Slashdot Mirror

"The "Radeon 9650" is the highest upgrade option .. also an old card. There are no options for current graphics cards."

True, but you can sell the stock card (quite a few earlier G5 users would glady take it off your hands) and just purchase an X800, but you aren't going to get $499 for that 9650. So, while Apple doesn't offer it as an option, it certainly is still an option to be had if wanted/needed.

"So where is the dual-core??".

We'll have them, just not quite yet. My Dual 2.5 is plenty fast.

Why wouldnt you. CD to CD or DVD to DVD copying is much easier with 2 drives. Why not give the user options??

It's called Firewire/USB 2. You can add one if you wish.

"Alot of people care. I personally don't want a 4+ foot tall computer ... this isn't the 70's"

I didn't like the size either. But, I aboslutely love the internal case design, and like the previous poster stated it sits under my desk as well and therefore have no problem with the size whatsoever.

"AMore network cards, better Audio cards, Raid controllers ... things that power users who buy PowerMacs typically need.."

Well, there's your three slots.

"You shouldn't have to buy extra RAM on a $3000 machine"

Doesn't the new dual core Dell start at $3000, and with only 512MB RAM?

Another way of saying they went from last generation's entry-level GPU (GeForce FX 5200) to this generation's entry-level GPU (the Radeon X300 is based on the Radeon 9600 core).

This is still a good thing, though.

The only setbacks seen with the fglrx drivers would be that of the mentioned lack of XRandR support as well as a lack of XCompMgr support (for drop shadows/transparency). However, such minor setbacks on 'beauty' shouldn't be a big decision when choosing which drivers to use.

And also the ATI inability to survive a suspend / resume cycle.... That's the one that kills the fglrx drivers every release for me, and I've had this laptop for 18 months now with that issue.

Hopefully it'll be working before I hand it on to someone else :-)

That's definitely not true. I'm currently using an ATI TV Wonder Pro in my MythTV box (Gentoo-based) and it works fine.

A lot of cards, including the ATI TV Wonder Pro, work via V4L and the bttv driver. Check it out. I've found that the card works far better in Linux than it did in Windows!

You were very lucky then

Nvidia and Ati 3D graphics drivers dont come with the free versions of Linux (only basic 2D support is given). So you must download and install the drivers for your graphics card to work in 3D. ...and the Ati driver is crippled with respect to anything other than 24bit colour and only works in XFree86 versions 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and X.Org 6.8
http://www.ati.com/products/catalyst/linux.html#1

Also check this list of unsupported hardware in Linux. Note that the sound card list is huge and theres a few SCSI controllers there too.
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Hardware-HOWTO/

...but its doing nothing new or revolutionary. The future has to be engines like Doom3 even though the computers of today are maybe not quite upto the point of realising that potential.

Great idea! We can dedicate chips to graphics coprocessing, sound tasks, network relating things, input/output. I hope they build this soon!

This is how to get ATI drivers working in Debian Sarge:

1. Download and untar the kernel source
2. Download the ATI RPM here
3. Use alien to convert the RPM to a DEB
4. Tell dpkg to overwrite the Mesa OpenGL library
5. Run their make.sh and make_install.sh
6. modprobe fglrx
7. Stop X
8. Run fglrxconfig and use the existing XFreeConfig to answer the questions
9. Start X
10. Woohoo! 8000fps in glxgears! Doom3 is a bit slower than in Windows. Oh well.
11. Add "fglrx" to /etc/modules
12. Reboot? Only if you want to.

So you're telling me that the real problem is the politicians. I've never really understood this "brodcast flag" to begin with. They're pushing for digital adoption by consumers then they throw this on at the last minute? I think that may be biggest reason I haven't seen many HDTV tuners for sale at my local retail outlets.

Also, as ATI points out on their page for the HDTV Wonder any device manufactured before July 1, 2005 is exempt, and you get the impression from their remarks that they're ramping up production because of this. I know I'll be buying one (or something similar) before then.

No X800 drivers from ATI? Are you sure?

No X800 drivers from ATI? Are you sure?

You find it almost impossible to believe that a low-end integrated chip in a three-year-old set-top console which currently sells for $125 for the entire system and was intended to connect to TV sets is inferior to a low-end GPU card from a $500 computer with DVI output that was just released this month? Okay.

I see your sarcasim..

Regardless of when the Mac Mini was released, the ATI 9200 chipset it contains was released just shy of 2 years ago (roughly April 2003) and its target even back then was a "price-conscious consumer" as stated in ATI's press release on 3/2003. Bragging about a two your old budget video chipset in a brand new PC is not going to help your claim much. I am not knocking the card at all but your silly time comparision to when the mini was actually released has nothing to do with the video chipset they used. You can pick up a 9200SE with 128MB (4x the mini) from Froogle for $35 and well worth it if you want a budget card.

The "9200" onboard has been proven to be a "9200SE"

Proven by whom?

Link, please.

A brief Google search yields dozens of people speculating that it's the SE, but none that confirm it as fact.

FWIW... ATI's own website claims it's a 9200, not a 9200SE. See for yourself.

ATI's method of competing has been to lie continually about the future of being able to use this feature. For example, back in 2000, ATI announced the VHA SDK to allow Linux users access to the MPEG2 accelerators on their cards. After 5 years of waiting, ATI still has not released this to the general public. Instead, they claimed in a FAQ that the GATOS project is currently working toward hardware assisted IDCT... But the GATOS project had already publically announced "no planned support."

So, I contacted ATI developer relations via the web in 2003 and waited three months. They never got back to me. So, I contacted them by phone, they confirmed the following:

• ATI has no plans to ever release the announced VHA SDK to the general public
  
• Because of "lack of interest" (I guess on ATI's part, because there is plenty of interest to be found on Linux mailing lists), they feel no obligation to ever honor the press release
  
• ATI has never release specs for doing iDCT to the GATOS project and does not expect the GATOS project to be able to support iDCT
  
• When ATI's Linux FAQ stated that GATOS would be providing support, ATI already knew they had a policy which required withholding the specifications on how to write drivers to use the iDCT acceleration feature.
  

Tell them about it: http://apps.ati.com/linuxDfeedback/index.asp

Where is this founded?

Here is a d/l for linux drivers, they have for about 20 of thier cards...

Are the drivers crap? Is this an urban myth? I loved my first ATI card with MPEG on board, and TV in... it was so nice! years ago now...

Then I had a matrox... damn thing, was a nice card but they supported my motherboard exactly 1 day (YES!! the next day they updated thier website!) after I ditched the card, after 13 months of unhappy marraige.

Now I just got two free nvidia 5700le's and they are nice enough :-) Well one is a 5200 :-( which is notably slower, even though it has double memory (256).

Doom3 on 5700le is definately playable on default settings.

me out.

ATI nVidia

That wasn't hard.

A friend of mine who used to work at ATI made a video shader demo that shows some neat video effects you can do in just a pixel shader -- i.e. render 1 rectangle that fills the screen with the video as your texture, and do all the "fun" stuff in a pixel shader. The ATI developer page that links to the binary is here.

If you look at the requirements for that demo, it wants a radeon 9500, which means that cards have bene powerful enough to do these things for years. I wouldn't be surprized if apple's video editing tools used the video card to composite scenes off-screen. Probably the same thing for newer versions of Premiere.

A friend of mine who used to work at ATI made a video shader demo that shows some neat video effects you can do in just a pixel shader -- i.e. render 1 rectangle that fills the screen with the video as your texture, and do all the "fun" stuff in a pixel shader. The ATI developer page that links to the binary is here.

If you look at the requirements for that demo, it wants a radeon 9500, which means that cards have bene powerful enough to do these things for years. I wouldn't be surprized if apple's video editing tools used the video card to composite scenes off-screen. Probably the same thing for newer versions of Premiere.

I just found out that there is a real-time-rendered version of that piece put out by ATI as a demo. It's a lot smaller than the movie, and it works on my GeForce card too.

1. Linux x86_64 does not support all Linux x86 features right now. Some drivers (ATI) don't work on x86_64 that do work on x86.

2. If you plan to use commercial software (such as an application server), some of the Linux packages refuse to install on anything other than plain, vanilla, 32-bit x86. Sure you can manually rip apart the package, but a lot of software I run on Linux will not install on x86_64, much less be supported by the developer.

Pixlet is a very high-bitrate codec that content creators are supposed to use to preview their video. According to Apple's H.264 FAQ, a 1GHz G4 is needed to play "high-end digital film frames at 960x540 (at about 20 Mbps)." For those not used to doing the math, that's about 18GB for a 2-hour movie. An HD 1080p movie is twice as large and requires a dual 2.0GHz G5, but this doesn't matter because Pixlet is for content creation, not distributing HD video. H.264 is the codec for distributing HD video and will be included in Quicktime 7.

But really the video card in the mini is powerful enough to do the job for HDTV, you just need players than make use of it.

The Radeon 9200 is not even close to being powerful enough for HD. It does not have a VPU. Even the 9800 isn't powerful enough. Only the Radeons based on the X800 core have the technology (VIDEOSHADER HD) for playing back HD.

I'd sure like to know the real system requirements (CPU and/or GPU) to play back H.264 video at 1280x720 and 1920x1080. I can't find them at Apple's site or with Google.

Here's the Pixlet info from the FAQ:

How does H.264 compare with Pixlet?

H.264 and Pixlet are designed for different uses.

Pixlet is focused on workflow, designed for digital filmmakers, animators and effects artists to easily review high-resolution image sequences on a standard PowerMac or PowerBook. Pixlet plays every frame of a sequence without frame-to-frame dependencies so that a media professional can scrutinize every detail of a sequence. Pixlet enables high-end digital film frames at 960x540 (at about 20 Mbps) to play in real time with a 1GHz G4 or faster Macintosh, while 1920x1080 frames (at about 40 Mbps) will play in real time on a dual 2GHz G5 or faster. This capability eliminates the need to invest in costly, proprietary hardware for the professional review process.

H.264 is a delivery codec, optimized for high quality and efficiency. It leverages data that does not change between frames for more efficient compression. While Pixlet may require about 40 Mbps for 1920x1080 content, H.264 delivers 1920x1080 content at about 8 Mbps. This efficiency in H.264 enables delivery to and playback on a wide range of devices, from mobile phones to computers to HDTV and beyond.

Pixlet is a very high-bitrate codec that content creators are supposed to use to preview their video. According to Apple's H.264 FAQ, a 1GHz G4 is needed to play "high-end digital film frames at 960x540 (at about 20 Mbps)." For those not used to doing the math, that's about 18GB for a 2-hour movie. An HD 1080p movie is twice as large and requires a dual 2.0GHz G5, but this doesn't matter because Pixlet is for content creation, not distributing HD video. H.264 is the codec for distributing HD video and will be included in Quicktime 7.

But really the video card in the mini is powerful enough to do the job for HDTV, you just need players than make use of it.

The Radeon 9200 is not even close to being powerful enough for HD. It does not have a VPU. Even the 9800 isn't powerful enough. Only the Radeons based on the X800 core have the technology (VIDEOSHADER HD) for playing back HD.

I'd sure like to know the real system requirements (CPU and/or GPU) to play back H.264 video at 1280x720 and 1920x1080. I can't find them at Apple's site or with Google.

Here's the Pixlet info from the FAQ:

How does H.264 compare with Pixlet?

H.264 and Pixlet are designed for different uses.

Pixlet is focused on workflow, designed for digital filmmakers, animators and effects artists to easily review high-resolution image sequences on a standard PowerMac or PowerBook. Pixlet plays every frame of a sequence without frame-to-frame dependencies so that a media professional can scrutinize every detail of a sequence. Pixlet enables high-end digital film frames at 960x540 (at about 20 Mbps) to play in real time with a 1GHz G4 or faster Macintosh, while 1920x1080 frames (at about 40 Mbps) will play in real time on a dual 2GHz G5 or faster. This capability eliminates the need to invest in costly, proprietary hardware for the professional review process.

H.264 is a delivery codec, optimized for high quality and efficiency. It leverages data that does not change between frames for more efficient compression. While Pixlet may require about 40 Mbps for 1920x1080 content, H.264 delivers 1920x1080 content at about 8 Mbps. This efficiency in H.264 enables delivery to and playback on a wide range of devices, from mobile phones to computers to HDTV and beyond.

Pixlet is a very high-bitrate codec that content creators are supposed to use to preview their video. According to Apple's H.264 FAQ, a 1GHz G4 is needed to play "high-end digital film frames at 960x540 (at about 20 Mbps)." For those not used to doing the math, that's about 18GB for a 2-hour movie. An HD 1080p movie is twice as large and requires a dual 2.0GHz G5, but this doesn't matter because Pixlet is for content creation, not distributing HD video. H.264 is the codec for distributing HD video and will be included in Quicktime 7.

But really the video card in the mini is powerful enough to do the job for HDTV, you just need players than make use of it.

The Radeon 9200 is not even close to being powerful enough for HD. It does not have a VPU. Even the 9800 isn't powerful enough. Only the Radeons based on the X800 core have the technology (VIDEOSHADER HD) for playing back HD.

I'd sure like to know the real system requirements (CPU and/or GPU) to play back H.264 video at 1280x720 and 1920x1080. I can't find them at Apple's site or with Google.

Here's the Pixlet info from the FAQ:

How does H.264 compare with Pixlet?

H.264 and Pixlet are designed for different uses.

Pixlet is focused on workflow, designed for digital filmmakers, animators and effects artists to easily review high-resolution image sequences on a standard PowerMac or PowerBook. Pixlet plays every frame of a sequence without frame-to-frame dependencies so that a media professional can scrutinize every detail of a sequence. Pixlet enables high-end digital film frames at 960x540 (at about 20 Mbps) to play in real time with a 1GHz G4 or faster Macintosh, while 1920x1080 frames (at about 40 Mbps) will play in real time on a dual 2GHz G5 or faster. This capability eliminates the need to invest in costly, proprietary hardware for the professional review process.

H.264 is a delivery codec, optimized for high quality and efficiency. It leverages data that does not change between frames for more efficient compression. While Pixlet may require about 40 Mbps for 1920x1080 content, H.264 delivers 1920x1080 content at about 8 Mbps. This efficiency in H.264 enables delivery to and playback on a wide range of devices, from mobile phones to computers to HDTV and beyond.

Apple makes a snazzy bluetooth keyboard and mouse. To connect to your TV, you should get a DVI to Component cable or adapter. Something like these:

Adapter
Cable (I would get this)

1. Video Cards, and
2. Games

>That took me five minutes dude, you've got to come up with a better argument.

Really? I though he was talking about TV TURNERS and not just video capture. There're a few more features in the ATi

From the Faq:

Q2: Which ATI graphics cards can use this driver?
A2: The ATI Proprietary Linux driver currently supports RADEON 8500 and later AGP or PCI Express graphics products, as well as FireGL 8700 and later products. We do not currently plan to include support for any products earlier than this. Drivers for earlier products should already be available from the DRI Project or Utah-GLX project.

What I don't understand is if this covers my laptops 340M, an IGP card. The laptop is only 14 months old... so I don't know if its considered an "earlier product"...

problably not, eh :(?

http://www.ati.com/support/drivers/misc/ATIVCRX.ht ml

Note the weird installer. It gave me the creeps but it worked.

And virtual girls tend to look better too. Here are some p i c s

And virtual girls tend to look better too. Here are some p i c s

And virtual girls tend to look better too. Here are some p i c s

And virtual girls tend to look better too. Here are some p i c s

I'm rather pissed they didnt release the ATI 800 gfx cards for the g4s, its twice as fast as a 9800.

ATI's RADEON® X800 XT Single Slot Graphics Solution for the Mac Powers Apple 30-inch Display

ATI's Press Release

Okay, so this is technically 2005 and the awards were for 2004.

The ill-informed should not bitch. HalfLife 2 Demo

Bug report #11120759:
Assumption that all graphic hardware manufacturers have binary drivers for the current stable Xorg release which allow for translucency and shadows to work is incorrect.

Affects: Many, if not all ATI cards and Xorg >= 6.8.0

Workaround: harass the hell out of ATI

ATI does most certainly write their own drivers. Apple handles any integrated card drivers because, well, they are Apple built OEM cards. My Powerbook cannot use the ATI drivers because my card is an Apple onboard ATI card. My G3 tower could use the ATI drivers because it used a ATI PCI card. (Both my Apple supplied Rage 128 and my aftermarket Radeon 7000 took ATI drivers). Nvidia also wrote their OS X drivers as far as I'm aware, although I'm sure they work very closely with APple.

I know ATI makes the flakiest drivers in Windows but the hardware rocks.
ATI supposedly has linux drivers but they don't support AIW cards very well. ATI instead refers you to the gatos project which seems to be under-manned.
Until ATI does make linux drivers for AIW cards or puts an ATI engineer on the Gatos project, Linux-based PVRs will continue to be hit and miss in terms of hardware.

...that doesn't care what this guy's system specs are or what resolution he watched it at?

Didn't we just have a nice article about game reviews? Where is the "meat" of this story?

Wouldn't it be much better to read something like this, instead:

Ant writes "Blue's News mentions a Far Cry Tech Demo/ATI & Crytek Tech Demo the showcases the capabilities of the amazing Crytek engine used to power the award-winning game, Far Cry. The tech demo is presented as a movie, called "The Project". The story is reminiscent of the 1930's adventure-serial "Cliffhangar" movie, but set in the present. I recommend everyone check it out.

There is also a video file format available for those who don't have a powerful system and/or video card."

Then again... this is Slashdot. *grin*

Happens for me with Firefox, IE and Opera, so something's not right... (To avoid too much mucking about I just used *gasp* Acrobat to scrape the site -- the link to the download is here if anyone else gets problems. {Dialup users beware: 161Mb!))

Slightly OT: But ATI just released new linux drivers that work with Doom 3, and according to the ID website, ATI cards are now supported with the new driver. I just played the demo through with the new drivers without a hitch.

Video: ATI Radeon 9800 Pro w/TV out (composite & svideo). A coax line runs composite -> the TV in line of my receiver.
Audio: Audigy 2 card with coax running from the SPDIF connector to the receiver's digital TV in.
To control it all: an ATI Remote Wonder remote control. It works by RF with ~10M of range so the source computer makes its noise in another room.

The Remote Wonder works well under Linux and MacOSX although you may have to google for drivers.

It's called Surroundview and ATi have been supporting it since their integrated Radeon 9100IGP northbridge. It allows the onboard graphics to work with a plug-in AGP card to provide up to three separate VGA/DVI outputs. Press Release: http://www.ati.com/companyinfo/press/2003/4661.htm l

I had been looking for a way to play Divx files on my TV for awhile. I had considered a Divx capable DVD player but you cannot just go to Best Buy or Future Shop to get one. I thought about a wireless solution but they are still very pricy. I found the easiest and cheapest solution was to buy an ATI video card with TV out.
The 9200SE supports the latest games and dual monitors with DIV and has TV out/s video all for about $80cdn Yes my computer has to be close to the TV but I also have it conected to my stereo for home theatre and mp3s. Playing movies from the hard drive also saves having to burn DVDs/CDs. For me, it was the cheapest way to have my home multimedia centre.

I like your suggestions but I think for a remote the ATI Remote Wonder which can be found for around $30 might be a better and cheaper choice.

Brief: Animusic is a bunch of animated music clips, where the animation is controlled by a MIDI file. Some great animation, and great music, in there.

It's also worth mentioning that there's a Real-Time version of Pipe Dream (from Animusic) on ATI's web site. It'll run on any ATI DirectX9 compatible card, probably not nVidia cards though.
But you can also play the MPG which is nearly identical to the pre-rendered original Animusic version. And with the PEART article slashdotted, you might as well watch this instead. :-)

I have a Blue and White G3/350. Purchased in 1999. It is currently running the latest Mac OS X and many apps at very usable speeds...

Compare that to the Windows world. Would you dare install XP on a Pentium II at 500MHz? How many driver incompatibilities would you have?

On a 1999 PC, why would you think Windows XP would have more driver incompatibilities than OS X? Windows XP drivers are almost identical to Windows 2000 drivers. Does Rage Pro 3D acceleration work yet in OS X on Rage Pro Macs (sold in 1999)? It does in Windows XP.

[nitpick] In 1999, the Pentium III was Intel's "prosumer" CPU (released Feb 1999). Not that it makes much difference. The Pentium III had the same core as the Pentium II but had SSE (Intel's version of Altivec) added.[/nitpick]

AWESOME!!!!

There were some new drivers released the other day.

I installed these applied the fedora patch and it runs just fine on a Radeon 9600. Not that fast mind you, but it certainly works.

BTW, if you are attempting to download, try the Bitorrent network, I pulled down the installer in about 30 seconds.

AWESOME!!!!!

There were some new drivers released the other day.

I installed these applied the fedora patch and it runs just fine on a Radeon 9600. Not that fast mind you, but it certainly works.

Berny