Tom's Hardware Reviews ATI and Nvidia on Linux

Beuno writes "I stumbled upon a GeForce vs Radeon review on Tom's Hardware, which seems normal enough. The big surprise is that it was actually a comparison of those two video cards on Linux (Fedora Core 5). The review isn't as thorough as I would like, but it does review all aspects ranging from tools available, complexity of getting them to work and benchmarks on performance. To me, this is a clear signs of Linux finally making a long expected breakthrough into common desktops."

Comments

Compatibility...

[ChowRiit]

Maybe this trend will have all game manufacturers making their games Linux compatible too? (As opposed to having to run them through emulators like Wine and Cedega)...

I know I'd move properly from XP if this were the case, and I suspect a lot of gamers feel the same way - there are a large portion that only use XP because getting the games to run under Linux is such a hassle.

We can but hope...

Re:Compatibility...

[Billy the Impaler]

WINE and Cedega are not emulators, rather, they implement a compatibility layer. Cedega is a proprietary fork of WINE that has more advanced DirectX implementation.

Re:Compatibility...

[McNihil]

being in the busines... DX# is a major impediment. Wine is in the short turn better because that will make sure that all older games will work thus not leaving anybody behind as soon as Microsoft decides to stop supporting something.

Don't be hard on wine because they are doing very good and important stuff for us all. I am not a wine developer.

Re:Compatibility...

[SanityInAnarchy]

This is an important distinction, by the way. While it does probably mean slower performance than running the same program natively under Linux, there have been instances where games run faster under Wine or Cedega than under Windows.

Cedega does cause a price problem, though. I would encourage everyone to use Cedega and wipe out their XP partitions so that games start being ported, but I can't really recommend it for the price alone. New Windows every 7 years: $200. Cedega: $5/mo = $120/year. Thus, Cedega is more expensive than Windows.

Wine is better for everything but games, though. While I would like to see something similar to the Point2Play interface, especially if I could get some nice sandboxing, it isn't really necessary. But, right now, Wine seems to have a better overall architecture than Cedega -- cleaner design -- and it does seem to support things that Cedega does not.

Re:Compatibility...

[0racle]

Hm, 5x12=120? You went to an American school didn't you, or do you live on some other planet that has 24 months in a year?

Re:Compatibility...

[kfg]

. . .do you live on some other planet that has 24 months in a year?

No, he lives on a planet where 7 years have 84 months.

KFG

Re:Compatibility...

[xdotx]

WINE: Wine Is Not an Emulator.
It's all in the name.

Re:Compatibility...

[DrSkwid]

No, it is all in the implementation.

Say what they like, WINE IS an emulator.

Re:Compatibility...

[Anonymous Coward]

Only for sufficiently large values of 5.

Re:Compatibility...

[SQLz]

Emulation is when you would say, run a PPC program on i386 Processor. Itercepting system calls is not emulation.

Re:Compatibility...

[Anonymous Coward]

i have only one thing to say: CVS Cedega.

the $5/mo is only for regular binary updates and some marginal support. if you don't care, then just use the CVS version whic usually works just as well.

Re:Compatibility...

[WCD_Thor]

I am one of these people-I hate the crap that Windows XP sends my way, but I am a gamer first and foremost, so I put up with anoying bugs, shitty features, and idiotic crashes. If games because Linux compatable, I would move to a linux opperating system in seconds. I am already planning on installing Suse 10.1 (the free dvd iso version) on my computer as a second opperating system, I just need more hard drive space so I can wipe my windows system disk (it really needs a fresh install). So far I have been using single layer dvd+r's to back up divx movies and save files from games, but I still need more space. I have lost a bunch of shit in the past due to my computer being stolen, and I know how shitty it is to try and replace lost data. Sorry, I just has my Tonsills taken out and I am hopped up on drugs, I'll shut up now and stop rambling.

Re:Compatibility...

[kimvette]

The difference is significant from an engineering perspective, sure. I'll grant you that.

However when it comes to daily use and colloquialisms, it's just semantics, and who gives a crap? Let's also argue over whether Linux is Unix or not Unix. From a purist perspective it isn't, and the distinction can be extremely important when it comes to legal issues (see SCO vs (Novell+IBM+Redhat) but from a user and administration perspective, Linux works like Unix. so it is Unix. When it comes to daily use of WINE or Cedega, who cares whether it's an emulator or a compatibility layer? Good grief.

Re:Compatibility...

[DrSkwid]

CPU emulation is ONE sort of emulation.

Re:Compatibility...

[Sark666]

Here's something I posted the other day on digg regarding the same subject:

It would be a lot easier for them to port if all games were opengl. I remember way back when John Carmack had his open letter to microsoft on the merits of opengl. Unfortunately, it seems d3d (even though crap back then) has won out in the end. Not that it's better than opengl, it could be now, but that's beside the point. Microsoft saw how big gaming was getting and wanted to tie developers and as a result it's users to one platform.

I think a turning point was the release of half life. Even though being a quake 1 engine game (don't start the q1/q2 halflive thing) it's default support was d3d. If valve stayed native opengl when that game exploded, we might have seen co's like ati get their act in gear a lot earlier with better opengl support. And potentially might have become a more attractive option for future developers.

Glad carmack still codes for win,nix, os X just cause he thinks 'it's a good thing.' Too bad developers like him are far and few between.

Consumers can kill something off like a plague when they are aware of the hardware/software tie in, like the death of the original divx hardware players, but when consumers (even tech savvy ones) don't think about it, or don't care what goes on behind the scenes, things like this happen.

I can't really see it changing drastically now. You hear about the odd port from a company which is great but the only way a lot of games to be natively available on linux is for linux to all of a sudden gain huge market share (hopefully one day, but still a long ways off).

If/when that time comes, developers would have to look at their development strategy, it will be a hassle to support d3d and opengl. So if they did see a market for both windows and linux they'd most likely consider opengl from the get go.

So, it would be nice to at least have more developers using opengl now, so the option is there for a port, but again I can't see that happening. People would have to do something radical and boycott a game and state the reason is because it uses d3d which is enforcing the tie-in of games to only one platform.

And just look at the moves microsoft can pull when they have this clout. Halo 2 being directx 10 only. Please... An xbox 1 port requiring the latest d3d. A strong arm tactic for vista if I ever saw one.

Re:Compatibility...

[julesh]

WINE and Cedega are not emulators, rather, they implement a compatibility layer.

emulate /emyoolayt/

      verb try to equal or surpass, typically by imitation.

    -- DERIVATIVES emulation noun emulative adjective emulator noun.

(source: Compact OED, www.askoxford.com)

I'd say this applies to wine and cedega, wouldn't you? They do try to equal or surpass Windows, and they do do it by imitating them.

Re:Compatibility...

[julesh]

Emulation is when you would say, run a PPC program on i386 Processor. Itercepting system calls is not emulation.

Yes it is, at least if you do it in order to imitate a different system. The word "emulate" means "behave in a fashion that imitates". Stop trying to redefine it to some restrictive use that would be better of being called "simulation".

Re:Compatibility...

[redcane]

Wine/Cedega do not try to "equal or surpass" windows, because they are not attempting to be an operating system. They translate binaries from win32 to run under linux. They certainly don't try to do it by imitation, because that would imply they took a similar approach. In my view that approach is writing an operating system. ReactOS is an example of an emualator of windows.

Re:Compatibility...

[Lorkki]

What would you call winelib in that case? It's exactly the same API reimplementation and works on the same platform, only it doesn't require the use of a PE loader. For that matter, what is glibc? Is GNU/Linux a Unix emulator?

This vague use of the concept of a "different system" certainly boggles the mind.

Re:Compatibility...

[SanityInAnarchy]

I believe there's some stuff they've licensed for use in the binary distribution, like the InstallShield libraries... Something like that.

Also, Point2Play is just a good idea for games.

I would use the CVS, but they killed off the Gentoo ebuild for that, which means no auto-updates and a fairly difficult build process. I would like to support them, anyway, and it gives me the ability to vote on games. Although that's always going to be skewed, I do want to remind them that I have some obscure games that don't work perfectly yet, and I'd like some work done on them.

But, there are other problems with paying that I don't feel like talking about, as I'm still trying to get them resolved...

Re:Compatibility...

[moro_666]

if we continue that logic then my browser is an mosaic emulator
and my text editor is a notepad emulator.

there's a very strong black line where emulators stop, wine
does not emulate a running windows system, it just implements
the library calls for regular windows api.

if anyone claims that this is emulation, then we shall also
define most jvm's (kaffee, the micro one in your mobile or handheld)
as emulators. we shall also call buses emulators of cars.

Re:Compatibility...

[Anonymous Coward]

Um sorry you're wrong. "Emulation" is a technical term and is defined by usage within IT, not some dictionary definition in the broader community. (ie. Websters can't tell us what our own jargon means)

I've been in this industry over 20 years and emulation has _always_ mean't translation of machine codes. Wine etc are what we have always called "compatibility layers", and very definitely not emulation. "Simulation" on the other hand has always referred to higher application level modelling (think Flight Simulator or the Sims)

Your definition is far too loose - "behave in a fashion that imititates" could easily describe Open Office Writer's relation to MS Word. Open Office "imitiates" Word quite closely. Is Open Office an emulator? I don't think anybody would describe it that way. On the other hand, does Open Office "simulate" Word. That's a pretty bizzare thought since "simulate" carries a connotation that the outcome is not real - last time I looked at my document files (produced with OO) they looked pretty real to me, written to disk and existing independently of whether or not OO was running.

Of course, you're quite welcome to define your own terms - just don't expect anyone else to use them or understand you very clearly.

Re:Compatibility...

[dp_wiz]

"Emulation" is a word for "through the ass".

Re:Compatibility...

[squiggleslash]

FWIW, this usually comes up, and it's worth pointing out a few things.

1. Most people know that WINE is a reimplementation of an API, not a CPU emulator. I know a handful of people get confused here, but the majority, in my experience, do not.

2. Historically, the word emulator has, actually, included programs that simulate operating systems, not just programs that simulate CPUs. For example, the Atari ST and Commodore Amiga had several systems marketed as "Macintosh emulators". The non-hardware versions of each merely patched the Macintosh ROMs to use local hardware rather than Mac hardware. So called "CP/M" emulators for V20/V30 series CPUs (an NEC version of the 8086 with native 8080 code execution support) were also widely available. These are by far not the only things refered to as "emulators" that were operating system, not CPU, emulators.

3. The debate over the term is so commonplace, that at one time WINE stood for, officially, both as "Wine Is Not an Emulator" and "WINdows Emulator". This is perfectly legitimate, it isn't a CPU emulator, but it does emulate Windows. A quick look-up of the dictionary definition of the word "emulate" will put you in good stead here as to why both terms are legimate.

The word "emulator" does not mean "CPU emulator", it merely means "Something that emulates". Whether you're emulating (immitating) a CPU, or an operating system, you are, actually, an emulator. Jumping in with a correction over the word emulator because it's not a CPU emulator is entirely unnecessary, and largely wrong. I don't doubt your motives, unfortunately usually when someone says "emulator", a large proportion of listeners think they hear an unspoken "CPU" in front of it, but even those who do usually know that nobody's talking about CPU emulation in WINE. Nobody except the Darwine people, anyway, but that's another issue.

Re:Compatibility...

[Alien Being]

Someone really should mod this as informative.

Re:Compatibility...

[Lorkki]

there's a very strong black line where emulators stop.

If you look more closely, I was illustrating just that; there is a more precise meaning in this context but you can confuse things a lot by drawing in a dictionary definition. The last analogue is bad and misguided, though, since buses and personal cars serve quite distinctly different roles.

Re:Compatibility...

[Anonymous Coward]

However, WINE does not emulate anything. It is an implementation of an API. If you consider WINE to be a Windows emulator, you must, by your own definition, consider *Windows* to be a windows emulator. And you'd have to admit, by your own definition, that your USB mouse is only *emulating* being a USB mouse, because it implements the USB HID standard for mice.

Implementing an interface is different from emulating a system. Emulation involves a system pretending to be something it is not. In the case of WINE, it doesn't pretend to be a Windows system, it simply has a different implementation of the Win32 and DirectX APIs.

Yes, in some cases, those API implementations are incomplete because the interface is so poorly documented, but that doesn't change the analysis.

No thanks...

[pdbaby]

No thanks... I'll wait for the 300 page Toms Hardware revi-oh. I see.

Re:No thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure they will make a lot of money in ads from this article ;-)

Re:No thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

there are adverts on tomshardware ? LOL

Re:No thanks...

[just_forget_it]

I love reading Tom's Hardware articles, they are so informative.

Re:No thanks...

[just_forget_it]

DOH, i meant..
I *next page* love *next page* reading *next page* Tom's Hardware *next page* articles, *next page* they *next page* are so *next page* informative.

Re:No thanks...

[kimvette]

It's not the ads on THG that I find annoying, it's the fact that he maximizes his ad revenue by breaking up articles into 30-page articles where each page consists of 75% ads and 25% content, whereas if he were publishing a printed magazine, he'd be in violation of laws regulating what is a magazine vs. what is merely a book of ads. Hell, even Computer Shopper (pre-peed.com and pricewatch.com days) was at its height they weren't as blatent as THG.

Oh, and they make no attempt to veil their bias in most of their "reviews."

Re:No thanks...

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny? That post is more informative and/or insightful than funny, because it's so true. :(

Re:No thanks...

[ErixTr]

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/12/geforce_and _radeon_take_on_linux/print.html

Adding "print.html" works for all articles on THG.

Linux on the desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

This is all very well but Linux's big breakthrough on the desktop won't come until we can play Duke Nukem Forever on Linux.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[cbiltcliffe]

What are you talking about? It plays exactly the same on Linux as it does on Windows. Just as easy to install, and even the exact same framerate.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[Baloo Ursidae]

Just as easy to install, and even the exact same framerate.

I've found, on the same hardware, that GTA: Vice City runs *smoother* with higher graphics settings in Cedega on Linux than natively in Windows. That really surprised me.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[MrHanky]

Maybe because Linux uses less RAM than Windows XP, or uses virtual memory better? Nvidia's driver code should be more or less the same, and there's no chance that cedega speeds up directx by converting it to OpenGL. I've had very good experiences with running Championship Manager under wine, and that's just a huge database.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[Tim C]

Check your RAM usage - for a lot of modern games under Windows, goig from 512meg to 1gig makes a considerable difference. Going from (say) 250 meg free to 350meg free is likely to have a noticeable effect too. I'd imagine that your Linux install uses less RAM than your Windows one, assuming you have third party firewall and anti-virus software under Windows.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[xsuchy]

and there's no chance that cedega speeds up directx by converting it to OpenGL.
OK. This is benchmark wine vs. native windows and it is better only in some test. But sometimes it is faster. http://wiki.winehq.org/BenchMark-0.9.5

Re:Linux on the desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think you "get" this thread

Re:Linux on the desktop

[Arker]

Linux manages memory+vm+disk caching *much* more intelligently than Windows, so yes, this is a likely reason for the speed increases seen in certain cases. However, I've noticed wine outperforming windows in cases where it seemed unlikely that any of that should affect it - i.e. in situations where memory usage and disk access were minimal. I can only assume they're cases where Windows is hitting some insane code bloat, particularly considering that video performance in X *should* always be a bit below Windows, given that Windows sacrifices security for speed and runs it all in kernel ring.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[ATMD]

Nvidia's driver code should be more or less the same

Nvidia's driver code is exactly the same - they've said that the binary part is just copied wholesale from the Windows driver, except with a different layer to interface with the operating system.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[TheDreadSlashdotterD]

I believe the code you're talking about is this:

...
GOTO shaftCustomer;
keepTheirMoney:
...
shaftCustomer:
while(1)
{
billsBills++;
if(billsBills==billsBalace) break;
GOTO keepTheirMoney;
}
...

I don't guarantee accuracy though

Re:Linux on the desktop

[Anonymous Coward]

Wine typically outperforms Windows because lots of the code doesn't need to be run. All the Windows security code, for example, doesn't do anything in Wine but does do stuff on Windows. It doesn't honor Windows security because, frankly, it isn't needed on Linux. There are lots of other shortcuts that Wine is able to take advantage of as well.

Windows and Linux have different memory+vm+disk caching policies that are targeted for different usages. Which one is "more intelligent" is simply a matter of debate. Considering that both keep the working set in memory while the program is running, these systems shouldn't play too large a role in performance.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[angulion]

Back in time I was amazed that Diablo2 with network play was smoother under linux with WineX (former version/name of Cedega) than Windows 2000.

Re:Linux on the desktop

[geminidomino]

I had a similar revelation, though not centered on graphics (This was a year ago and I was still on a Geforce2 Ti).

On Windows, WoW would randomly bluescreen with something about the network stack. Through Wine and Cedega (depending on how blizzard broke them with whatever the current patch was at the time), once the new patches were coded around, we were set for hours of grinding mindless fun!

2007 it is!

[QCompson]

To me, this is a clear signs of Linux finally making a long expected breakthrough into common desktops.

Yes, how can anyone doubt that 2007 will be the year of linux on the desktop?

Re:2007 it is!

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Well I won't believe it until Netcraft confirms it! ;-)

Performance issues

[also-rr]

Generally performance running games on Linux has been a mixed bag (on the same hardware).

NWN, WoW and UT have all been slightly faster than the Windows version, and crashes have been less of a problem (ctrl-alt-f1, kill task, no need to reboot - which _is_ required for some reason under Windows as games seem to offer best performance off a fresh reboot... resource recovery problems in the DirectX subsystem maybe?)

On the other hand EVE runs slower, with more graphical artifacts. Yes I'm aware that this is because it doesn't play that nicely with WINE and the fact that it runs in a playable fashion is a small miracle. It is still the case that if you want the best performance then you have to play it on Windows, for now.

Re:Performance issues

[tolan-b]

NWN, WoW and UT on WINE do you mean? What about native UT?

Re:Performance issues

[also-rr]

Whichever method worked best. For both UT and NWN that was native, not via WINE. (Although in many cases the set up to play the Windows version with Cedega is easier than the native setup... YMMV.)

Re:Performance issues

[SanityInAnarchy]

# emerge ut2004

Ok, I cheated. Our ut2004 comes on four or five CDs, each of which has data files which must be copied over. Same with Doom 3. However, there's no next-next-next at all, just agree to one license and go.

Re:Performance issues

[FinchWorld]

The DVD version of UT2004 Is a doddle to install on Linux, it even has a gui to do it that ran for me when I inserted the DVD.

Re:Performance issues

[praedictus]

I've had no troubles getting the native linux games running, NWN, DOOM3, and UT2004 all run flawlessly. I haven't played with WINE gaming, though if I get anything that requires XP I'll get around to it. The farthest I've gotten with WINE is getting Excel to run, and even that was iffy: the save as feature doesn't work though a regular save did. I did like the NVidia drivers, upgrading a 5200 to a 6600GT was as simple as power down, swap cards, power up. No reboots to install drivers, it JUST WORKS. Gaming (read Blizzard) is really is the only reason I haven't wiped the Win partition and converted it and my media partition to Reiserfs or ext3

Re:Performance issues

[WhiteWolf666]

Run EVE on Cedega. It runs beautifully, and as fast as Windows. Make sure you're using a high-responsiveness kernel.

As far as graphical artifacts, I've only ever seen minor texture corruption on some transparencies, and only very, very occasionally. To me, it looks more like a heat related problem (I'm big on quite computing, so my fans aren't 50000 RPM monsters) than a code problem.

As for Wine (free) versus Cedega (nonfree), I sleep soundly at night, because although Cedega is nonfree, I'd rather pay money to Transgaming, a small company that is pretty friendly, than Microsoft.

Re:Performance issues

[Araxen]

WoW isn't faster on Linux. I've tried running WOW on Linux under Cedega and it's at least 15fps slower on my system.

let them do a Notebook comparison and see ATI fall

[Locutus]

...on their face. Most laptops with ATI Mobility Express chipsets can't use the onboard video memory. ATI broke this a year ago and has not fixed it.

So don't trust ATI for Linux capabilities on notebooks.

Maybe Toms Hardware can do a notebook comparison since they've already done the desktop. I'm pretty sure that would expose this failure to far more than the few who already are aware of this. And just maybe, it'll get ATI to fix this.

LoB

They missed something in the article.

[Ant P.]

You can play Quake 3 using only free software and a 9600XT, you can't with a 7800GT.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Munchr]

No, you can't. Unless you're advocating piracy, you must still purchase a copy of Quake 3. Just because the sourcecode is available for free does not mean that the art and level resources are.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Jacek Poplawski]

You don't know what you are talking about. He wrote "Free Software" not "without paying any money". You can play Quake3 using only the Free Software, as long as you are using Radeon or Intel supported by DRI.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[KarmaMB84]

So there's GPLed BIOS and firmware for all those PC components too?

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Munchr]

The point is, Quake 3 is NOT "free software". You cannot play Quake 3 using ONLY free software.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Khyber]

But I can play Quake 3 under linux (ubuntu) with a GeForce 6200. What does that tell you?

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Aim Here]

The game code is free software. The data files that you buy from your favourite retailer in the Quake 3 box aren't, however. I'm down with that.

However, to spoil your nitpick, but won't there be free third party data files (maybe even Id software's demo levels too) that you can use with your free software Quake 3 binary?

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can indeed play Quake 3 using nothing but free software. The catch is that you need the non-free media files, which don't really count as software. They're data, that's all. That'd be like claiming you can't listed to MP3s of commercially available music using only free software, just because the music files aren't free.

The Q3 engine does actually run without any of id's data files. There are at least two sets of free data files you can use with a free software Quake 3 engine - Tremulous, and Alien Arena. You can also run a surprising number of TCs without the original data files too, if you don't mind the occasional missing texture or sound effect somewhere. None of that is really relevant, because none of those actually are Quake 3 - they're each a game in their own right.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[FinestLittleSpace]

You're a pedantic idiot who read wrong. Oh the irony.

The original parent was RIGHT. You CAN play Quake 3 using only free software, just like >>I, using WINE, can use something such as Visio 'using only free software'.

Wanker,

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Anonymous Coward]

You can play Quake 3 using only free software and a 9600XT, you can't with a 7800GT.

..you must mean free drivers, since Quake 3 isn't free :) If that's correct then it's really good news. Radeon 8500/9000/9200 used to be the best video cards with free drivers. I had Radeon 9200 in my desktop before and it was really easy to setup. Now I only have Geforces and they only work with proprietary nVidia drivers. It's sad that nVidia is pretty much your only option when choosing graphics card for a linux desktop machine. I'm day dreaming of well performing video card with free drivers..

Re:They missed something in the article.

[linvir]

What non-free software do you have to run to play Quake 3? Or is there non-free software somewhere else in the game itself? The installer? What?

Re:They missed something in the article.

[SanityInAnarchy]

Yes, it is. It costs money, but it's still "free" as in "libre" -- you can get sourcecode for Quake 3.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[SanityInAnarchy]

It tells me no one cares. Quake 3 is probably old enough that it's playable in software mode, or on a 3dfx card.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[SillyNickName4me]

However, to spoil your nitpick, but won't there be free third party data files (maybe even Id software's demo levels too) that you can use with your free software Quake 3 binary?

Indeed.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[laffer1]

Unless this is recent, 9200 and lower are the only ones with 3d acceleration in xorg. I have a 9600xt all in wonder and i've never had 3D acceleration working without getting binary ATI drivers. (linux) And since i'm more of a BSD person, its really bad.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[SillyNickName4me]

..you must mean free drivers, since Quake 3 isn't free :)

So tell me, what the source packages on this page are about.

Let me quote the most relevant entry on that page:

Q3A 1.27g Game Source This is the combined source code for Quake III Arena and Quake III: Team Arena. It can be used to build the 1.27g point release or the Team Arena release. It contains buildable project files and all related game source code as well as prebuilt tool executables.

It is released under the GPL. How is that not free software?

Ah, you mean the game data? You can get that for free as well abeit with some limits, and as a matter of fact there are free and Free datafiles for quake 3 that do not need the data files from ID software to work.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Mad Merlin]

Experimental 3D acceleration support for ATI cards >9200 is already in Xorg, see the old page (from before it was merged with Xorg) here: http://r300.sourceforge.net/.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Ant P.]

Nope, there's a working r300 driver in CVS. I had Nexuiz running with it two days ago, constant 60fps at 1280x1024 (although turning on HDR makes it choke). On the other hand it doesn't have EXA support so Composite is painfully slow.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[DeathPenguin]

LinuxBIOS ( http://www.linuxbios.org/ ) has good support for recent AMD-based boards. I don't think there is a similar free VGA BIOS project, though.

Re:They missed something in the article.

[Khyber]

Quake 3 defaults to assuming 3dfx if it doesn't detect an OpenGL card. Just for your enlightenment.

quite good article

[Jacek Poplawski]

They even mentioned DRI.

Re:let them do a Notebook comparison and see ATI f

[killpog]

Yup, I agree. No comparison yet. I advise all my clients not to buy ATI. They will not respond to requests for support, and refuse to acknowlege any bugs. They disgust me.

prit version, coralized version

[Anonymous Coward]

The print version and because that didn't work for me, the same via coral cache

ATI, Linux, and Apple

[miyako]

I've always used nVidia cards, which have always worked well for me under Linux. I've never tried getting an ATI card to work because I've never heard anything other than it was sheer agony to use an ATI card under Linux.
In general, this is fine. If a hardware vendor doesn't support my OS, then I will buy from a vendor who does. In this case, nVidia hovers between "almost as good as" and "slightly better than" ATI, depending on who has most recently released a new video card, so it's not a big compromise.
I do find ATIs lack of Linux support to be disappointing now however, because those of us interested on running Linux on an intel mac are stuck with a choice between ATI and an embedded crappy video card.
Incidentally, has anyone had any luck getting Linux to dual boot with OS X on one of the newer iMacs? I'm interested in getting one, but until Autodesk offers an Intel Mac version of Maya I'm stuck on Linux (and actually, even if there were an Intel Mac version, I'm not sure I want to pay the fee to transfer my license from Linux to Mac) so I can't justify getting a new machine unless it can run Linux well with good 3D support.

Re:ATI, Linux, and Apple

[TheRaven64]

because those of us interested on running Linux on an intel mac are stuck with a choice between ATI and an embedded crappy video card.

Realistically, this will only make a difference if you are playing games or doing GPGPU work. The recent Intel chips compare well with one or two generation old hardware from nVidia; they even have pixel shader hardware, which is used for a number of effects in a modern graphical environment.

By the way, anyone looking for a GPU to use with free drivers on FreeBSD should look at Intel. Now Eric Anholt (the FreeBSD DRI maintainer) is working at Intel, FreeBSD support is improving rapidly.

Re:ATI, Linux, and Apple

[matrixhax0r]

There's a new opensource driver for ATI cards. As you may already know, ATI released code and documentation for their old r200 and r100 based cards. Then the opensource community used that information to write opensource drivers which are now found in X11-DRM and Mesa.

However, for r300 and up, ATI wanted to force users to use their proprietary drivers which have really sucked so far. Never fear! There's the r300 project currently in development that aims to add support for these more modern cards. What started as an invididual project (http://r300.sourceforge.net/R300.php), is now fully integrate into the the offical DRM and Mesa development trees.

Although the r300 driver is not in the offical DRM nor Mesa releases yet, the are in the CVS tree.
DRM - cvs.freedesktop.org:/cvs/dri checkout drm
Mesa - cvs.freedesktop.org:/cvs/mesa checkout Mesa
There are quite a few guides on compiling and using these sources. I recomend checking the Gentoo Forums. They support EXA and Xorg 7.1 (unlike current ATI / nVidia drivers IIRC). In fact I'm using them as I'm typing this.

Performance is not nearly the speed of the binary drivers. However, I can still play UT2K4/Doom 3, so it's good enough. It looks very promising and is likely to get must faster in the future. It seems very stable and I haven't had a video driver crash since I started using them (around Xorg 7.01 release).

Re:ATI, Linux, and Apple

[sowth]

I do find ATIs lack of Linux support to be disappointing now however, because those of us interested on running Linux on an intel mac...

Hmmm...doesn't OS X run the FreeBSD userland? I wonder if it is not so different that you might be able to get FreeBSD's Linux Compatibility working. I suppose it is kernel based, but if OS X's kernel can run a FreeBSD userland, then why not Linux Compatibility too? At the very least, the idea should carry across. Maybe there is some project out there which ported it to or does the same thing on the Mac? I'm sure a lot of people would be interested in such a thing...

Not necessarily the same thing, but I found a program called Q emulator which may do what you want...it also emulates the 80x86 processor though, so it may be slow.

Re:ATI, Linux, and Apple

[init100]

I've never tried getting an ATI card to work because I've never heard anything other than it was sheer agony to use an ATI card under Linux.

I have an ATI Radeon Mobility X600 in my Dell laptop, I use the ATI proprietary driver and it works just fine. I run Fedora Core 4 on it, and installed the driver from the Livna third-party RPM repository.

Ah yes

[gowen]

Because hundreds of Desktop apps require 3D accelerated drivers.

Like erm ... err ... erm ... you know.
Oh, 3D rendering. I mean, everyone in my office spends all day doing 3D rendering.

Clue : if the speed at which windows are blitted to the screen is the rate determining step in you workflow, you're probably not getting paid enough.

Re:Ah yes

[Bender Unit 22]

Maybe not 3D, but the Linux distributions I have tried, does not perform well on standard onboard graphics chips. If you have a 20" monitor and run 1600x1200, it becomes very annoying when you come a Windows desktop. But just a 50$ can solve that problem.
I have been switching between Windows and Linux until I got that card. Booting Windows when I got tired of the poor graphics performance, and booting Linux again when I got tired of missing all the advantages of having a Linux desktop when all the server I work with, runs Linux.

Re:Ah yes

[gowen]

Maybe not 3D, but the Linux distributions I have tried, does not perform well on standard onboard graphics chips

I've heard a lot of people make vague statements like this, but I seriously need more information.
What do you mean by this?
How does this poor performance affect your workflow?
How much time per day will acceleration save you?

Re:Ah yes

[TheRaven64]

Exposé on OS X makes me a lot more productive; I multitask a lot, and I can switch between tasks with this a lot faster than I can with other mechanisms. Maybe it only save a minute or two a day, but it also means I can stay in flow while switching between components of the same problem. This is only possible with hardware OpenGL.

Pixel shaders on a modern GPU can be used to do good sub-pixel AA. The clearer the text on my screen is, the longer I can read it without getting eye-strain. The longer I can go between breaks, the more productive I am.

Take a look at OS X sometime. A lot of small things (e.g. different height drop shadows showing which windows is active, minimise effects showing exectly where a window goes when it is minimised) that appear to be just eye-candy are usability enhancements. Use them for a few months, and then go back to a system without them, and you realise how much processing you were doing with your subconscious that you now have to do consciously, and the more mundane tasks (such as tracking windows) you can do subconsciously, the more of your conscious mind can work on interesting things. Good GPU support is a pre-requisite for a lot of these.

Re:Ah yes

[Bender Unit 22]

I am not sure that the acceleration saves me time as such.

My workflow was affected since I can complete my tasks faster when I run Linux.

It takes a lot before I would prefer to run Windows on the desktop so when I decided to boot Windows I had to be very annoyed by the half updated windows and mousetrails.
So I guess the answer is that you can't take a stop watch and compare the speed my my work and compare the accelerated versus the non-accelerated. But you can if you compare Windows vs. Linux.

But if it can put you at ease, I can tell you that I paid for the card myself even though it is my computer at work.

Re:Ah yes

[Bender Unit 22]

Now that I think about it, it was mostly the 2 Citrix application I have to run that was slow under Linux. Under Windos they were fine. So it might be a combination of the Citrix client with the Linux graphics driver. They run a lot better on Linux with the Nvidia card.

Re:Ah yes

[francium de neobie]

Like, Google Earth for Linux, it uses OpenGL

Re:Ah yes

[gowen]

Fair enough. But is Google Earth really an office productivity app? That's what Desktop Linux means -- a linux system for people who work in offices. Improved Google Earth performance is nice, but its not something thats going to make the difference between a Fortune 500 company migrating their offices to Linux or upgrading to Vista. I don't deny that 3D apps have a noticeable performance boost.

I do deny that 3D apps are terribly widely used in the generic commercial environs that the phrase "Linux On The Desktop" conjures up.

Whatever is preventing Linux from wider Desktop use, it isn't the performance of Google Earth.

(Clue: its the de facto standard that is Microsoft Office, and the fact that OpenOffice, while adequate for many tasks, really isn't very good. [And its MS Office compatibility is deeply imperfect. Which isn't OpenOffice's fault necessarily, but there you go...]).

Re:Ah yes

[Arker]

OpenOffices biggest problem, besides the inertia factor and the ruthless way MS holds onto that and uses it as a weapon, is that it's too much like MSOffice. The whole word processor paradigm sucks, frankly, and if the marketplace as a whole ever wakes up to that fact and starts using the proper tool for the job... well a guy can dream, right?

Re:Ah yes

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people wouldn't interpret "linux on the desktop" so narrowly. AFAIK traditionally the split is into 3 areas: server, desktop and embedded.
I suppose you'd say "linux on the home desktop" is not "linux on the desktop?"

Re:Ah yes

[julesh]

Because hundreds of Desktop apps require 3D accelerated drivers.

Like erm ... err ... erm ... you know.
Oh, 3D rendering. I mean, everyone in my office spends all day doing 3D rendering.

Clearly you need to get a new job in an office where people really do spend all day (or at least substantial portions of it) doing 3D rendering. I'd suggest an architect or structural engineer's office as a good start.

Re:Ah yes

[knewter]

Google Earth

Passing your Drivers Test

[Anonymous Coward]

Tom's would rather see the site influence future development, than merely report the findings of a series of tests anymore.

Just do an entry/mid/high set of tests of $300,$600,$1200 systems using $125,$250,$500 ATI and Nvidia cards respectively.

Even a simple head-to-head platform comparison showing Windows framerates at 133% of Linux or at 75% for other tests.

Drivers tests are going to be boring anyway, but at least test older revision software too, to see recent improvements.

fglrx is a piece of crap!

[giorgosts]

My correspondance with the fglrx packager: Dear Sir/Sirs, > > I don't know if this is the proper channel to report bugs or > deficiencies of the fglrx drivers to, but I don't know where else to > turn to. > > My system is RADEON 9600 XT 256MB (AGP) on Intel 845PE motherboard , > Pentium4 2.4 GHz, 1GB RAM. While on Windows XP everything runs fine, > on every flavor of Linux I've tried I get the same bugs: > > 1. glxgears freezes linux, and also every type of openGL application > after approx. 1 min. > > 2. Xv video overlay on TV-out produces only the upper half of the > piped video. If I disable Xv overlay, video is correctly displayed but > the performance deteriorates to a point where it is unwatchable. > > I have tried ubuntu 5.10 and 6.06, kubuntu 5.10 and 6.06, SuSe 10.1, > drivers 2.25.18 and 2.26.18 with every possible configuration and I > get the same bugs. > > I have switched back to "ati" driver on kubuntu 6.06 albeit with no > TV-out. > > Luckily windows can read linux filesystems and I watch my videos this way > > I would greatly appreciate if the drivers for linux can pipe video to > my tv while I work on my monitor, just like extended desktop on xp. > > Thanks for reading. Responce: Unfortunately I don't for for ATI, so can't really help you much with the drivers. I just submit the packaging scripts to ATI for their installer. But maybe the following is helpful to you: > 1. glxgears freezes linux, and also every type of openGL application > after approx. 1 min. I have never heard of this problem before. I have a Mobility 9600 and 9800XT myself, and have no such problems with the driver. Have you tried changing "fast writes" in your BIOS to "off", or trying different Linux kernels? > 2. Xv video overlay on TV-out produces only the upper half of the > piped video. If I disable Xv overlay, video is correctly displayed but > the performance deteriorates to a point where it is unwatchable. I guess you are using PAL TV? I believe this is a know issue, and there is no way around it other than reverting to much older drivers (8.20 might work, 8.16 should for sure if you can get it to compile on your kernel). From what I hear, ATI should be working on TV stuff for future releases, but I have no idea when they will be released. For now I'd recommend you disable Xv, and use the OpenGL display target of your video player (for example in mplayer use: "-vo gl2"). That should give you good performance, provided you can fix issue #1. I suggest you check out the Rage3D community site at http://rage3d.com/board/forumdisplay.php?f=88 and the unofficial ATI wiki at http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Main_Page for more info.

Re:fglrx is a piece of crap!

[nowhere.elysium]

That's as may be, but your formatting is worse.

Re:fglrx is a piece of crap!

[giorgosts]

Sorry , I cut and pasted from the e-mail, but the formating didn't go through. I guess I sould have pressed the "preview" button before. I must have assumed that nowdays everything "just works" in linux (swiftfox on kubuntu dapper). Slashdot doesn't permitt the same post twice either. Better luck next time.

Re:fglrx is a piece of crap!

[SanityInAnarchy]

Where's your line breaks?

Bad Slashdotter. No cookie.

Regarding your problems, I'm not surprised. The last time I had an ATI card, I had to manually hack the Linux drivers, as they were autodetecting my system as using AGP 2.0, when it was AGP 3.0 (AGP 8x). Now, I have two PCI Express systems, so that wouldn't be a problem, except that experience was enough to put me off of ATI on Linux, and I haven't bought an ATI card since, except the one in this Powerbook.

Once I got it working (by commenting out autodetection and hardcoding AGP 3.0), I still had similar problems to yours -- I never really tried TV out, but I never, ever had the ability to play video properly while using the proprietary ATI drivers. The open source DRI drivers worked fine, of course, but they didn't have any 3D acceleration at all, much less the extensions required by UT2003. So I had to choose, on boot, whether I wanted to be able to watch video or play games.

Basically, even the parts of the driver that were open source (the AGP acceleration) sucked. The closed parts sucked even more, especially because I could actually fix the open parts, but not the closed ones.

My next video card was nVidia, and I've never looked back. Almost completely proprietary, but they keep it up to date with every new kernel and kernel feature I try. I have a fairly custom kernel -- 64-bit, patched for Reiser4 and recent open source drivers straight from my gigabit card manufacturer, lots of custom hacks here and there -- but all I ever have to do is "emerge nvidia-kernel" whenever I get a new kernel. And everything works as well or better than any open source drivers I've had -- I can do XvMC (hardware-accelerated mpeg decoding), or just xv (X Video extension) which almost always looks good, fullscreen, antialiased by mplayer, at 1600x1200, no matter what the video is. Any game that I can get to work on Linux, period, never has any problems from the video drivers -- stuff just works.

My only ATI card left is something I had to get for my server, which I built as a second desktop machine, with the same motherboard as my desktop -- which was built for PCI Express, which does not boot unless it has a PCI Express card in there, even though the BIOS would seem to suggest that I could use a standard, $5 bargain-bin PCI video card. Problem was, although the PCI video card works fine, it won't boot at all unless there's a PCI Express card in there. So I got a $50 ATI card, which has the added advantage that, for another $10 or so, I got a tuner card to go with it. If I ever get around to it, I can set up MythTV on that box.

Re:fglrx is a piece of crap!

[matrixhax0r]

Try the r300 driver. See my post here: http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=191304&t hreshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=15724881# 15725179

hm

[joe 155]

From TFA: "Acquiring Nvidia drivers seldom entails more than consulting a package repository for your Linux distribution of choice, and instructing local package management facilities to fetch, build, and install all required files and dependencies."

Well, support for Nvidia isn't supported on FC5 because it is non-free, so you won't find it in the standard repositories using yum... if you add livna you can do "yum install kmod-nvidia -y" which will handle it all... but it is important not to use the Nvidia ones because they overwrite sections of your X and can cause problems, especially if you change you card later. More info can be found here; http://stanton-finley.net/fedora_core_5_installati on_notes.html#nVidia... just wanted to get the message out there to protect the penguins

Re:hm

[arashi no garou]

Also, in Slackware there is no official Nvidia package. It's still trivial though. Just fire up the Links browser, point it to http://www.nvidia.com/drivers and download the latest Nvidia linux driver. Su to root, run the driver package, let it build the kernel addon for you, and let it modify your xorg.conf. If you've already toyed with your xorg.conf it might not modify the file for you; just manually change "nv" to "nvidia". Start up X and you should see the Nvidia logo. If so, you're all good. This has worked for me for every version of Slackware from 9.0 up.

Re:hm

[MikeBabcock]

That's FUD.

I've been using NVidia's drivers for two years now with FC3, FC4 and FC5 downloaded from NVidia and installed per their instructions. The only problems I've ever had are when doing X upgrades my xorg.conf needs reconfiguring for dual-head output.

Re:Linux on desktops?

[MrCopilot]

In 2006 a Linux machine with a vidocard is a geek's hobby, a curiosity, nothing more.

Excellent troll my friend. Explain http://www.desktoplinux.com/index.html

Out of the 4 Desktops and 1 laptop in my home, 2 dual-boot, 3 are full time Linux.(All Debian) All of them gamers.

With an NVidia Graphics card Linux is a viable desktop. For work, web and Leisure.

Free Software is not a hobby, it is a way of life.

I look forward to the money I will save and you will spend on Vista. I look forward to the knowledge I will gain and you will be ignorant of. I look forward to modifying my system and my code to my liking, while you look forward to being locked out, broken apps and slashed features, and unsolvable crashes. (lest I forget the required reboots and reinstalls)

To each his own.

But other sites have been doing this for a while

[loftwyr]

You can always get good info on hardware under linux on Phoronix. They've got lots of experience with linux builds and games and wine to give good information.

Looking for the things that arent there.

[Anonymous Coward]

"To me, this is a clear signs of Linux finally making a long expected breakthrough into common desktops."

And I saw Linus Torvad on a potato chip. no wait on my grild cheese sandwich.

Re:Looking for the things that arent there.

[kfg]

And I saw Linus Torvad on a potato chip.

That's nothing. I saw a burrito on RMS.

KFG

NVidia owners - Please help out Nouveaux project!

[Hobart]

This seems like a good on-topic thread in which to mention the freedesktop.org (X.org folks) effort to write a 100% open source 3D driver for the NVidia cards -- nouveau

http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/wiki/

If you're an owner of an nVidia card, please do all you can to help contribute! They appear to be suprisingly far along.

--
Slashcode bug # 497457 - unfixed since December 2001 - Go look it up!

XGL

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject.

Re:XGL

[gowen]

XGL accelerates standard desktop windows.

The question still remains: does anyone actually find that unaccelerated desktop windows are slowing them down? I don't know about you, but I think faster than I type, and my editor displays the characters I type faster than either.

Re:XGL

[SillyNickName4me]

The question still remains: does anyone actually find that unaccelerated desktop windows are slowing them down? I don't know about you, but I think faster than I type, and my editor displays the characters I type faster than either.

Moving a window on an unaccelerated desktop uses quite a bit of cpu time, thereby reducing what is available to other programs. An accelerated desktop makes it a lot easier for your machine to actually keep burning that DVD at full speed even when you are switching between windows, rearranging them or such things.

In other words, a desktop that makes good use of hardware acceleration can not only do things in a visually nicer way, it also stays out of the way for cpu intensive operations.

Re:XGL

[gowen]

Sure. But who moves windows about very often, or for extended periods of time?
Does it really matter if your computationally intensive task takes 1200 minutes or 1200 minutes and ten seconds?

If your DVD burner is running so close to underflow that moving a big window turns your DVD into a coaster, then your major problem is not with the graphics driver.

3D acceleration has its place, but its not whats stopping Linux on the desktop, because the needs 99.99% of desktop users are perfectly well served by generic X drivers.

OK: Time to mention the elephant in the room.
When people say Desktop Linux needs better 3D performane, the vast majority of them are talking about gaming. That's fine, and a genuine concern for gamer. But lets not pretend that Linux Gaming and Desktop Linux are synonymous terms.

Re:XGL

[SillyNickName4me]

Sure. But who moves windows about very often, or for extended periods of time?
Does it really matter if your computationally intensive task takes 1200 minutes or 1200 minutes and ten seconds?

No it does not, but you are misinterpreting the issue.

Considering that part of desktop use is things like playign video and audio, doing voice over ip communications and such, having less things in the way of good realtime performance makes those things work instead of break intermittently. It makes performance more predictable and it makes it easier to guarantee responsiveness.

If your DVD burner is running so close to underflow that moving a big window turns your DVD into a coaster, then your major problem is not with the graphics driver.

While that is true, it in no way counters the argument that removing a component that can get in the way makes for a better situation.

3D acceleration has its place, but its not whats stopping Linux on the desktop

Not on its own, no. It is one of the factors.

, because the needs 99.99% of desktop users are perfectly well served by generic X drivers.

That in no way changes that having accelerated drivers makes for a substantially better experience, better responsiveness while generating lower overhead, and makes more things work in nice and predictable ways.

OK: Time to mention the elephant in the room.
When people say Desktop Linux needs better 3D performane, the vast majority of them are talking about gaming. That's fine, and a genuine concern for gamer. But lets not pretend that Linux Gaming and Desktop Linux are synonymous terms.

The fact that you believe (as you already stated anyway) that 3D acceleration is not highly desirable for desktop use doesn't make it so. Go read the opengraphics mailinglist if you want to get a clue about why exactly 3D acceleration is really really important for generic desktop use.

If you don't see the advantages for your own typical use, that is fine, maybe there are none in your SPECIFIC case.

Re:XGL

[init100]

does anyone actually find that unaccelerated desktop windows are slowing them down?

Are you sure that the driver is unaccelerated? I thought that the open source drivers (both ATI and nVidia) were 2D-accelerated, but lacked 3D acceleration. I haven't had slow performance on the (2D) desktop for ages.

Re:XGL

[deepb]

I agree with you 100%. I would probably pay $500+ for a graphics card that would allow me to use additional features within XGL (or rather the same features, just faster). So I'm very interested in 3D acceleration, yet I haven't played a PC game since I ditched Windows 5 years ago. If I had a brand new $500 graphics card, I still wouldn't use it to play games -- I would be buying it to accelerate my desktop performance.

It's not that I need things to happen any faster in order to increase my productivity.. it's that I like smooth, high-resolution desktop graphics.

Re:XGL

[poofyhairguy82]

Sure. But who moves windows about very often, or for extended periods of time? Does it really matter if your computationally intensive task takes 1200 minutes or 1200 minutes and ten seconds?

Its not just about moving windows- its about being able to easily manipulate them. My desktop is a lot nicer now that Linux has a decent Expose ccopy with XGL and Compiz. Before XGL, the software that tried to do that without the GPU sucked (look up skippy).

Re:Linux on desktops?

[Anonymous Coward]

You're spending too much time looking forward while I will be playing on my Vista system.

xgl on ATI

[nicku]

Does this mean that xgl will work properly on the latest ATI drivers? The last time I tried it was pretty much a no go unless you had an nvidia card....

Re:xgl on ATI

[Anonymous Coward]

I tried installing xgl yesterday on ubuntu 6.06 with ATI drivers fglrx 8.25.18. on Radeon 9700pro. I havn't seen any of the issues reported from earlier versions like crashes,and have tried all the stuff from the demos, like semi-opaque DVD running while spinning the desktop cube, with few stalls.

Apart from the ATI issues trying to replace mesa with fglrx solved using
http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-user@lists.debi an.org/msg440319.html
there were no issues other than that the blobby shaking xgl dialogs will do my eyes in.

It's working fine, at least until the next kernel upgrade.

Re:xgl on ATI

[Anonymous Coward]

XGL is proprietary software because it only works with proprietary drivers.

Re:xgl on ATI

[fithmo]

Xgl and compiz are running just fine for me in Ubuntu with the newest ATI drivers on a Radeon 9800XT.

Good article

[Anonymous Coward]

Good article, I hope they follow up with more graphics on Linux related articles and that other sites do the same.
I really wish ATI and nVidia (and others) would release open source graphics drivers.

http://www.opengraphicsproject.org/

not just for gaming

[Bender Unit 22]

I got a Nvidia card with passive cooling for my Linux desktop instead on the onboard graphics. All the desktop computers I have had at work, have always been slow compared to Windows with any Linux distribution when it comes to graphics speed. It does not make it better that you need to run a higher resolution to get the same screen "real estate". (of course, tuning font sizes help a bit).

Anyway I installed the 50$ Nvidia card which solved that problem. And with SUSE 10, I hope I don't have to worry about compiling the drivers every time there's a kernel update since the Nvidia drivers can be found in YAST.

Re:not just for gaming

[tritonic]

I got a Nvidia card with passive cooling for my Linux desktop

I just got an old nVidia Riva TNT, and took the fan off myself. DIY passive cooling on a budget. And hey, it's still working a year down the line.

Sub $100 Video Card Recommendation?

[Anonymous Coward]

Need an AGP card for a desktop that'll be running Linux 24x7. Don't want to spend an arm and a leg, can anyone recommend a decent card for under $100?

Thanks!

Re:Sub $100 Video Card Recommendation?

[Bender Unit 22]

I got this one http://www.club-3d.com/distri/productinfo/spec_vga .php?ordercode=CGN-628ATVD which works fine. 50-55$(price quickly converted to $ in my head) in my local shop.
I also got a similar model from ASUS which had horrible shadows when using the analog signal(and it didn't have analog out on the DVI port)
So I switched the two cards between the machines(since one of them used digital and the other analog signal) and the Club3D had no shadows.
The heatsink of both gets very hot, so it needs a bit of space around it. Although the Nvidia program says that the alarm level for the chip temperature is something around 140c(seems like a lot).

Re:Sub $100 Video Card Recommendation?

[pharm]

Any Radeon 9250 is well supported & cheap.

Re:Sub $100 Video Card Recommendation?

[Anonymous Coward]

Go look at tigerdirect or newegg, both runs sales of sub hundred buck agp cards all the time. I got a nvidia 5500 for real cheap, like 40 bucks, works quite well. I'm not a hard core gamer but for what I do it seems fine. And I use fedora so the referenced "add livna" to your repositoriy list fits. They have much better ones now for your price range. In fact you should be able to get both a decent-enough vid card and another half gig stick of ram for $100. Do both it'll be like getting a new puter!

Re:Sub $100 Video Card Recommendation?

[Tribbin]

Geforce 6200 does it for me, compact, passively cooled XFX card.

Re:Sub $100 Video Card Recommendation?

[giorgosts]

I bought the same, on Linux worked fine, on XP the drivers gave me an infinate loop. So I had to exchange that with an 9600 XT with sub-par support under linux, as you can see in my other posts..

Re:Sub $100 Video Card Recommendation?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would like to point out that all the newer nVidia cards (6x00 and 7x000 except the 6600) DO NOT have "xv" overlay support. This causes problems for some applications so buyer beware!

Re:Linux on desktops?

[ThePub2000]

It's hardly a troll. What's more important to define this is what exactly you mean by "desktop linux". If you define it as running office applications, browsing the web and keeping in touch through email, then Linux is less of a hobby and more of a reality. With distribution like Ubuntu, assuming you run all the non-written suggested hardware, you can have a fully functional and perfectly sane Linux desktop. Although, if you define "desktop linux" as being able to play native 3D games reliably, then desktop linux is almost entirely a hobbiest system still. People that want that sort of desktop will more than likely be interested in systems like XGL and their choices of easily compatible hardware are more restricted, add on top of that all kinds of potential conflicts with software, etc. The simple fact remains that other than installing a linux machine, not much more has become easier. The desktop environments are richer, and with a graphical package system installing software into is easier. But, the overall 'experience' of desktop linux still requires a higher technical skill than even many pc gamers are willing to invest enough time into learning. Maybe it's the rabid 'linux ftw' people who are instead trolls. Some people really do just like to turn on their machine and find it works. Windows offers that, and still will for some time over linux.

Re:let them do a Notebook comparison and see ATI f

[laffer1]

There are other reasons to buy nVidia. They actually support OTHER open source operating systems. (FreeBSD, Solaris) I can play some games under FreeBSD 6 like Enemy Territory quite nicely using the nvidia binary drivers. The binary drivers got me to buy my first nVidia card ever. I'm rather impressed with it considering its not even one of their more recent cards (only fx5200). xorg support sucks above 9200 chipsets as their is no 3d acceleration. I only wish nvidia made their own video cards like ati does. I've had bad luck with some oem cards. (one nvidia and several ati)

Re:Linux on desktops?

[chriso11]

Oh yeah - playing the awesome BSOD game! It's as much a part of the windows entertainment pack as solitare!

Re:NVidia owners - Please help out Nouveaux projec

[matrixhax0r]

There's a similar effort for ATI drivers. See my post here: http://linux.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=191304&t hreshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&pid=15724881# 15725179

Re:Linux on desktops?

[NotBorg]

I look forward to the money I will save and you will spend on Vista. I look forward to the knowledge I will gain and you will be ignorant of. I look forward to modifying my system and my code to my liking, while you look forward to being locked out, broken apps and slashed features, and unsolvable crashes. (lest I forget the required reboots and reinstalls)

Recently I switched from Mandriva 2006 to Suse 10.1. I have had nothing but trouble with getting any kind of performance (when the drivers do work) on my ATI video card. I switched to Suse because the Mandriva croud just doesn't seem to have much activity within the user and support communities. Also ATI claims support for Suse. While I like Suse much better and find the community much richer, my Linux install is still crippled.

I'm not a kernel/driver programmer. Quite frankly, while it is completely possible for me to dig in to every aspect of Linux programming, I don't have that kind of time and resource. You can call me "ignorant" all you want. While you look forward to choosing specific hardware for Linux, modifying you system code to get it working, and calling people ignorant for not knowing what you know, I look forward to not buying all new hardware (thousands of dollars and a gamble to boot) just to get a functional system.

I'll still enjoy open source when I can but I can't make fixing it "way of life." I still use OpenOffice.orgOpenOffice.org, Firefox GIMP, and a host of other software packages that don't cost me money even on Windows. Windows isn't perfect and Microsoft sucks, but I don't have to alter my way of life and become a system programmer to make it work--and I don't think that is all that ignorant.

Preview button and "Plain Old Text" would help

[KWTm]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

You don't have to do a lot of pre-formatting; just change the mode from "HTML" to "Plain Old Text", which is actually HTML except that a linebreak is inserted at the end of every line (so you could still insert HTML tags). I've set "Plain Old Text" as my default.

But, yes, I don't regard the Preview button as optional.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEuTgKB8iUW0haVSkRAiciAJ4n5wB+9hzwpQphA72ECu SZZQRhVwCdHCqp
USEN+rupj1eXR2Of1xVC8MI=
=dkcz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

ATI Drivers ARE available via Yum

[bhunachchicken]

From the article,

"Installing Nvidia drivers is simple, straight-forward, and usually incorporated into your distribution's package repository. For example, Fedora Core 5 offers GeForce driver revisions 8756 and 8762 through select repositories, so installation involves little more than invoking Yellow Dog Updater, Modified (YUM) or YUM Extender (YUMEX). Nvidia clearly wins on this front, because ATI doesn't offer this luxury."

The last few updates of the ATI drivers I have recieved have been done so via YUM on FC5. In fact I'm due for an upgrade now,

yum check-update

...
kernel.i686
kmod-fglrx.i686
...

Re:ATI Drivers ARE available via Yum

[gr8dude]

But this will only work if you've configured yum to use the livna repository.

Re:ATI Drivers ARE available via Yum

[init100]

But this will only work if you've configured yum to use the livna repository.

Are you claiming that nVidia drivers are available from any official repository? I have to use Livna to get both nVidia and ATI proprietary drivers.

Re:ATI Drivers ARE available via Yum

[gr8dude]

No, I didn't say that. The idea is that a non-Linux person will expect that command to work out of the box (like I did when I first encountered the problem). Since it won't work, the person will revert to the default "Linux is too complex for me" state, being unaware of the real cause of the problem.

Re:ATI Drivers ARE available via Yum

[init100]

Ahh, I see. I always recommend people that want to install Fedora Core to take a look at Stanton Finley's excellent installation guide, where all these topics are covered.

3D? Talk to me about 2D.

[pdh11]

I'm still looking for any graphics card with amd64 Linux drivers that supports either dual-dvi with accelerated portrait mode (1200x1600 x2), or dual-link DVI (2560x1600). Matrox have some that will do it, but only with proprietary drivers and only on ia32.

Peter

Re:3D? Talk to me about 2D.

[Anonymous Coward]

Umm im a bit confused what your looking for but Ive been using an nvidia 7800gtx w/ a apple 30" at 2560x1600 for a little over 6 months now and it works great for me.

I had to tweak xorg.conf to get it recognize the higher resolution which was a bit annoying otherwise all good though.

Re:3D? Talk to me about 2D.

[jtjammer]

Yep. I run RHEL 4 on a dual Opteron64 with nvidia 7800GTX on an apple 30" monitor at work. SWEET!

3D card trully supported under linux? Where?

[GreatBunzinni]

So NVidia and ATi are crap at providing Linux drivers. But is there any video card which is really supported under linux (open source drivers provided by the manufacturer) that is any good and economically viable? It can even be an equivalent to a NVidia mx400. Is there anything like that in the market?

Re:3D card trully supported under linux? Where?

[Albert Sandberg]

I'm running pixelshaders 3.0 and everything I can think of here in kubuntu with my 6600 card just as good as in windows I suppose... and I program demos as well so yeah, I've tried coded for them

I didn't read the article, but here it works great.

Re:3D card trully supported under linux? Where?

[treak007]

ati might be crap, but Nvidia's drivers are surprisingly nice. They aren't perfect, but they are milestones ahead of ati

Re:3D card trully supported under linux? Where?

[poofyhairguy82]

So NVidia and ATi are crap at providing Linux drivers. But is there any video card which is really supported under linux (open source drivers provided by the manufacturer) that is any good and economically viable? It can even be an equivalent to a NVidia mx400. Is there anything like that in the market?

Yes. Its made by the company that ships the most GPUs- Intel. The GMA 950 (whats in a Intel MacMini) has fully open drivers, has more features than a MX400 (like Pixel Shader 2.0 support) and open drivers. It runs XGL like a dream.....

quirks in NVidea & X11

[chunderfest]

I've been happy with my GeForce 4 card, once I determined the following about X11's support for it:

• X.org's NV driver (at least the initial versions) didn't support automatic screen-off with my LCD display; it'd blank the screen but not power it down;
• Nvidea's proprietary driver for X11 would powerdown the screen, but couldn't handle anything put out by video4linux (in kernel 2.4);
• XFree86's NV driver in version 4.5.0 and newer handles both DRI screen-powerdown and v4l output perfectly.

.02c.

Re:xgl on ATI (Works great on the X300)

[SlashdotOgre]

I've been running Xgl in Gentoo for roughly 6 months now using my X300 card in my Dell D610. Check out the http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_XGL page for details as well as Xgl threads in the Unsupported Software forums at forums.gentoo.org. The latest version (well nearly latest, I just svn'ed up and aparently a new version came out) is very stable and only a handful of apps crash it (GoogleEarth being the big one, but I imagine other OpenGL intensive apps may cause issues).

There's no problem here

[GISGEOLOGYGEEK]

What's the problem?

It's Linux!

You are supposed to be spending your spare time writing your own drivers to do the specific task you need, why are so many here searching for drivers? They're missing out on all the fun!

Re:let them do a Notebook comparison and see ATI f

[MadEE]

xorg support sucks above 9200 chipsets as their is no 3d acceleration

This is incorrect. R300 drivers have been on the CVS tree of xorg for awhile now.

a note about ATI

[nyquil superstar]

One thing the article mentions is NVIDIA support is an easy add from one of the repositories for FC 5. This is also true for ATI, and I'm not sure why the author didn't catch this. See rpm.livna.org. It's been that way for a while now, and getting the ATI drivers installed (with full 3d supprt) is very easy. From the site:

To install the ati drivers simply execute "yum install kmod-fglrx" or "yum install kmod-fglrx-smp" if you use a SMP-Kernel.

Granted, getting the ATI driver previous to about six months ago was, in the words of another poster "sheer agony." It's a much, much better situation today. A couple of commands and it "just works."

ATi driver is garbage

[postmortem]

Everybody else who says differently has used Linux for 5 minutes (like the author of that "excellent" article).

Re:ATi driver is garbage

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been using an ATI card on linux with little to no trouble for two years. But whatever.

Re:ATi driver is garbage

[init100]

Oh? I have an ATI card on my work laptop, and it works just fine in Linux, using the proprietary ATI driver. I did not use the ATI installer though, since the unofficial FC5 repository Livna provides this driver in RPM format.

And I use my laptop all day at work.

Re:ATi driver is garbage

[postmortem]

Glad it works for you, but didn't work for me, and for quite a few unhappy folks at ATi fans hangout, rage3d.com, just open the Linux Driver bulletin board and salvo of problems will appear.

Yes, ATi's drivers are getting better with the time, as the driver and driver team matures. However, ATi's attitude does not: they are making linux drivers just because PR. Not because the custmers. ATi recognizes majority of customers uses Windows, and allocates minimal resources for Linux drivers developement, along the market share line. As long as they don't have honest intention to provide good Linux dirver, I won't be buying in such articles.

Re:ATi driver is garbage

[be-fan]

It's a viscous circle. ATI's OpenGL drivers aren't very good, which means that Linux workstation users (ILM, Disney, etc), use NVIDIA. That provides less incentive for ATI to improve their workstation drivers, etc.

Re:ATi driver is garbage

[IL-CSIXTY4]

It runs just fine here for several hours a day with an ATI x1400 in my Dell laptop. That's not to discount that other people might have problems, but I've been quite impressed with the performance and stability.

Mod parent and OP up

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sick of these binary drivers... and no good amd64 Flash player

Beuno want more!

[beaverfever]

Beuno writes:
"The review isn't as thorough as I would like..."

Nine pages wasn't enough. We want ten... and a 96 oz Big Gulp, a 4 lb bag of doritos and bigger cheeseburger options.

All Hail the Oracle

[weremook]

You can point out simple arithmetic errors and make baseless anti-American comments.

I guess that is what passes for clever these days.

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[ardin,mcallister]

actually, its not baseless. American schools are horrible when it comes to teaching anything other than how to make babies and how girls can dress like whores.. I'm american and even I think that.

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[hclyff]

Hmm, it seems that you, too, are a fine product of the US education.

See http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2005/2005003.pdf or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programme_for_Interna tional_Student_Assessment for example.

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know much about other country's schools, but allot of people seem to want to come here to go to University, not to mention work and live.

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[Ravatar]

That's curious... I learned how to develop software and build/maintain networks (CCNP) in my US public high school. Was part of your school curriculum related to teaching you how to make broad generalized claims without backing or proof?

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[TheDreadSlashdotterD]

Students have to pushed in order actually do anything. When I was taught to swim, they threw me in the water and let me flail around until I could swim. Now they hand you a book on swimming and call it equivalent.

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[ChrisMaple]

"I don't know much about other country's schools, but allot of people seem to want to come here to go to University, not to mention work and live."

Q.E.D.

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I'll tell ya what.. If Americans are so stupid, then don't visit any American websites.. wait, then you'd be screwed. -37 Troll +157 Pwned!

Re:All Hail the Oracle

[Anonymous Coward]

Works for the president . . .

Penguin Planet

[mrraven]

Ah ha now I can run Penguin Planet (formerly Tux racer) at 500 frames per second. Now never mind the refresh rate on my monitor is 70 hz, I tell ya that's living. Who needs to solve world hunger or war when you've got this?

We! Need! More! Pages!

[Anonymous Coward]

A Tom's Hardware Guide article ain't a Tom's Hardware Guide article unless it includes a full battery of testing dual head monitors and checking to see how well they are supported out-of-the-box. On my ATI 7000, I get much better refresh rates than the Windows drivers, but forget about running any game other than GLArmagetron, and ditch DRI when using ATI's built-in xinerama, which BTW can't really stretch all the way trying to do widescreen on my DVDs. What, you guys still using one screen? You call yourself a geek?

Re:Linux on desktops?

[sfontain]

I look forward to the money I will save and you will spend on Vista. I look forward to the knowledge I will gain and you will be ignorant of. I look forward to modifying my system and my code to my liking, while you look forward to being locked out, broken apps and slashed features, and unsolvable crashes. (lest I forget the required reboots and reinstalls)

I look forward to saving 10 to 20 hours setting up my OS. I look forward to my applications and drivers working properly out of the box. I look forward to getting professional support and service instead of posting online in a Linux forum to ask for help from condescending 16-year-olds with all the answers who tell the neophytes to STFU and RTFM.

Of course, I can't deny that all the OSS knowledge you'll gain will help you immensely throughout your life. You'll likely also meet lots of women now that you've spent so much time learning Linux; they swoon over that kind of stuff.

Re:let them do a Notebook comparison and see ATI f

[mashade]

You mispelled that.

"Fixed in CVS!!!1!eleventy"

There, fixed that for ya ;)

Re:Yes, Linux on desktops, & Laptops & pda

[MrCopilot]

What's more important to define this is what exactly you mean by "desktop linux"

I mean a fully functional multi-purpose computing/entertainment/communication/creation device. For some people Windows XP fits this definition with the addition of a few software titles. For me and mine Linux fits this definition and fits it better and cheaper.

if you define "desktop linux" as being able to play native 3D games reliably, then desktop linux is almost entirely a hobbiest system still

I said fully right. What I don't expect is it to play every Windows DirectX10 game the day it comes out. Eventually, odds are good, unless it is a MS title, we'll get it running. Better still we convince the publishers that we BUY Linux Binaries, I bought UT2004 and Quake4 and Doom3. I'd buy more. Wine takes care of the rest.

The simple fact remains that other than installing a linux machine, not much more has become easier.

Spoken like someone who doesn't recall how truly difficult everything was not so long ago in linux. We've come a long way, really really fast. I find it better. It may not be perfect but niether are the alternatives, I trust the forward momentum in this lane. Not only that I get to help if I want.

Some people really do just like to turn on their machine and find it works. Windows offers that, and still will for some time over linux.

http://kanotix.com/ Just works, off the CD, I wonder if the Vista DVD will be like that. The laptop I refer to in the parent post runs it 24/7.

So to sum it up, Nvidia makes a Linux Desktop, ATi breaks it.

Re:Linux on desktops?

[init100]

While you look forward to choosing specific hardware for Linux, modifying you system code to get it working, and calling people ignorant for not knowing what you know, I look forward to not buying all new hardware (thousands of dollars and a gamble to boot) just to get a functional system.

Even though I'm not the GP, I'll reply. I did not buy any special Linux-compatible hardware, and I did not have to modify any system code to get my systems working, including graphics drivers. I use Fedora Core 5 for my desktop system and Fedora Core 4 for my work laptop. My desktop has a recent nVidia card and my laptop has an ATI Radeon card, and both are using the proprietary drivers from their respective vendors. The only thing I had to do after system installation was to add the third-party RPM repository Livna, which provides packages that don't conform to the Fedora Core package inclusion rules (such as proprietary software or packages that are potentially patent-infringing in the US). After adding the Livna repository, I could install the nVidia and ATI drivers, NTFS driver, multimedia software and codecs, etc, directly from the package manager. And there wasn't any code modification involved. And it all works just fine.

We need Open Source drivers!

[Brandybuck]

We need Open Source drivers! I don't mind closed proprietary stuff at the application level, but I demand at it in the infrastructure. When I buy a piece of hardware with my hard earned money, even a video card, I expect to be the full owner of that hardware. I don't want it beholden to NVidia or ATI. If they want to tell me what software I can run on my hardware, then can damned well fork over part of the purchase price for it!

I've had a new laptop for four weeks now. I put on Kubuntu because ATI "supports" the video (X1400) with a native Linux driver. Today I gave up and installed FreeBSD. I've spent four weekends too many trying to get it to work. For a TFT display, the vesa driver is more than acceptable, and I might as well be using it on an OS I'm familiar with, instead of figuring out a new one. I don't get to play fancy 3D games, but who the fsck cares? This is a work machine! (On the upside, FreeBSD supports the wifi card in the laptop while Linux doesn't).

Re:Yes, Linux on desktops, & Laptops & pda

[ThePub2000]

I mean a fully functional multi-purpose computing/entertainment/communication/creation device. For some people Windows XP fits this definition with the addition of a few software titles. For me and mine Linux fits this definition and fits it better and cheaper.
And you're entitled to believe that, but someone elses belief doesn't make them a troll.

I said fully right. What I don't expect is it to play every Windows DirectX10 game the day it comes out. Eventually, odds are good, unless it is a MS title, we'll get it running. Better still we convince the publishers that we BUY Linux Binaries, I bought UT2004 and Quake4 and Doom3. I'd buy more. Wine takes care of the rest.
And I said 'native', Wine doesn't count as a native application. Developers are entitled to be rewarded for the work they put into developing games by their users paying for them. Just because there's a review on Tom's doesn't mean though that Linux will be coming out of the closet anytime soon. The Macintosh is infinitely more capable of providing those sorts of services (with a larger userbase) and there still is not any sort of critical mass there.

Spoken like someone who doesn't recall how truly difficult everything was not so long ago in linux. We've come a long way, really really fast. I find it better. It may not be perfect but niether are the alternatives, I trust the forward momentum in this lane. Not only that I get to help if I want.
I never said linux hasn't come far, but let's face it it's still playing catchup to everything else out there. There's some nifty things available on a linux desktop, but none of it comes easily or even intuitively most of the time(being intuitive is more important than easy imo).

http://kanotix.com/ Just works, off the CD, I wonder if the Vista DVD will be like that. The laptop I refer to in the parent post runs it 24/7.
I suppose if you view linux as a beta operating system you can legitimately compare it to Vista. And, yes, Linux is extremely versatile, allowing things like DVD booting, but that sort of functionality hardly defines an operating system. Although, you can do a CD boot in XP.
My whole point was that as a whole package linux still isn't even ready for primetime in the respects of the original post, and probably never will. While it is a reliable day-to-day desktop for average tasks, it is not a solution for the average day-to-day advanced user. The simple fact that game card developers don't actively support their cards under the platform, or that game developers don't release games to the platform even simultaneously says alot. Both of these types of developers apparently don't view the platform as either mature enough, or available in enough mass to make their products worthy of top-notch support.

*shrug* all of this is opinion derived from observation. And, of course, opinions are like a backside -- everyone has one, and they usually stink.

Nathan

The best way to read that site

[houghi]

http://userstyles.org/style/show/490 in combination with https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/2108/

Can be usefull for other sites as well that you read often.

Memory Leaks?

[rsilvergun]

did ati fix em? There where a bunch last I tried to really use the drive, but that was over a year ago. How about install? Last time I used ATI's driver on a non-stock kernel, it was a bitch to get working. I've got a Radeon 9200 right now (much as I love nvidia software, their tv out kinda sucks), and I've been stuck in WinXP.

Boycott ATI

[vandan]

ATI's track record of Linux support is appauling, the most recent example being their pulling support for all pre-R300 cards. They also flatly refuse to assist DRI developers working on the R300, claiming that their own driver 'supports' the R300 and above line. But in all honesty, that 'support' is patchy at best, and the writing is on the wall for R300 support as well - pretty soon only the new X1xx cards will be supported.

Locking when switching between X and a console are NOT FIXED despite what the article says - ATI simply marked the bug page in bugzilla as 'fixed'. There are lockups with XGL. The XPRESS chipset is very badly supported and very slow - my friend's Turion-based laptop with an XPRESS chipset plays UT2004 slower than my Athlon XP 1600 with an original Radeon 7200 with DRI drivers! 2D performance is pathetic. There is no XRENDER acceleration. Suspending / hibernating doesn't work. XCOMPOSITE support is non-existant. The list goes on and on.

If people want a gaming card, buy an nVidia, or you will be sorry. If gaming isn't so important, buy a something with an Intel chipset - they have excellent open-source drivers, and are only getting better. I installed XGL on a laptop with an Intel i945G card last weekend, and I was shocked by it's impressive performance - XGL in particular was as smooth as I've ever seen it ...

Re:Linux on desktops?

[Retief-CDT]

Would you buy the wrong size coffee filters? Do you repair anything by by buying random parts from the wrong manufactor?

Whats so hard about researching compatible Hardware? And by the way Nvidia cards start as low as $15.00 for a reasonable AGP card that's somewhat less than $1000's of dollars.

Re:let them do a Notebook comparison and see ATI f

[thegoogler]

truth about the card quality :(

i've never actually had a card _not work_, but i've had some small problem with every nvidia card i've had. the fan failed awfully fast on my 6600gt, and the ti4200(i think?) that i had before this had ram issues. i also had a geforce2 or something before that which had some small issue.

i've never had a problem with an ati card, but i've only owned 2(rage pro pci and a rage mobility) and heard so much bad news about even trying them on linux that one of those machines just got sold, and the other one is running win2k as a backup machine of sorts.

Hm, that seems a bit strong ...

[ScrewMaster]

To me, this is a clear signs of Linux finally making a long expected breakthrough into common desktops.

To me, this is a clear sign that those two hardware sites just happened to think that reviewing them under Linux was cool.

Re:Linux on desktops?

[CCFreak2K]

This isn't something I wanted to see.

The hazards of clicking on links, I guess.

2 Ques'ns: Price/Perform and kernel compatibility

[Anonymous Coward]

I've two questions for the more knowledgeable here:

1. Price/Performance.

        TFA quotes the NVidia card at $577 and ATI at $169, but shows similar performanc.

        Q. Given similar performance, why would I go near NVidia? (This is a real question - not rhetorical - I'm in the market a the moment)

2. Kernel Compatability

        I take it from general comments here that NVidia Linux support is more extensive that ATI, but also more proprietory.

        But I've also heard that NVidia's cards can be a bear/impossible to get going with custom kernels (ie. they
        basically support only the stock kernels from the major distros)

        Q. Is ATI's Linux suppport so bad that I should go with NVidia, despite the lockin to stock kernels?

Thanks in advance

MOD PARENT UP

[lord_rob the only on]

Well this is not exactly true actually. in fact if you follow that link you will go to the standard site (/index.html). But when you are there, replace the /index.html by /print.html and voilà, you are done. Thanks :)

bull

[poofyhairguy82]

XGL is proprietary software because it only works with proprietary drivers.

Bullshit. XGL works great on my Macbook with Intel graphics using open drivers.

Re:Linux on desktops?

[Filip22012005]

I look forward to saving 10 to 20 hours setting up my OS. I look forward to my applications and drivers working properly out of the box. I look forward to getting professional support and service instead of posting online in a Linux forum to ask for help from condescending 16-year-olds with all the answers who tell the neophytes to STFU and RTFM.

Have you tried setting up Ubuntu lately? The concept of using a liveCD to install is brilliant. Setting up a functioning Linux computer including office, internet tools and many other things is much less work than setting up Windows. No driver-hunting (you say out of the box, but which box?), no third-party websites, no endless reboots when fully updating. It's really only 30 minutes for a fully functional, fully updated computer. In all fairness, I run Gentoo (to appeal to women, mostly), which has all the problems you mention. But that's exactly the point: there's choice.

Ditto for battlefield 2

[phorm]

In my case this was likely because the windows graphics drivers are integrated with the power-saving, buttons, etc. You can't use the updated ones from the graphics-card manufacturer, and the laptop manufacturer stopped updating the specific ones for that laptop (and latter models went with ATI instead of NVidia).

So in the end, I had windows with less up-to-date graphics drivers, and crappy gameplay in BattleField 2. On the other hand, Linux+NVidia Driver+Cedega game better gameplay for many of the games requiring a newer graphics driver.

On other systems, I've found that sometimes there's a graphics/FPS penalty for running Cedega (depending on the game), but loadtimes from the disk tended to be a bit faster on the ReiserFS filesystem etc etc.