jam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Monday 25 August 2008 08:27:55 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> > My boss bought second-hand extra monitors for all of us and I now
>> > need to buy a graphics card which can support dual-head for
>> > Debian/Ubuntu (and Windows XP and Vista).
>> >
>> > Since there are always swings around about "best linux support"
>> > which I didn't follow, what's the order of the day? Should go with
>> > nVidia, AMD or maybe Intel? Any specific card families/models?
>>
>> Intel, unless you need serious 3D performance[1], then AMD/ATI, since
>> they have released the spec for the cards and so open drivers are on
>> the way. NVIDIA last of all, because they are as closed as ever,
>> recently had a rash of hardware production quality faults, and the
>> reverse engineering efforts are great -- but never as good as the
>> hardware documentation.
[...]
> I totally disagree, but I'm pragmatic not idealistic.
So am I; pragmatically, using a driver that means you are less likely to
hit problems, and that your problems are less likely to be ignored, is
well worth the performance hit for using an Intel graphics chipset.
Likewise, using an ATI part where you get passable support using the
binary driver and good future support, seems more pragmatic to me than
tying yourself to binary drivers forever ^W until NVIDIA get bored.[1]
So, yes, I can see why the NVIDIA hardware might seem attractive, but
I don't think it actually stacks up in the real world.[2]
> nvidia-settings let you setup 2 monitors, specify master monitor, and
> get it working in seconds, all in an easy GUI and IMHO setting up dual
> monitors IS a GUI task.
*shrug* I have no strong opinion on this.
> Setting dual monitors of recent INTEL was an hour of googling and
> phaffing for a mate (and I have setup 100s vi-ing XF86config then
> xorg.conf over the years) THEN intel graphics performance on mythtv
> was so bad that he reverted to running DVICO under winders. <sob> :-)
...doesn't Intel only support video acceleration on the primary head of
a dual monitor setup due to hardware limitations? Anyway, that
experience is so divergent from any Intel experience that I have had, or
that people I know have had, that it seems (to me) likely to be an outlier.
> Last I purchased a 5300 card was about $50, and worked well for
> google-earth and most tasks, was a bit low-end for mythtv
*nod*
> Finally if pci is the only option, get a new mobo. Many ASUS with dual
> nvidia onboard. PCI is nigh impossible to get. (ASUS AMD uATX mobo for
> $70 ish)
I agree here. My comments were regarding PCI*e*, or PCI Express, the
new serial bus interconnect that is all the rage for new hardware these
days, and has (finally) replaced AGP, fwiw.
Regards,
Daniel
Footnotes:
[1] ...but, at the end of the day, I own a notebook with an NVIDIA
graphics chip because it was the best option available to to my
disappointment.
[2] I am presuming, here, that y'all tend to set up your graphics
hardware and then, you know, just use it. A handful of hours work
up front isn't that big a price for six to twelve months of use.[3]
[3] Actually, in my case, typically for three to five years of use, but
apparently most people change hardware more frequently than I do.
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
