Jump to content

Intel GMA4500 / GL 4x Express Chipset


bboyg
 Share

78 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
  • 1 month later...

Hello.

 

I've installed Lion on my Toshiba L450-11Q, after that I've tryed to install GMA4500M kext in several ways, but always getting normal resolution (1366*768) with very strange displaying (it looks like this: k75ak.jpg)

 

I've used instruction from http://tonymacx86.com/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=29005&start=10 from arikstress post. Is that kext issue or there is a way to enable antialiasing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello.

 

I've installed Lion on my Toshiba L450-11Q, after that I've tryed to install GMA4500M kext in several ways, but always getting normal resolution (1366*768) with very strange displaying (it looks like this: )

 

I've used instruction from http://tonymacx86.co...=29005&start=10 from arikstress post. Is that kext issue or there is a way to enable antialiasing?

 

I think I had this issue before... it was related to the DualLink property on the DSDT file. Maybe if you remove it the graphics will work just fine (don't know). Since I don't use OSX anymore, I can't give you more information than this, sorry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

anyone got this card to work with ML ? as there is no 32bit kernel all patched X3100FB kexts don't work.any one has 64bit version modified for device code 2a42 ?Edit: works with a patched SL kext

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know, this is an old thread.

 

Old, but gold!!

 

 

You can use iLife 08, but not iLife 09 since iLife 09 requires Quartz.

And you can run iWork 08 without Quartz, but you need my patch, but forget iWork 09.

 

WinSucks_4ever, how did you manage to run iLife 08 - specially iMovie! - without quartz extreme? I tried this, but iMovie keep displaying that annoying check for QE that prevents to open it.

 

Is there any version of iMovie (intel, please) that does not require QE, or at least opens anyway even without QE?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Old thread, but maybe somebody has an idea how to get

 

Vendor: Intel (0x8086)

Device ID: 0x2e12

Revision ID: 0x0003

 

working on Mountain Lion 10.8.x

 

Almost there, using this 64-bit kext on Gateway DU10G with dual DVI/VGA output

 

But DVI goes black & only VGA gives extended desktop with correct resolution

 

Ofcourse not being able to use primary desktop there is not much I can do (I can get it to mirror it with keyboard Cmd+F1 shortcut)

 

If I could only get the DVI display (or make VGA primary) I would be set...

 

sebus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Really?

 

All I see is :

John (JawhnL5) has left osxl along with the research for a GMA 4500 qe/ci solution

 

He decided not to share any of his kexts or even a IOreg for that matter. Also he decided to make it closed to everyone at OSXL and told us that he did not want to be bothered anymore about it and he would release it in his own time for what ever that is worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 9 months later...
  • 4 weeks later...

How do I make this work? I got kernel panic with this on Mavericks.

What is mean "with this"?

Such video cards controlled by GMA950 or X3100 drivers that are 32 bit only. They are not supported by Mavericks.

Use OSX 10.7.5 or install other video.

 

I tested G41M chipset with embedded video DevID=0x2e32. Booted by Clover I have native resolution. The system is about full working: internet, office, development. There is no OpenGL, no QE/CI and so some applications will be unavailable. There is also no color calibration so working with photo will be not perfect. As well as on Windows.  ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is NO support for GMA4500!!!!!!   :wallbash:

 

Stop asking, it will NEVER work! Resolution change does not constitute working graphics.. An accelerator would need to be written from scratch to support this graphics and NO ONE has ever made one and its not worth it for any one to do so.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hello everyone, I am another person who's facing the problem with resolution of the Intel G41 Express Chipset. My system is Dell Vostro Mini Tower Desktop.

 

I've successfully install the iAtkos ML2 to my PC and facing both the problem of the chipset and the display (a Dell one with native resolution of 1440x900), I think.

 

After installing, the OS preference said display adapter is 64 MB of Unknown Shared System Memory, I've tried a lot of kexts but failed, when I tried the kext for 10.6.2 from the post of bboyg, my OS recognize the name of the Chipset and said that it is "G41 Intel Express Chipset" but the resolution still maintains at stretched 1024 x 768.

 

I've tried editing the org.chamelon.boot.plist by defining boot options to Graphics Enabler = yes, "Graphic Mode = "1440x900x32" in many different ways including adjust directly edit file by text editor or using chamelon wizard sofware, then RESTART, right at booting step, the DELL DISPLAY, NOT Chamelon, showed me a message that "the input timing is not correct, please adjust your input timing to 1400x900at 60Hz", and the PC stopped there forever. It's so weird.

 

When I tried edting the file com.apple.boot.plist to the native resolution, It didn't work.

 

I've also try booting with the default file of chamelon, at booting step I added the option "Graphic Mode"="1400x900x32", but I still boot into OS with 1024x768. 

 

Hope to get help from experts to continue to explore the insane Hackintosh. :D. Thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I bet if people were benevolent enough, we would have everything done on the blink of an eye. Unfortunately, everyone embraces the JOKER's philosophy on a daily-basis. (IF YOU'RE GOOD AT SOMETHING, NEVER DO IT FOR FREE!)
Never had a chance to meet a legendary programmer. Everyone I meet is a mugle, HarryPotterly speaking. Lmao
I do come up with unique solutions to fix dozens of mysterious problems on both Mac and Windows, but that doesn't make me anything more than an ordinary problem solver who doesn't sleep until everything is working perfectly, impressing those of less knowledge unintentionally of course. As long as those who are great at what they're doing -although it's not the same domain- appreciate what I do, I'm proud to be that ordinary problem solver.
Moreover, It's the second time that I put my friend's ASUS 9800 GTX in the oven. I need a HQ thermal paste and a copper patch so it can last longer. Here in Morocco, NOT A CHANCE IN HELL! the only thing I could find is a standard 1$ thermal paste that doesn't do S***.
Good day, everyone!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reverse engineering is a very labor intensive process. It requires a specific - and valuable - skill set. Those who have the equipment, experience and time to do it usually get paid to do it.

I don't think anybody is going to write a driver from scratch for obsolete, underpowered on-board video for which there is no developer information available.

It has never happened in all of Hackintosh history and I think it never will. So far, anyone who has attempted to start such a project have failed.

 

AFAIK the only peripheral driver that has ever been written from scratch, specifically for Hackintosh use (there are no Intel Macs with PCI slots!) was the Envy sound card driver.

But it was written by the same person who wrote the Windows drivers - the developer already had access to anything he needed to know about the hardware. So it doesn't really compare.

 

Everything else that we have was built upon open source Linux drivers where a developer can go through existing code, see register information and whatever else is needed to "talk" to the hardware.

 

Please don't get me wrong, you know I'm not knocking the effort of the developers we have!

I'm just trying to make it clear that there is a huge difference between starting with 0 information and starting with information gathered from source code from an already existing driver.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes.. but no...Callisto was just a framebuffer driver right? No hardware acceleration. Again, I'm not knocking it at all, any effort is appreciated and applauded and encouraged etc etc.

 

I've seen this type of topic before, a user attempting to rally developers and beg them to build a working driver. It never happens.

 

I'm just trying to draw attention to the fact that it makes a huge difference when information about how the hardware works is available and when it isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...