twophive Posted August 1, 2007 Share Posted August 1, 2007 Yes or No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted August 1, 2007 Share Posted August 1, 2007 No.No. It works, but no QE/CI, only VESA, which means no acceleration and 1024x768 at the best. Get a nVidia 7-series or one of the supported ati's FTW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twophive Posted August 1, 2007 Author Share Posted August 1, 2007 No.No. It works, but no QE/CI, only VESA, which means no acceleration and 1024x768 at the best. Get a nVidia 7-series or one of the supported ati's FTW I figured. I stumbled upon this : http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?...N82E16856101034 It would've been so perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted August 1, 2007 Share Posted August 1, 2007 Well ppl have gotten the G33 chipset to work, they just buy a gfx card to get qe/ci, so you're not completely out of luck. Don't know about that specific motherboard, but if a chipset works in one, it should work in another. Check this thread on the Gigabyte GA-G33M-DS2R Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmoncu Posted November 1, 2007 Share Posted November 1, 2007 in leopard people have reported this works, full QE/CI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twophive Posted November 5, 2007 Author Share Posted November 5, 2007 Well, I've seen the GMA X3100.kext in Leopard, but this is just the "GMA 3100", not "X3100". Is there a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Yeah, it's the same thing, AFAIK. Should work now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
errandwolfe Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Could someone please PM me a confirmation if the X3100 works or not on desktops. Laptop users are having an issue with it not recognizing the internal display. The only way to get it working is to hook up an external monitor. Curious to see if there are any weird glitches on the desktop side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted November 5, 2007 Share Posted November 5, 2007 Could someone please PM me a confirmation if the X3100 works or not on desktops. Laptop users are having an issue with it not recognizing the internal display. The only way to get it working is to hook up an external monitor. Curious to see if there are any weird glitches on the desktop side. I couldn't find one. Although ppl are using laptops with external displays no problem. Anyway, twophive if it doesn't work, then you can get a 7300LE or something cheap.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thysm00 Posted November 6, 2007 Share Posted November 6, 2007 I'll receive my new G33 board from gigabite with X3100 so i'll post results soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dia3olik Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 Hi! i'm interested too! please keep us informed! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thysm00 Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 I received it today, i'll try when i'm back home unless my girlfriend tells me not to... Be patient i'll post results! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delish Posted November 7, 2007 Share Posted November 7, 2007 So far I havent got it to work, devid on my card is 0x29c2 (Bearlake integrated) I tried to add that to X3100FB kext but it still doesnt work, X3100 and X3100FB kext do show up in systemprofiler/extensions thou, but Graphic/Displays says "No kext loaded" I got a GA-G31MX-S2 btw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thysm00 Posted November 8, 2007 Share Posted November 8, 2007 I'm sad to say the same thing as delish... it doesn't work... i get this insystem profiler (in french sorry): Type : Moniteur Bus : Intégré VRAM (totale) : 64 Mo de mémoire système partagée Fournisseur : Intel (0x8086) Identifiant du périphérique : 0x29c2 Identifiant de révision : 0x0002 Informations sur l’extension du noyau : Aucune kext n’est chargée So no kext loaded. I've seen in the x3100 plist that 0*00008086 was there but i dion't know exactly where to put the id, any idea? i'm using a GA-G33M-DS2R motherboard. I've tried to forec loading the kext, by kextload, terminal said kext seems to be loadable and then not loaded Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clockworx Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 The problem is that your board has a GMA 3100, which is VERY different from the X3100. X3100 has hardware T&L, different shader version support.....pretty much everything. The GMA 3100 is actually closer to the GMA950, specs and performance-wise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_GMA I've been looking for a desktop motherboard that has the GMA X3100, but so far have come up empty. I find LOTS of mobo's that say they have a X3100, but upon looking closer at the specs at the manufacturer website, I always find that the board actually has a GMA 3100. This isn't surprising, since the X3100 is defined as "the mobile version" of the X3000, and no mac so far has an X3000 either. (Though the mac mini may eventually have one). Anyways, I've been looking for the same thing, but unfortunately there's no motherboard I know of that currently has an X3100, so anyone looking for a X3100 like I am is probably out of luck. EDIT: Correcting myself. It seems that these ones MAY have an X3100. http://minipc.aopen.com/Global/spec.htm Their specs match up with an X3100 (GM965 chipset, which should be using the X3100, unlike the G33, which uses the GMA3100.) Unfortunately, when I went to look for verification, their detailed spec sheet points lists it as GMA3100, though all of the other specs (bus speed, chipset) point to it being an X3100. Is it really that hard for system manufacturers to avoid this confusion and list their specs correctly?!!?!? EDIT again: Same deal with this board, though the specs they list point more the the GMA3100. http://www.msicomputer.com/product/p_spec....5&class=ipc However, Intel is very clear that the GM965 chipset is paired with the X3100. I'm starting to wonder if either intels docs are horrible, or if the system sellers only have a vague concept of what they're buying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Synaesthesia Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 Interesting, I never knew there was a difference. Seems like a big one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 The only GMA X-series chip (that being the new one with unified shaders and a completely different architecture to previous GMAs) available on a desktop platform now is the X3000, which is part of G965. X3000 may work with the X3100 kexts, I don't know - it should be the same architecture, at least, although Intel claim X3000 (G965) will not support Shader Model 4.0, which X3100 (GM965) will. I don't know if that means there are substantial architectural differences or if it's just a software enforced limitation to encourage uptake of G35 (when it finally reaches retail.) It's a fairly moot point to Windows users, as DX10 shader model 4.0 apps would be far too slow on X3100 from what we've seen so far of it's performance anyway. G31 and G33 use GMA 3xxx (not no 'X') which is just a GMA950 with some video processing features added and clockspeed increased. Again, I don't know if this means that the GMA950 kexts could be coaxed into working on them, but it's certainly worth looking into. G35 will use GMA X3500, which also might work with the X3100 kexts. We'll have to wait and see. Intel shouldn't have used such similar terminology for completely different architectures; it's resulted in a lot of confusion, not only in the OSX86 community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clockworx Posted November 14, 2007 Share Posted November 14, 2007 The only GMA X-series chip (that being the new one with unified shaders and a completely different architecture to previous GMAs) available on a desktop platform now is the X3000, which is part of G965. X3000 may work with the X3100 kexts, I don't know - it should be the same architecture, at least, although Intel claim X3000 (G965) will not support Shader Model 4.0, which X3100 (GM965) will. I don't know if that means there are substantial architectural differences or if it's just a software enforced limitation to encourage uptake of G35 (when it finally reaches retail.) Actually, there are two "desktop" mini PCs listed above that I am fairly sure have an X3100. They have the correct chipset (GM965), and as further "proof", they use mobile chips (socket P) rather than desktop chips. So apparently these company took desktop platforms and stuck them into a small-form-factor desktop. I'd be curious to see if the X3100 driver works with the X3000. I really wouldn't be surprised either way if it did or didn't work. They're similar, but there are some differences. I have no idea why Intel chose to make so many different version of their integrated graphics chipsets, or give them such obnoxiously similar names. The substantial differences I see that could cause incompatibility are the clock speed (667 vs 500/400), and shader models. I guess it depends if Apple's drivers make calls to the graphics driver that utilize the version-4.0 features (though I'm guessing they probably don't) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azurael Posted November 15, 2007 Share Posted November 15, 2007 Well I did say a desktop platform. That, of course, excludes any desktops using a mobile platform, like those mini-PCs and machines like the iMac + Mac mini Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clockworx Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Well I did say a desktop platform. That, of course, excludes any desktops using a mobile platform, like those mini-PCs and machines like the iMac + Mac mini Well, I got a good deal on a GMA X3000 desktop system, so I guess I'll be finding out in a few days.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dia3olik Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Nice! Tell us what you'll find out! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enb14 Posted November 20, 2007 Share Posted November 20, 2007 Guys my DG33FB with has a GMA3100 didn't work on 10.5.1, it just crashed, it even didn't boot at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyty2 Posted January 15, 2008 Share Posted January 15, 2008 Is there some news about GMA3100 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
splintah Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 i have a asus p5k-vm witha a gma3100 i was actually 100% shure it was a X3100 when i bought it (bought it to use as hackintosh) now i a m a little pissed to say the least why didnt they call it a gma 970 or something are there any news on getting this thing to work ? did anyone try the gma950 drivers ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhalls Posted January 19, 2008 Share Posted January 19, 2008 The G33 CHipset itself is not the problem. Look at my sig, the G33 board works fin. But the onboard-Video istnt supported. works only 1024x768 no qi and so... with a cheap 7300GT videocard all works fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts