens attached to the iGPU I assume it power gates it. I wouldn't call that broken, personally ;)
Given that none of the reviews have mentioned that you *can* use Quicksync when just using a discreet card, I'd assume that Intel haven't changed anything in that regard.
Re: Ivy Bridge - Z77/H77 - is the Quicksync still broken with a Discrete Graphics car
Quote:
Originally Posted by
scaryjim
I believe the trick with quicksync is that because it uses the iGPU shaders you need to have the iGPU active, and if the computer detects a discreet card and no screens attached to the iGPU I assume it power gates it. I wouldn't call that broken, personally ;)
CPU cores are power gated and get switched on and off when they are needed or not. Why should the iGPU be different. In fact the display part could be switched off whilst the shaders are active if the CPU was designed properly.
When I have to use a software bodge that impacts performance by 10% unnecessarily in order to use part of the CPU that just does processing I would call that broken ;)
Maybe you're just the kind of guy that accepts excuses for poor design and execution from engineers willingly ;)