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
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 fr
> 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 = 8
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
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 car
"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 c
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 do
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 c
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 righ
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 u
> 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
>
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
> > >
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 Li
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 a
> 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 choo
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 :-)
>
>
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.
>
>
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
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
> f
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
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
> 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 betw
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,
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 DR
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 DR
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 tend
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
27 matches
Mail list logo
