Q: Hi,
Im one of the many ATI users ashamed, thats my tail between my legs when another linux user it asks me what video card. Would you every buy a ATI card again?
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Nvidia is the clear choice in Nvidia vs ATI. There is just no comparision.
Although onerous in the past and instabilities still plague some people, nvidia is the best choice.
But it's like best choice of no choice.
On a scale of 1 to 10, were 1 is kernel for MS windows, and 10 is PostgreSQL. ATI would score a 1.2 and Nvidia would score a 1.5 in terms of desirability.
If performance isn't a issue the best OSS-only solution would be using the embedded-style video cards from Intel and Via.
What I would like is a video card ISA, a standard layer of hardware and software abstraction that all video cards would reliably reproduce the latest OpenGL functionality with generic drivers. A new OpenGL specification, a new way to develop the ISA and thus progress would still go on and not be so stuck in the mud like the x86 ISA was until a while ago.
Then for any extensions, propriatory vendor specifications/protocols, performance tweaks, special features and such can be taken care of by more propriatory-style OSS and Closed software drivers.
Then you could have a generic "modrpobe 3dgen" type command and get hardware acceleration aviable on any graphics card. If you want more then just install the propriatory drivers and get a 10% boost in performance and extra stuff like overclocking or anti-aliased textures.
Something like that.
Hell aren't video cards nowadays just little extra-specialized computers? They have a CPU, their own RAM, ROM, and BIOS. Hell, I wouldn't be suprised if they start comming out with their own cmos or flash memory stuff to simulate a disk of sorts…
/. had a story about using your nVidia GPU for audio stuff.
Re:Nvidia is the clear choice in Nvidia vs ATI. There is just no comparision.
Although onerous in the past and instabilities still plague some people, nvidia is the best choice.
But it's like best choice of no choice.
On a scale of 1 to 10, were 1 is kernel for MS windows, and 10 is PostgreSQL. ATI would score a 1.2 and Nvidia would score a 1.5 in terms of desirability.
If performance isn't a issue the best OSS-only solution would be using the embedded-style video cards from Intel and Via.
What I would like is a video card ISA, a standard layer of hardware and software abstraction that all video cards would reliably reproduce the latest OpenGL functionality with generic drivers. A new OpenGL specification, a new way to develop the ISA and thus progress would still go on and not be so stuck in the mud like the x86 ISA was until a while ago.
Then for any extensions, propriatory vendor specifications/protocols, performance tweaks, special features and such can be taken care of by more propriatory-style OSS and Closed software drivers.
Then you could have a generic "modrpobe 3dgen" type command and get hardware acceleration aviable on any graphics card. If you want more then just install the propriatory drivers and get a 10% boost in performance and extra stuff like overclocking or anti-aliased textures.
Something like that.
Hell aren't video cards nowadays just little extra-specialized computers? They have a CPU, their own RAM, ROM, and BIOS. Hell, I wouldn't be suprised if they start comming out with their own cmos or flash memory stuff to simulate a disk of sorts…
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Great explanation. I really understand your point about the things and stuff. I'm glad you didn't elaborate or answer my question because it gives me a chance to go WTF? 
Ahh…
Nvidia has had decent drivers for Linux for much longer than ATI, always supports their latest chipsets within a few days to a few weeks of retail availability, performance is comparable to their Windows drivers, has the wonderful "nvidia-installer" which supports most (all?) Linux distros, now has the "nvidia-settings" control panel, and of course has better overall OpenGL support.
I just retired my tired GF3 Ti200 for a 6800 and am happy to say that it works wonderfully so far (and Doom3 looks great ).
[/quote]
Now that makes sense. Although nVidia still doesn't support FOSS properly, even Linux.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Great explanation. I really understand your point about the things and stuff. I'm glad you didn't elaborate or answer my question because it gives me a chance to go WTF? [/quote]
Ahh…
Nvidia has had decent drivers for Linux for much longer than ATI, always supports their latest chipsets within a few days to a few weeks of retail availability, performance is comparable to their Windows drivers, has the wonderful "nvidia-installer" which supports most (all?) Linux distros, now has the "nvidia-settings" control panel, and of course has better overall OpenGL support.
I just retired my tired GF3 Ti200 for a 6800 and am happy to say that it works wonderfully so far (and Doom3 looks great ).
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Nvidia. End of discussion.
Why would that be the end of the discussion?
At this point I don't even consider ATI as an alternative.
Great explanation. I really understand your point about the things and stuff. I'm glad you didn't elaborate or answer my question because it gives me a chance to go WTF?
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Originally posted by: guy
Nvidia. End of discussion.
Why would that be the end of the discussion?
At this point I don't even consider ATI as an alternative.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
Nvidia. End of discussion.
Why would that be the end of the discussion?
Re:Nvidia. End of discussion.
Re:The first decent video card company to support FOSS will get me to spend more than $50-100 on a video card.
Re:Well I seem to recall I get about 75% of windows performance in linux with my ati card. I've heard that nvidia cards get 95-105% of windows performance in linux, so yeah, nvidia's drivers >> ati's. I really like ati, but damn they are lazy when it comes to linux stuff. They say they've hired more driver guys, mainly linux driver guys and we should see the results soon, but I'm still waiting.
Re:I've been using ATI for a while, and used nVidia previously. ATI's drivers seem pretty good (much better than I hear they were just a couple of years ago) and prformance is decent. My next card will definitely be nVidia for a couple of reasons. They do seem to have better drivers, and Cedega doesn't seem to like ATI nearly as well.
Re:nVidia, but only because it is easier to find retail $50 or less cards. Neither company supports Linux, so it really doesn't matter to me. I'd get Matrox before the others if money was no object.
Re:I generally just go for the best budget performer out at the time. Last time I bought a new card this happened to be a GeforceFX 5900XT.
Before that I had a Radeon 9100 and never had any major problems with the ATI drivers (performance wasn't too bad either),
although I must say I did start to miss the ability to start multiple 3D-accelerated X-servers.
Re:nVidia, their drivers have always worked fine enough for me.
Re:Performance was a secondary concern, I mainly wanted to avoid an ATI based system.
Re:Originally posted by: guy
nVidia no doubt and you know how much of a PITA it is to find a notebook with a decent nVidia chipset in it?
Nvidia doesn't have a decent mobile chipset, never has. The Mobile Ti4200 was alright, but it was just a downclocked desktop part. At the moment, ATI pretty much owns the performance notebook video chip market.
Re:Until ATI make an actual commitment AND showing with their Linux development I have purchased my last ATI card.
I'll be upgrading when AMD makes the processor change, and has parts available, so I'll probably be going mobo, CPU, ram, and video all at the same time. The last 3 Nvidia cards I've owned have promptly been returned, and exchanged for the ATI equivalent.
Re:nVidia no doubt and you know how much of a PITA it is to find a notebook with a decent nVidia chipset in it?
Re:can't add poll for some reason
0 Comments.