On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 05:07:05PM +1000, Christopher Halse Rogers wrote: > On 6/25/08, Markus Hitter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > probably some of you already read that statement of kernel developers > > about the opening of graphics drivers: <https:// > > www.linuxfoundation.org/en/Kernel_Driver_Statement> > > > > Currently I'm using Intel's integrated graphics (G965, G31), but I'm > > about to upgrade to a "real" graphics card. > > > > Which vendor should I prefer (or stay with the G31) in order to > > support proper open source graphics drivers? Is there a > > contraindication if I want to use CUDA-like technologies (I'm doing > > FEA, CFD) ? > > > For high-performance graphics cards you're pretty much limited to ATI > or nVidia. This makes the choice nice and easy: ATI/AMD have released > specs, and employ at least one Xorg developer. nVidia have done > neither, and (unsurprisingly) haven't responded to nouveau's > request(s) for documentation.
As a slight correction, actually Aaron Plattner, the current maintainer of the open source -nv driver, has been employed by nVidia for a while now. (I couldn't say whether he has other duties at nVidia besides maintain -nv or if it is his full time job.) But I would concur that -ati seems to be a good bit further along than -nv at present. In fact, while -ati still has a ways to go before it's a suitably complete replacement for -fglrx, it's been making such good progress that I think we can reasonably foresee a day when we start talking about moving -fglrx out of main over to multiverse or something. Bryce -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
