Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Friday 17 October 2003 14:07, Dhruba Bandopadhyay wrote: > > > > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:53:36 +0100 (BST) > > Done and done. > > > > I am using gentoo-sources-2.4.20-r7 > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ian $ glxgears > > 3856 frames in 5.0 seconds = 771.200 FPS > > 4194 frames in 5.0 seconds = 838.800 FPS > > 4094 frames in 5.0 seconds = 818.800 FPS > > 4107 frames in 5.0 seconds = 821.400 FPS > > 4153 frames in 5.0 seconds = 830.600 FPS > > > > I don't know how those match up to others, but it certainly is > > faster than my old Voodoo. > > Here's what I get. > > $ glxgears > 6789 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1357.800 FPS > 7051 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1410.200 FPS > 6977 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1395.400 FPS > 6962 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1392.400 FPS > 6963 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1392.600 FPS > > Same card. Quite odd eh? :-\ Glxgears for modern cards is simply a fill rate test and really gives no true image of the card's performace. My GF4 gives 24181 frames in 5.0 seconds = 4836.200 FPS 23711 frames in 5.0 seconds = 4742.200 FPS 23583 frames in 5.0 seconds = 4716.600 FPS 23688 frames in 5.0 seconds = 4737.600 FPS 23612 frames in 5.0 seconds = 4722.400 FPS But it is ti4600 so it's memory bus is like twice of the FX5200. The down side is that this has heat sinks over memory modules and fan over the GPU. One thing you might want to try is enabling the experimental accelerated RENDER extension support. You need to set Option "RenderAccel" "true" in the device section to enable this. It works great and gives a really healthy boost for 2D graphics with the latest drivers this really makes the difference. All software that support REDER extension (allmost all) will use HW blits and I think they even has alpha support too. There are some small things still to be done, but nothing that normal use would reveal. So for normal desktop usage it is perfect. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 12:07:32 +0100 (BST) "Dhruba Bandopadhyay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:53:36 +0100 (BST) > > Done and done. > > > > I am using gentoo-sources-2.4.20-r7 > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ian $ glxgears > > 3856 frames in 5.0 seconds = 771.200 FPS > > 4194 frames in 5.0 seconds = 838.800 FPS > > 4094 frames in 5.0 seconds = 818.800 FPS > > 4107 frames in 5.0 seconds = 821.400 FPS > > 4153 frames in 5.0 seconds = 830.600 FPS > > > > I don't know how those match up to others, but it certainly is > > faster than my old Voodoo. > > Here's what I get. > > $ glxgears > 6789 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1357.800 FPS > 7051 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1410.200 FPS > 6977 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1395.400 FPS > 6962 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1392.400 FPS > 6963 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1392.600 FPS > > Same card. Quite odd eh? :-\ > Quite odd. I wonder if there is anything that I can be doing to get faster performance. Not that I'm complaining, but I might as well get all that I can. > Nvidia makes no changes to fonts AFAIK. You know, I've always been > put off american army because of the extensive preparation of > registering your soldier etc. I'm a strong addict of ET though and > play with [Gentoo] prefix so this community can tell I'm one of them. > ;-) Would you say AA is good enough to go through registration? If > so, I might give it a try. > So far, I have only gone through the training section of it. I don't know how good it is in game play. I'll let you know. I have tried et, but I am almost pathetically bad at it, but the game play seems pretty good. Other than constantly getting my head blown off that is :) -- Ian Truelsen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: ihtruelsen Homepage: http://www.ihtruelsen.dyndns.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:53:36 +0100 (BST) > Done and done. > > I am using gentoo-sources-2.4.20-r7 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ian $ glxgears > 3856 frames in 5.0 seconds = 771.200 FPS > 4194 frames in 5.0 seconds = 838.800 FPS > 4094 frames in 5.0 seconds = 818.800 FPS > 4107 frames in 5.0 seconds = 821.400 FPS > 4153 frames in 5.0 seconds = 830.600 FPS > > I don't know how those match up to others, but it certainly is faster > than my old Voodoo. Here's what I get. $ glxgears 6789 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1357.800 FPS 7051 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1410.200 FPS 6977 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1395.400 FPS 6962 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1392.400 FPS 6963 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1392.600 FPS Same card. Quite odd eh? :-\ > One thing though: I think that I used to have AA fonts in X, or at least > they weren't this jagged before. Does the nvidia driver deal with fonts > differently? > > Thanks to all. I'm off to try America's Army :) Nvidia makes no changes to fonts AFAIK. You know, I've always been put off american army because of the extensive preparation of registering your soldier etc. I'm a strong addict of ET though and play with [Gentoo] prefix so this community can tell I'm one of them. ;-) Would you say AA is good enough to go through registration? If so, I might give it a try. Take care. Dhruba. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
MAL wrote: Hmm, using the same kernel and a Radeon 8500LE, (now cheaper than that nVidia card), and 16bpp, (same as you), I get: 7485 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1497.000 FPS 8763 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1752.600 FPS 8744 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1748.800 FPS 8764 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1752.800 FPS That is using ATI's official drivers. I get slightly faster with the DRI offerings, but they don't draw textures properly. Personally I have various problems with the ATI drivers, such as Neverwinter Nights locking completely after 5 seconds of playing. The DRI drivers work in these circumstances, but the textures are all messed up, (still playable). From what I can discern, this is something most ATI user's don't see. I would suspect a Radeon 9600 or whatever they're on now, would not have these problems, and is going to be a shedload faster than my 8500LE. these are my results with a GeForce FX Go5200 on a laptop: 12179 frames in 5.0 seconds = 2435.800 FPS 16752 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3350.400 FPS 16803 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3360.600 FPS 16839 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3367.800 FPS 16831 frames in 5.0 seconds = 3366.200 FPS i get way better performance than on my desktop system with the radeon 9000. i know, the fx 5200 is newer. still i believe nvidia has to be the choice ;-D cheers, eric -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
i own both an nVidia and an ATI. - they work fine, but nVidia installation has been easier (though strictly dependent of nVidia Corp. wills) - gaming does better on nVidia, at least the games i own.. - ATI have a mechanically more robust cooling system; it could sound funny but i've always (3 cards) had to take care of nVidia card fan to avoid too much noise and strong vibrations - ATI has "silenced" cooling compared to nVidia R# -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
"Ian Truelsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 is > starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of the big > two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for framebuffer stuff > and for DRI. > > Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? ATI - the open source drivers are much better. And I don't want a "tainted" kernel. -- Hilsen Harald. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
Ian Truelsen wrote: I am using gentoo-sources-2.4.20-r7 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ian $ glxgears 3856 frames in 5.0 seconds = 771.200 FPS 4194 frames in 5.0 seconds = 838.800 FPS 4094 frames in 5.0 seconds = 818.800 FPS 4107 frames in 5.0 seconds = 821.400 FPS 4153 frames in 5.0 seconds = 830.600 FPS I don't know how those match up to others, but it certainly is faster than my old Voodoo. Hmm, using the same kernel and a Radeon 8500LE, (now cheaper than that nVidia card), and 16bpp, (same as you), I get: 7485 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1497.000 FPS 8763 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1752.600 FPS 8744 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1748.800 FPS 8764 frames in 5.0 seconds = 1752.800 FPS That is using ATI's official drivers. I get slightly faster with the DRI offerings, but they don't draw textures properly. Personally I have various problems with the ATI drivers, such as Neverwinter Nights locking completely after 5 seconds of playing. The DRI drivers work in these circumstances, but the textures are all messed up, (still playable). From what I can discern, this is something most ATI user's don't see. I would suspect a Radeon 9600 or whatever they're on now, would not have these problems, and is going to be a shedload faster than my 8500LE. MAL -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 20:45, Luke Ravitch wrote:
On 2003-10-16 11:45, Mark Knecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there a reasonably priced (<$125) nVidea board with no fan that runs
> under Linux? What nVidea type GPU would I be looking for?
I have a GeForce4 MX 440 SE also. Works like a charm under Gentoo and all other *nixes. Right now you could get one for $50. I play games with it all running at either 1024x768x32 or by 1600x1200x32 flawlessly. I even do some OpenGL programming and I've been _very_ statisfied with this card.
http://www.zipzoomfly.com/jsp/ProductDetail.jsp?ProductCode=324015-OP
-Pete
--
perl -e 'print pack("H*", "70766572746573406E79632E72722E636F6D0A")'
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 23:53:36 +0100 (BST) "Dhruba Bandopadhyay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I enabled the frambuffer setup in the kernel, but the only option > > that I saw there was for the riva, which I enabled but doesn't seem > > to get the proper functionality. > > That's your problem right there. Do not use graphics card specific > options in kernel. Disable riva and enable vesafb. > Got it. vga=795 works for me now and I can actually read the messages on the screen that used to flow by way too quickly. Good start that. > Don't forget to uncomment the following line in /etc/modules.d/nvidia. > Oh > and post your glxgears figure together with kernel version just for > comparison :-) > > options nvidia NVreg_EnableAGPSBA=1 NVreg_EnableAGPFW=1 > Done and done. I am using gentoo-sources-2.4.20-r7 [EMAIL PROTECTED] ian $ glxgears 3856 frames in 5.0 seconds = 771.200 FPS 4194 frames in 5.0 seconds = 838.800 FPS 4094 frames in 5.0 seconds = 818.800 FPS 4107 frames in 5.0 seconds = 821.400 FPS 4153 frames in 5.0 seconds = 830.600 FPS I don't know how those match up to others, but it certainly is faster than my old Voodoo. One thing though: I think that I used to have AA fonts in X, or at least they weren't this jagged before. Does the nvidia driver deal with fonts differently? Thanks to all. I'm off to try America's Army :) -- Ian Truelsen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: ihtruelsen Homepage: http://www.ihtruelsen.dyndns.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On 2003-10-16 11:45, Mark Knecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Is there a reasonably priced (<$125) nVidea board with no fan that runs > under Linux? What nVidea type GPU would I be looking for? I have a GeForce4 MX 440 SE. It was well under $100. You could probably get something comparable for under $50 by now. It has no fan and is solid with both Quake 3 and movies. Anything in the GeForce4 MX line would probably do what you need. -- Luke -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
> Great minds think alike. That is the board that I bought today. > Installed without a hitch and gets 3D accel right out of the box. The Congrats ;-) > only problem that I have is that it does not see to like the frame > buffer modes from grub. I had vga=794 in my grub line, which worked fine > for my Voodoo3, but results in a blank black screen for the nVidia. > > I enabled the frambuffer setup in the kernel, but the only option that I > saw there was for the riva, which I enabled but doesn't seem to get the > proper functionality. That's your problem right there. Do not use graphics card specific options in kernel. Disable riva and enable vesafb. > Are you able to use fb modes from grub? If so, could you pass along the > options that you selected in the fb kernel config section? I would be > very appreciative. Here's what I use. title Gentoo GNU/Linux (2.6.x) root (hd0,0) kernel (hd0,0)/boot/bzImage root=/dev/hda3 hdd=scsi video=vesa:ywrap,mtrr vga=0x31B idebus=66 Don't forget to uncomment the following line in /etc/modules.d/nvidia. Oh and post your glxgears figure together with kernel version just for comparison :-) options nvidia NVreg_EnableAGPSBA=1 NVreg_EnableAGPFW=1 Good luck. Dhruba. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thursday 16 Oct 2003 23:03, Ian Truelsen wrote: > On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:56:53 +0100 (BST) > > "Dhruba Bandopadhyay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old > > > Voodoo 3 is starting to show its age). What I would like to know > > > is which of the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under > > > Linux for framebuffer stuff and for DRI. > > > > > > Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for > > > Linux? > > > > When I bought my card recently, that was exactly my question. What > > is (1) the most powerful card that (2) makes no noise and (3) works > > perfectly in linux? > > > > The answer I concluded upon was the "Asus V9520 Magic/T GeForce FX > > 5200 128MB (GX-013-AS)". That's the sixth card down on the link > > below. > > Great minds think alike. That is the board that I bought today. > Installed without a hitch and gets 3D accel right out of the box. The > only problem that I have is that it does not see to like the frame > buffer modes from grub. I had vga=794 in my grub line, which worked > fine for my Voodoo3, but results in a blank black screen for the > nVidia. > > I enabled the frambuffer setup in the kernel, but the only option > that I saw there was for the riva, which I enabled but doesn't seem > to get the proper functionality. That's why you have a problem. Don't enable riva fb. Choose VESA fb instead. I use vga791 with no problem on my Asus V9560. Peter -- == Portage 2.0.49-r13 (default-x86-1.4, gcc-3.2.3, glibc-2.3.2-r1, 2.4.23_pre7-gss) i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 3200+ == -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:56:53 +0100 (BST) "Dhruba Bandopadhyay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo > > 3 is starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which > > of the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for > > framebuffer stuff and for DRI. > > > > Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? > > When I bought my card recently, that was exactly my question. What is > (1) the most powerful card that (2) makes no noise and (3) works > perfectly in linux? > > The answer I concluded upon was the "Asus V9520 Magic/T GeForce FX > 5200 128MB (GX-013-AS)". That's the sixth card down on the link > below. > Great minds think alike. That is the board that I bought today. Installed without a hitch and gets 3D accel right out of the box. The only problem that I have is that it does not see to like the frame buffer modes from grub. I had vga=794 in my grub line, which worked fine for my Voodoo3, but results in a blank black screen for the nVidia. I enabled the frambuffer setup in the kernel, but the only option that I saw there was for the riva, which I enabled but doesn't seem to get the proper functionality. Are you able to use fb modes from grub? If so, could you pass along the options that you selected in the fb kernel config section? I would be very appreciative. -- Ian Truelsen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: ihtruelsen Homepage: http://www.ihtruelsen.dyndns.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
Donnie Berkholz wrote: Unfortunately nVidia's 3D support is all closed-source, and they don't really share documentation for 2D either. I do not consider this "better." ATi, on the other hand, has shared complete documentation for many of its earlier cards and I believe this will continue. It is also increasing support for its official closed-source drivers. And the Direct Rendering Guide is getting a little outdated unfortunately because I haven't had time to update it. =\ at least they (nvidia) did (and of course still do), unlike ati, support linux in the past ;-) i think your guide still works. an outdated one rather can be found here: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ati-faq.xml doesn't show what to configure in the XF86Config at all. IMHO a very bad guide... imagine somebody who's new to gentoo. he'll start with the ati-faq insteed of having a look to the dri-guide => no 3d!!! leads to frustration :-/ cheers, eric -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
> I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 is > starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of the big > two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for framebuffer stuff > and for DRI. > > Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? When I bought my card recently, that was exactly my question. What is (1) the most powerful card that (2) makes no noise and (3) works perfectly in linux? The answer I concluded upon was the "Asus V9520 Magic/T GeForce FX 5200 128MB (GX-013-AS)". That's the sixth card down on the link below. http://www.overclockers.co.uk/acatalog/Online_Catalogue_Asus_137.html Good value for money and supports side band addressing and fast writes perfectly. Let us know how things go. Take care. Dhruba. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 15:02, Eric Marchionni wrote: > when i was looking for my new notebook, it definitly had to have a > nvidia card! > it was pretty hard to get dri running on my radeon 9000 (the gentoo dri > guide didn't exist then). > and now i'm a happy nvidia user without troubles :-) > > buy a nvidia card because they (nvidia) started to support linux way > earlier (and better) then ati. Unfortunately nVidia's 3D support is all closed-source, and they don't really share documentation for 2D either. I do not consider this "better." ATi, on the other hand, has shared complete documentation for many of its earlier cards and I believe this will continue. It is also increasing support for its official closed-source drivers. And the Direct Rendering Guide is getting a little outdated unfortunately because I haven't had time to update it. =\ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
RE: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thu, 2003-10-16 at 11:34, Mark Knecht wrote: > Great thread. I'm doing a new box and have been an ATI user. However, I need > an adapter with no fan and do not require leading edge 3D support. The ATI > Radeon 9000 model I was using seems to have disappeared, so I didn't know > what to do. > > Is there a reasonably priced (<$125) nVidea board with no fan that runs > under Linux? What nVidea type GPU would I be looking for? I have a geforce2 mx400 in my old desktop, use it for a mythtv box now, that has no fan. You can still buy them online for under $40 US. Jayson Garrell -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
The Voodoo just got behind for things like gaming. It just won't handle the requirements of games today (or a few years back either) in 2 or 3D. However, for many purposes it's just fine. On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 20:46:53 +0200 "D.Wilkening" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Ian, it's quite the same situation for me. Looking for a new gra-ca i remembered having an old voodoo3 somewhere in my flat. I thougt of (searching and) installing it because my old ati rage IIc is'n good for xine/zapping/desktop. My question is: why is the voodoo not good enough anymore and can i save some time by *not* installing it? After all i'm not interested in 3D but i remember that card to be not the worst in 2D, so xine/zapping should work, right? Dieter Zitat von Ian Truelsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 is starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for framebuffer stuff and for DRI. Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? -- Ian Truelsen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 20:46:53 +0200 "D.Wilkening" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Ian, > > it's quite the same situation for me. Looking for a new gra-ca i > remembered having an old voodoo3 somewhere in my flat. I thougt of > (searching and) installing it because my old ati rage IIc is'n good > for xine/zapping/desktop. > > My question is: why is the voodoo not good enough anymore and can i > save some time by *not* installing it? > After all i'm not interested in 3D but i remember that card to be not > the worst in 2D, so xine/zapping should work, right? > Other than the 3D support, the Voodoo is a solid card. I have not had any problems with it, beyond 3D support (and that is mainly speed and texture support). Were it not for the 3D technology leaping away from my poor old Voodoo, I wouldn't hesitate to leave it where it is. -- Ian Truelsen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] AIM: ihtruelsen Homepage: http://www.ihtruelsen.dyndns.org -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
Ian Truelsen wrote: I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 is starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for framebuffer stuff and for DRI. Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? when i was looking for my new notebook, it definitly had to have a nvidia card! it was pretty hard to get dri running on my radeon 9000 (the gentoo dri guide didn't exist then). and now i'm a happy nvidia user without troubles :-) buy a nvidia card because they (nvidia) started to support linux way earlier (and better) then ati. my 2 cent -eric -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
Hi Ian, it's quite the same situation for me. Looking for a new gra-ca i remembered having an old voodoo3 somewhere in my flat. I thougt of (searching and) installing it because my old ati rage IIc is'n good for xine/zapping/desktop. My question is: why is the voodoo not good enough anymore and can i save some time by *not* installing it? After all i'm not interested in 3D but i remember that card to be not the worst in 2D, so xine/zapping should work, right? Dieter Zitat von Ian Truelsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 is > starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of the big > two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for framebuffer stuff > and for DRI. > > Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? > > > -- > Ian Truelsen > Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
> Ian Truelsen wrote: > > I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 > > is starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of > > the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for > > framebuffer stuff and for DRI. > > > > Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? > > Nvidia - They have better long term driver support > > Rick > Great thread. I'm doing a new box and have been an ATI user. However, I need an adapter with no fan and do not require leading edge 3D support. The ATI Radeon 9000 model I was using seems to have disappeared, so I didn't know what to do. Is there a reasonably priced (<$125) nVidea board with no fan that runs under Linux? What nVidea type GPU would I be looking for? Thanks, Mark -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
Ian Truelsen wrote: > I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 > is starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of > the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for > framebuffer stuff and for DRI. > > Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? Nvidia - They have better long term driver support Rick Kitty5 NewMedia http://Kitty5.com POV-Ray News & Resources http://Povray.co.uk TEL : +44 (01270) 501101 - ICQ : 15776037 PGP Public Key http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x231E1CEA -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 10:30:24AM -0700, Ian Truelsen wrote: > I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo > 3 is starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which > of the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for > framebuffer stuff and for DRI. nVidia gets my vote. I've been using one for a few months now without any problems. I just switched to Gentoo, so before I was installing the nvidia drivers manually---it was trivial. I'm not a gamer, but I do use Pro/Engineer on my Linux box; that application is pretty picky with video cards. Our standard workstations at work *used* to come with ATI cards, but they had too many problems and we switched to nvidia. Based entirely on hearsay, the nvidia drivers are generally of much better quality and more stable (though maybe not as well performing). Although, (again based on hearsay) the ATI drivers seem to have improved reliability as of late. Hope that helps! Matt -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
On Thu, Oct 16, 2003 at 10:30:24AM -0700, Ian Truelsen wrote: > I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 is > starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of the big > two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for framebuffer stuff > and for DRI. > > Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? Sadly I can't say anything for ATI (I have it on my windows box, never used an ATI card under linux), but can vouch for nVidia. My card is the Ti4200 (with dual output) which runs just fine under the stock nvidia drivers, outputs to dual monitors with the nvidia xinerama setup, and runs quake, etc nice and fast. Probably the best idea would be to go through the forums and look and see what problems are cropping up. Are there lots of posts about getting X/q3/whatever going with nvidia or ATI? Are there posts regarding getting drivers or setup issues? The things you may not like regarding nVidia however: - I have no idea how the new FX cards run or if the drivers are up to date for them. Check the forums, the readme in the nvidia-kernel docs or on the nvidia.com site to check. - The accelarated drivers for nvidia are non-free. If you have issues with propriatory drivers you have to use the 'nv' module under X (not nvidia) which is non-3d-accelarated and not nearly as good (as I understand it). Pros for the nVidia setup (my personal options) - good up to date drivers - haven't had any problems with 3d games or apps - works with 2.6 kernels fine My $0.02 alan -- Alan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - http://arcterex.net "There are only 3 real sports: bull-fighting, car racing and mountain climbing. All the others are mere games."-- Hemingway -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
I'm a long time Nvidia user both in Windows and Linux and I'd go with them. I used ATI many years ago (Mach 64 days ) but from what I've seen Nvidia keeps their drivers updated and Linux support is available for even the new cards. My observation and comments by others indicate that ATI tends to lag behind in getting Linux drivers out for their newest cards so you have to wait to use their full potential. On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 10:30:24 -0700 (PDT) "Ian Truelsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 is starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for framebuffer stuff and for DRI. Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? -- Ian Truelsen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-user] nVidia or ATI
I am looking to get a new video card for my desktop (the old Voodoo 3 is starting to show its age). What I would like to know is which of the big two nVidia or ATI are better supported under Linux for framebuffer stuff and for DRI. Given the choice between the two, which would you choose for Linux? -- Ian Truelsen Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
