[gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Platoali]

Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
 are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
process of freeing their graphic cards driver. But I did not have any
good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way  it had to  until broken.
I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?

And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
anyone have any comment about them?

Best regards
Platoali
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Michal 'vorner' Vaner]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 973 bytes --]

Hello

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 12:42:22PM +0430, Platoali wrote:
> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?

I had an nvidia some time ago (2 years). I had to give up 3D, since the
proprietary drivers gave me hell. Only about every third version worked
(only with every second kernel version). Even when it worked, it
sometimes crashed the whole kernel or didn't render fonts.

Now I have intel i915 and I'm happy. It is not a strong card, but it
supports 3D, I'm able to even play games on it, it allows plugging in
monitors at runtime (with X capable of resizing the screen & pretending
it is xinerama).

I have no experience with ati.

-- 
Anyone who goes to a psychiatrist ought to have his head examined.
		-- Samuel Goldwyn

Michal 'vorner' Vaner

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[James]

Platoali <platoali <at> gmail.com> writes:


> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?


All religious questions, imho. Nvidia might have the latest edge in 
pure performance, but, the movement to open up sources is definitely
an opportunity for a game changing situation, imho.



> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?

kernel newbies has some information for you to start your research:
Section 3 DRIVERS:
Section 3.1 Graphics:
http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges

http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-d08660c208028aa2b3783826cd7935ab510b736f


You might also use this page for comparison purposes:

http://freestone-group.com/video-card-stability-test/benchmark-results.html

Personally, I like ATI, but it more because I believe that
AMD will come closer to doing what's best for opensource
rather than Nvidia or Intel. It would be great if I'm wrong....

When you spend your money, you are "casting a vote", imho.


hth,

James

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Hal Martin]

James wrote:
> Platoali <platoali <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>
>   
>> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
>> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
>>     
Just a suggestion, wait about a month before you buy, if you can. Both 
ATi and nVidia are poised to release new generations of cards, both 
which outperform their predecessors at a lower price point.
> All religious questions, imho. Nvidia might have the latest edge in 
> pure performance, but, the movement to open up sources is definitely
> an opportunity for a game changing situation, imho.
>   
nVidia user here, I haven't had any problems with their drivers. Sure, 
there's the occasional version with a memory leak, etc... and when that 
happens I just downgrade to the last stable version and wait for a 
better one to come out.
>
>
>   
>> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
>> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
>> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
>> anyone have any comment about them?
>>     
Again, I haven't had any difficulties with the nVidia drivers. I'm 
running a GeForce 7900GTX, which uses the same linux driver as the 
Quadro does.
> kernel newbies has some information for you to start your research:
> Section 3 DRIVERS:
> Section 3.1 Graphics:
> http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges
>
> http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-d08660c208028aa2b3783826cd7935ab510b736f
>
>
> You might also use this page for comparison purposes:
>
> http://freestone-group.com/video-card-stability-test/benchmark-results.html
>
> Personally, I like ATI, but it more because I believe that
> AMD will come closer to doing what's best for opensource
> rather than Nvidia or Intel. It would be great if I'm wrong....
>
> When you spend your money, you are "casting a vote", imho.
>
>
> hth,
>
> James
>
>   

-Hal
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Galevsky]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Hal Martin <hal.martin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Again, I haven't had any difficulties with the nVidia drivers. I'm running a
> GeForce 7900GTX, which uses the same linux driver as the Quadro does.

Same here with nvidia driver on a 8800GTS GC.

A former ATI addict who left for performance issues.

Gal'
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Jesús Guerrero]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1789 bytes --]

Hello,

I can only comment about my experience (facts).
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:42:22 +0430
Platoali <platoali@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
> considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
> applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
> poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
> buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
>  are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
> process of freeing their graphic cards driver.

No, they just released some specs. They did not release a single line of the
fglrx driver source.

> But I did not have any
> good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
> ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way  it had to  until broken.
> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
> 
I tried it yet-once-more a couple of months ago, it did not work, just like the
few dozens I've tried before. Particularly I found:

1.- 100% cpu usage under any wm, while idle
2.- xinerama just plainly doesn't work, it's not usable, and provoqued xorg
    log spamming due to a bug

This was with an hd2600.

> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?

I never found a nvidia card with did not work with a simple
"emerge nvidia-drivers". They just work.

In any case, luck with anything you choose.
-- 
Jesús Guerrero <i92guboj@terra.es>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Justin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 405 bytes --]

Galevsky schrieb:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Hal Martin <hal.martin@gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Again, I haven't had any difficulties with the nVidia drivers. I'm running a
>> GeForce 7900GTX, which uses the same linux driver as the Quadro does.
>>     
>
> Same here with nvidia driver on a 8800GTS GC.
>
> A former ATI addict who left for performance issues.
>
> Gal'
>   
Second!


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Justin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2198 bytes --]

Platoali schrieb:
> Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
> considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
> applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
> poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
> buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
>  are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
> process of freeing their graphic cards driver. But I did not have any
> good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
> ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way  it had to  until broken.
> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
>
> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?
>
> Best regards
> Platoali
>   
Quoting Donnie from his interview with LinuxCrazy:

[0:04:38]
comprookie2000: What video card do you recommend?

dberkholz: I like ATI or Intel, depending on your needs. Both of them 
have done a really good job of opening up all their documentation and 
their drivers in the past couple of years, more recently ATI: Intel's 
been doing it for a while and set the standard. If you're a gamer, you 
probably want ATI instead of Intel because the Intel ones don't perform 
as well, but they're really nice and cheap and open. Some NVidia cards 
work with a reverse-engineered driver called Nouveau 
<http://nouveau.freedesktop.org/>, but I don't really want to support a 
company that doesn't support open source.

comprookie2000: Yeah, I was on newegg.com <http://hewegg.com> and they 
interviewed a person from NVidia and they said they weren't going to 
open up the drivers, that's what the guy said on the interview. Tell me 
about your everyday box.


Full transcript here: 
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?p=5099210#5099210
Podcast here: http://linuxcrazy.com/?q=node/33


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Grant Edwards]

On 2008-06-17, Platoali <platoali@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
> considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
> applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
> poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
> buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
>  are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
> process of freeing their graphic cards driver. But I did not have any
> good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
> ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way  it had to  until broken.
> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
>
> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux
> kernel regardless of how much open/free the drivers is.

Definitely nVidia.  Over the past few years I've had a 3-4 of
each (ATI and nVidia).

I've had continuous problems with ATI (on all 3 different
boards/chipsets). DRI works sort-of, some of the time.  The
free drivers lock up, the closed-source drivers work a little
better have have bugs even in 2D mode.  The video overlay never
worked on one of my ATI board (the one that used to be in my
HTPC setup).

All the nVidia cards "just work".  The open 2D drivers "just
work". The closed 3D drivers "just work".

> I'm currently thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati
> firegl 5600. Does anyone have any comment about them?

I run a dual-DVI Quadro something-or-other and never had a
single problem.  Just did an emerge nvidia-drivers, and
everything (including DRI) worked.  Same for a dual-head nVidia
6200 setup.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! I'll show you MY
                                  at               telex number if you show me
                               visi.com            YOURS ...

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

Hi,

if you want to make a political statement: buy ATI

if you want to use the card with almost no problems and good performance: buy 
nvidia.

Yes, ATI has released docu. Yes, everybody is working on the drivers. But the 
open ones only do 2d so far and the closed ones are horrible.

There are problem threads on nvnews. But its a support forum.... most people 
using nvidia don't have any problems.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Platoali]

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Hemmann, Volker Armin
<volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> if you want to make a political statement: buy ATI
>
> if you want to use the card with almost no problems and good performance: buy
> nvidia.
>
> Yes, ATI has released docu. Yes, everybody is working on the drivers. But the
> open ones only do 2d so far and the closed ones are horrible.
>

Does this mean that AMD have not released 3d parts of the drivers? Do
they plan to release the 3d parts?


> There are problem threads on nvnews. But its a support forum.... most people
> using nvidia don't have any problems.


Well, I've search a little bit, and found that Ati firegl 5600 beats
Quadro fx 1700 in every way. according to this:

http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/graphics-cards/specapc-3ds-max-9-graphics,117.html

Although all tests have been run on windows. It seems that Ati have
better hardware and it is also going to be more open source friendly
in near future. I'm planning to use this workstation for 3 or 4 years
or even more. So I'm thinking to risk a little and bet on AMD , and
hope that they  deserve my hard earned money.  but I'm not sure yet. I
need to do a little more search about AMD plans, and current
development status of ATI driver.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Grant Edwards]

On 2008-06-17, Platoali <platoali@gmail.com> wrote:

> Does this mean that AMD have not released 3d parts of the drivers? Do
> they plan to release the 3d parts?

AMD hasn't release _any_ parts of the drivers, and they have no
plans to do so.

> Although all tests have been run on windows. It seems that Ati have
> better hardware and it is also going to be more open source friendly
> in near future.

IMO, it's going to be a long time before there are usable
open-source ATI driver.

> I'm planning to use this workstation for 3 or 4 years or even
> more.

If I were you, I wouldn't plan on having decent ATI drivers in
3 or 4 years.

> So I'm thinking to risk a little and bet on AMD, and hope
> that they deserve my hard earned money.  but I'm not sure yet.
> I need to do a little more search about AMD plans, and current
> development status of ATI driver.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! I've got a COUSIN
                                  at               who works in the GARMENT
                               visi.com            DISTRICT ...

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Dienstag, 17. Juni 2008, Platoali wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 8:48 PM, Hemmann, Volker Armin
>
> <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > if you want to make a political statement: buy ATI
> >
> > if you want to use the card with almost no problems and good performance:
> > buy nvidia.
> >
> > Yes, ATI has released docu. Yes, everybody is working on the drivers. But
> > the open ones only do 2d so far and the closed ones are horrible.
>
> Does this mean that AMD have not released 3d parts of the drivers? Do
> they plan to release the 3d parts?

they haven't released a 'driver'. So they can't release '3d parts' of it.

They released all the necessary documentation and they are working with Novell 
to create open drivers (there are two projects to create open ati drivers - 
to increase the mess).

The closed source frglx drivers are still closed source. They are still the 
only option to get working 3d and they still suck ass.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[James]

Platoali <platoali <at> gmail.com> writes:


> Although all tests have been run on windows. It seems that Ati have
> better hardware and it is also going to be more open source friendly
> in near future. I'm planning to use this workstation for 3 or 4 years
> or even more. So I'm thinking to risk a little and bet on AMD , and
> hope that they  deserve my hard earned money.  but I'm not sure yet. I
> need to do a little more search about AMD plans, and current
> development status of ATI driver.

One thing I'd like to point out, from what I've read. Many people think that
AMD/ATI can just release sources. Most of the time, due to the fact that other
companies license software and resell their(ati) hardware designs, so AMD/ATI
is legally bound not to release those sources directly. So that is why they
publish documentation (whenever possible) about the specifics of the 
graphics hardware.

I for one, as a firmware engineer, believe that AMD/ATI have turned a 
"significant corner" in their attitude and subsequent plans to position
their company to be very attractive to the open source community. I also
believe that it make take some more months to see the fruit of these efforts
and some years for this fruit to become widespread. (Things always take
a while with technology and lawyers). But, these are my opinions, not, in
any way actually connect to AMD/ATI.


(over simplified VLSI perspective):
There is something larger at work here, imho. That is that the GPU
/cellprocessor /microprocessor are merging onto the same substrate,
for a variety of reasons. The GPU/Cell is a wonderfully powerful processor
for searching and sorting and parallel algorithms of all sorts. As such
many technical efforts are underway to utilize the GPU/Cell processor
as a companion to the CPU. At some point, all of the proprietary-ness
of GPU/Cell processor will become obsolete, and Intel is at a particular
"sweet spot" since they are the commander of the smallest (fastest) physics
at this point in time.

In a few years the entire territorial madness that surrounds
GPU/Cell processors may just be a bad memory. Hard to predict, 
but, my money is on AMD/ATI. 

http://lwn.net/Articles/260676/

Here's an interesting link.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=fosdem_08_bridgman&num=1

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Stroller]

On 17 Jun 2008, at 17:18, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> ...
> if you want to make a political statement: buy ATI
>
> if you want to use the card with almost no problems and good  
> performance: buy
> nvidia.

This comparison seems to rather neglect Intel.

Sure, they come a third place in pure performance terms, but  
performance means nothing if you can't take advantage of it. Intel  
have been releasing open-source drivers for their GPUs for some time  
now - 2 or 3 years? They maintain them and contribute to other OSS  
projects like X.org.

IMO Intel deserve our thanks for this for more than ATi or nVidia,  
and since I tend to buy hardware with the intent of still being able  
to use it in 5 years' time, their graphics chipsets are also a  
practical choice for me, too.

Stroller.

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Grant Edwards]

On 2008-06-17, Stroller <stroller@stellar.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On 17 Jun 2008, at 17:18, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
>> ...
>> if you want to make a political statement: buy ATI
>>
>> if you want to use the card with almost no problems and good  
>> performance: buy
>> nvidia.
>
> This comparison seems to rather neglect Intel.

Imagine that. What was requested was a comparison of ATI and
nVidia. ;)

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow! I think my career
                                  at               is ruined!
                               visi.com            

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Dienstag, 17. Juni 2008, Stroller wrote:
> On 17 Jun 2008, at 17:18, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > ...
> > if you want to make a political statement: buy ATI
> >
> > if you want to use the card with almost no problems and good
> > performance: buy
> > nvidia.
>
> This comparison seems to rather neglect Intel.

because Intel does not produce amd chipsets.


> IMO Intel deserve our thanks for this for more than ATi or nVidia,

and they deserve damnation for their monopolistic tactics, their artificially 
high prices, their copying of amd after bashing them for years.

Did you know that amd worked closely with linux developers when they developed 
the amd64 plattform?
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[pk]

Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:

> Yes, ATI has released docu. Yes, everybody is working on the drivers. But the 
> open ones only do 2d so far and the closed ones are horrible.

I have had quite a few ATI cards (all radeon class) and have been using 
fglrx for almost as long as it has been out and have had very little 
problems. I have only had one Nvidia card though (which I gave up on a 
long time ago due to problems with the drivers). So everything's not 
"peachy" in Nvidia-land... All from my experience and point of view, of 
course.

Regarding the open source drivers (of which I'm quite excited about):
The open ones do 3D and have done so for quite a while (r2/3/400). R500 
has recently been added (albeit alpha quality) and r600 is on it's way.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ati_r500_3d&num=1
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=ati_r500_gaming&num=1
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NjUwNw

For the inquisitive, documentation is here:
http://developer.amd.com/DOCUMENTATION/GUIDES/Pages/default.aspx

I plan to use an open driver (haven't decided between radeon and 
radeonhd) when r600 support has stabilised...

Best regards / MfG

Peter K
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[James]

Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann <at> tu-clausthal.de> writes:


> > This comparison seems to rather neglect Intel.

> because Intel does not produce amd chipsets.

> > IMO Intel deserve our thanks for this for more than ATi or nVidia,

> and they deserve damnation for their monopolistic tactics, their artificially 
> high prices, their copying of amd after bashing them for years.

First, I did say something good about Intel. Look at my second post under
"VLSI perspective". Intel is winning the pure physics battle and could easily
put a gpGPU with a x86 (or compatible) chipset on a single substrate, and work
closely with the open source community to do the right thing.  The problem
with Intel, is the founders have similar attitudes as the Son of Satan 
(aka Bill Gates).....

Intel only responds to the open source community when it gets it's A_ _ kicked
in by AMD. (There is quite a lot of history here). Now that INTEL is
the current champion of the physics wars, the corporate idiots that run
Intel, will only marginally move to open source, until AMD heals up 
financially. This is historically recurring theme (fact).


FAST FORWARD a few years.....

gpGPU is ubiquitous and everywhere easily implemented (or at least in
my dreams). The average 3D video game on any platform uses less than
10% of the gpGPU/processor. It will not matter who has more patents
in Stream/Cell/gpGPU court, because all hardware will exceed what the 
majority of users need or want (from a gaming or work perspective).

The DNA researchers, spoofs that track minutia about the planet's inhabitants,
etc, etc will care. But the average technoid making a living whilst playing
video games that look very real, will only care about one thing.

Who has been the nicest and friendliest to the opensource community?

It's actually a dame shame, for me as an American, with Christian tendencies.
Intel nor microsuck lead where I want to follow. Corporations elsewhere
in the world attract me more (and you wonder why our great nation
is hated by many in the world?). I always spend my money
on systems where the corporate leaderships is the most appealing
(never an easy decision and not recommend to others as it is painful).

I spend my money on AMD/ATI.


Like I said in the beginning, when we began this thread, 
"All religious questions, imho"


> Did you know that amd worked closely with linux developers when they developed 
> the amd64 plattform?

Now you are teasing me. I thought you recommended Nvidia? Oh, I just realized,
you took my advise and chose the best (easiest) contemporary path. Good
choice, as I cannot argue (effectively) against Nvidia. It's a principled 
thing, for me.

cheers and seeya!


hth,

James


-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Dienstag, 17. Juni 2008, James wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin <volker.armin.hemmann <at> tu-clausthal.de> writes:
> > > This comparison seems to rather neglect Intel.
> >
> > because Intel does not produce amd chipsets.
> >
> > > IMO Intel deserve our thanks for this for more than ATi or nVidia,
> >
> > and they deserve damnation for their monopolistic tactics, their
> > artificially high prices, their copying of amd after bashing them for
> > years.
>
> First, I did say something good about Intel. Look at my second post under
> "VLSI perspective". Intel is winning the pure physics battle and could
> easily put a gpGPU with a x86 (or compatible) chipset on a single
> substrate, and work closely with the open source community to do the right
> thing.  The problem with Intel, is the founders have similar attitudes as
> the Son of Satan (aka Bill Gates).....
>
> Intel only responds to the open source community when it gets it's A_ _
> kicked in by AMD. (There is quite a lot of history here). Now that INTEL is
> the current champion of the physics wars, the corporate idiots that run
> Intel, will only marginally move to open source, until AMD heals up
> financially. This is historically recurring theme (fact).
>
>
> FAST FORWARD a few years.....
>
> gpGPU is ubiquitous and everywhere easily implemented (or at least in
> my dreams). The average 3D video game on any platform uses less than
> 10% of the gpGPU/processor. It will not matter who has more patents
> in Stream/Cell/gpGPU court, because all hardware will exceed what the
> majority of users need or want (from a gaming or work perspective).
>
> The DNA researchers, spoofs that track minutia about the planet's
> inhabitants, etc, etc will care. But the average technoid making a living
> whilst playing video games that look very real, will only care about one
> thing.
>
> Who has been the nicest and friendliest to the opensource community?
>
> It's actually a dame shame, for me as an American, with Christian
> tendencies. Intel nor microsuck lead where I want to follow. Corporations
> elsewhere in the world attract me more (and you wonder why our great nation
> is hated by many in the world?). I always spend my money
> on systems where the corporate leaderships is the most appealing
> (never an easy decision and not recommend to others as it is painful).
>
> I spend my money on AMD/ATI.
>
>
> Like I said in the beginning, when we began this thread,
> "All religious questions, imho"
>
> > Did you know that amd worked closely with linux developers when they
> > developed the amd64 plattform?
>
> Now you are teasing me. I thought you recommended Nvidia? Oh, I just
> realized, you took my advise and chose the best (easiest) contemporary
> path. Good choice, as I cannot argue (effectively) against Nvidia. It's a
> principled thing, for me.

cpu from amd, graphics from nvidia. chipset from the one who has the least 
bugs ;)
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Nicolas Sebrecht]

Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com> a écrit:

> Definitely nVidia.  Over the past few years I've had a 3-4 of
> each (ATI and nVidia).

But now, it's not the same context. ATI specs are known and open source
drivers coming. It's definitely different of the "past few years".

-- 
Nicolas Sebrecht

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Joshua D Doll]

Hal Martin wrote:
> James wrote:
>> Platoali <platoali <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>
>>  
>>> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
>>> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
>>>     
> Just a suggestion, wait about a month before you buy, if you can. Both 
> ATi and nVidia are poised to release new generations of cards, both 
> which outperform their predecessors at a lower price point.
>> All religious questions, imho. Nvidia might have the latest edge in 
>> pure performance, but, the movement to open up sources is definitely
>> an opportunity for a game changing situation, imho.
>>   
> nVidia user here, I haven't had any problems with their drivers. Sure, 
> there's the occasional version with a memory leak, etc... and when 
> that happens I just downgrade to the last stable version and wait for 
> a better one to come out.
>>
>>
>>  
>>> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
>>> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
>>> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
>>> anyone have any comment about them?
>>>     
> Again, I haven't had any difficulties with the nVidia drivers. I'm 
> running a GeForce 7900GTX, which uses the same linux driver as the 
> Quadro does.
>> kernel newbies has some information for you to start your research:
>> Section 3 DRIVERS:
>> Section 3.1 Graphics:
>> http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges
>>
>> http://kernelnewbies.org/LinuxChanges#head-d08660c208028aa2b3783826cd7935ab510b736f 
>>
>>
>>
>> You might also use this page for comparison purposes:
>>
>> http://freestone-group.com/video-card-stability-test/benchmark-results.html 
>>
>>
>> Personally, I like ATI, but it more because I believe that
>> AMD will come closer to doing what's best for opensource
>> rather than Nvidia or Intel. It would be great if I'm wrong....
>>
Doesn't Intel contribute drivers and code to very many F/OSS projects 
including the kernel and Xorg?

--Joshua Doll


-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Grant Edwards]

On 2008-06-17, Nicolas Sebrecht <nicolas.s-dev@laposte.net> wrote:
>
> Grant Edwards <grante@visi.com> a écrit:
>
>> Definitely nVidia.  Over the past few years I've had a 3-4 of
>> each (ATI and nVidia).
>
> But now, it's not the same context. ATI specs are known and open source
> drivers coming.

I'll believe it when I see it.

> It's definitely different of the "past few years".

I doubt it.

-- 
Grant Edwards                   grante             Yow!  Hold the MAYO & pass
                                  at               the COSMIC AWARENESS...
                               visi.com            

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Mark Kirkwood]

Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2008-06-17, Nicolas Sebrecht <nicolas.s-dev@laposte.net> wrote:
>   
>>
>> But now, it's not the same context. ATI specs are known and open source
>> drivers coming.
>>     
>
> I'll believe it when I see it.
>
>   
>> It's definitely different of the "past few years".
>>     
>
> I doubt it.
>
>   

Well, looks like there is good progress on the radeonhd and radeon 
drivers in Xorg [1] - so I think there is reason to be positive. I 
suspect that the significant changing fact is AMD now owning ATI... 
before then I'd be inclined to agree with you!

Cheers

Mark

[1] see urls in pk's post.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida (emacs or vi (gnome or kde) ...))

[Iain Buchanan]

Hi,

I changed the subject slightly to make my point:  Every person will have
a different opinion, as the number of replies already shows.  Everyone
has had different experiences with either.  Some people buy one card
that never worked with the propriatary drivers, and therefore never buy
from them again.  Some people buy a card and have great performanc and
no problems, ever.  Personally, I've used a number of both cards, and
I've been able to get 3D working and quite stable on all of them.

My best advice would be to find someone who has the exact card you want
to buy, and see how it works for them.  Distribution doesn't matter, so
long as it's linux.  Then check kernel and Xorg versions.

HTH!
-- 
Iain Buchanan <iaindb at netspace dot net dot au>

I would much rather have men ask why I have no statue, than why I have one.
		-- Marcus Procius Cato

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[fire-eyes]

Platoali wrote:
> Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
> considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
> applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
> poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
> buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
>  are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
> process of freeing their graphic cards driver. But I did not have any
> good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
> ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way  it had to  until broken.
> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
> 
> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?

ATI's drivers have been buggy to the point that I avoid them 100% of the 
time when using linux. In multiple systems, using their drivers means 
that my system will hard hang 100% of the time when exiting xorg in any 
way. Such as logging out, killing xorg, rebooting, etc.

Nvidias drivers are far more stable in linux, I would strongly suggest 
going that route. I do not know the specifics of those cards, sorry.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Bill Roberts]

This is my first time replying to a thread using gmail, so I apologize
in advance if It ends up on the  wrong end of the thread.

There seems to be a big change coming in graphics: Intel is coming out
towards the end of the year with a motherboard with integrated
graphics that will be competitive with the graphics provided by nvidia
and ati cards.

I am guessing that soon graphics for most applications will be
provided in the same way that sound, ethernet, usb and others, which
used to be provided by extension cards, are provided to most users
today, as an integrated part of the motherboard.

The days when ATI and NVIDIA can rack up huge profits selling cards
for two, three, or four times the cost of a motherboard, are coming to
a close. I'm sure there will always be a market for high end graphics
cards, but for most of us, the graphics on the new motherboards will
fill the bill.

I'm hanging on with an old AGP nvidia 6600GT and relatively obsolete
motherboard in anticipation of better solutions coming soon.

Bill Roberts

On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 9:32 PM, fire-eyes <sgtphou@fire-eyes.org> wrote:
> Platoali wrote:
>>
>> Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm
>> considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic
>> applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my
>> poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to
>> buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards
>>  are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the
>> process of freeing their graphic cards driver. But I did not have any
>> good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was
>> ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way  it had to  until broken.
>> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux?
>> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia?
>>
>> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
>> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
>> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
>> anyone have any comment about them?
>
> ATI's drivers have been buggy to the point that I avoid them 100% of the
> time when using linux. In multiple systems, using their drivers means that
> my system will hard hang 100% of the time when exiting xorg in any way. Such
> as logging out, killing xorg, rebooting, etc.
>
> Nvidias drivers are far more stable in linux, I would strongly suggest going
> that route. I do not know the specifics of those cards, sorry.
> --
> gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Wednesday 18 June 2008, Bill Roberts wrote:
> This is my first time replying to a thread using gmail, so I apologize
> in advance if It ends up on the  wrong end of the thread.
>
> There seems to be a big change coming in graphics: Intel is coming out
> towards the end of the year with a motherboard with integrated
> graphics that will be competitive with the graphics provided by nvidia
> and ati cards.

no, intel is saying that.

And honestly, intel is the master of fud and preannouncing vaporware. They 
have a long history of announcing stuff that never came into existance, was 
delayed for YEARS or went away after some examples for the media. 

The last time intel produced a 'competetive' graphics solution it was the i740 
... not very competetive at all.

So as long as intel does not show the boards I just don't believe them.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Robin Atwood]

On Tuesday 17 Jun 2008, Platoali wrote:

> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
> anyone have any comment about them?

I don't know if this helps but my laptop has an Mobility Radeon 9600 M10 chip 
which I use the x11-base/x11-drm drivers with and it's fine. I think it's 
only 2D though, i.e. googlemaps is unusable. However, everything is 
open-source.

HTH
-Robin
-- 
------------------------------------------------------
Robin Atwood, 











-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Ati or Nvida

[Platoali]

On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Robin Atwood
<robin.atwood@attglobal.net> wrote:
> On Tuesday 17 Jun 2008, Platoali wrote:
>
>> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel
>> regardless of how much open/free  the drivers is. I'm currently
>> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does
>> anyone have any comment about them?
>
> I don't know if this helps but my laptop has an Mobility Radeon 9600 M10 chip
> which I use the x11-base/x11-drm drivers with and it's fine. I think it's
> only 2D though, i.e. googlemaps is unusable. However, everything is
> open-source.
>
> HTH
> -Robin
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Robin Atwood,
>

My main use for this graphic card is blender and as many know, all the
interface is written in OpenGL, so any graphic card without 3D is
useless for me.

I don't think the new generation of integrated Gpu/Cpu works for
professional graphic applications. I think Ati and Nvidia will have at
least their pro customers in  future for their high end graphic cards.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Enrico Weigelt]

Hi,


I've made the big mistake of bying an notebook w/ geforce go 6100.

The proprietary drivers *never* worked for me - the binary kernel
modules crashed the whole kernel (complete lockup) after a several
seconds (doesnt even need X to come up for that).

I've analyzed their module a bit and seen really bad things. 
Looks it's a hand-written bunch of assembler code with massive 
code obfuscation, just like Skype ;-o

IMHO, if someone spends so much work into machine code obfuscation,
he *really* has something to hide. Not just some "intellectual
property" (which is outdated alfter a few months).

Of course, opensource 3D support is (almost) not existing, 
(2D works very fine), and NVidia repeatedly states that they
will NOT do the slightest attempt to improve the situation. 

So I strongly suggest, NOT to buy NV cards.

(BTW: a few month ago, I managed to stop a customer from buying
several hundreds of NV cards - yes, consulting jobs sometimes
make really fun this way ;-P)


cu
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt    ==   metux IT service - http://www.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 Please visit the OpenSource QM Taskforce:
 	http://wiki.metux.de/public/OpenSource_QM_Taskforce
 Patches / Fixes for a lot dozens of packages in dozens of versions:
	http://patches.metux.de/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Wednesday 18 June 2008, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> I've made the big mistake of bying an notebook w/ geforce go 6100.
>
> The proprietary drivers *never* worked for me - the binary kernel
> modules crashed the whole kernel (complete lockup) after a several
> seconds (doesnt even need X to come up for that).
>
> I've analyzed their module a bit and seen really bad things.
> Looks it's a hand-written bunch of assembler code with massive
> code obfuscation, just like Skype ;-o
>
> IMHO, if someone spends so much work into machine code obfuscation,
> he *really* has something to hide. Not just some "intellectual
> property" (which is outdated alfter a few months).
>
> Of course, opensource 3D support is (almost) not existing,
> (2D works very fine), and NVidia repeatedly states that they
> will NOT do the slightest attempt to improve the situation.
>
> So I strongly suggest, NOT to buy NV cards.
>
> (BTW: a few month ago, I managed to stop a customer from buying
> several hundreds of NV cards - yes, consulting jobs sometimes
> make really fun this way ;-P)
>

and what do you recommend?


ATI? Which 3d drivers are as bad as nvidia from 'obfuscation' point of view 
and a lot worse if you compare the horror stories? Ati, whose drivers even 
suck in windows?

Btw, most of the time people have problems with nvidia its either the cards 
bios or the mobos.

Or Intel? With no 3d power at all?
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Nicolas Sebrecht]

Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> a écrit:

> ATI? Which 3d drivers are as bad as nvidia from 'obfuscation' point
> of view and a lot worse if you compare the horror stories? 

The point is that *this* is changing with ATI.

-- 
Nicolas Sebrecht

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Robert Bridge]

On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 22:04:40 +0200
Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@metux.de> wrote:
> I've made the big mistake of bying an notebook w/ geforce go 6100.

There is your problem. A notebook card. Even the nVidia site admits
that the notebook cards are weird. The drivers support the chipset, but
there are no guarantees about the rest of the card, which may cause the
drivers to fail.

I would say that I have a geforce Go 5200, and it works cleanly and
stably with the nVidia drivers, though almost all the hotkey related
features fail. If it didn't work, would I blame nVidia? No, I would
blame Dell, it's Dell laptop after all.

So before you go flaming nVidia for a mobile card, check it is
not actually a problem with the notebook, as notebooks frequently get
customised cards.

Cheers,

Rob.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Bob Young]

-----Original Message-----
From: Enrico Weigelt [mailto:weigelt@metux.de] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 1:05 PM
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida


>Hi,
>
>
>I've made the big mistake of bying an notebook w/ geforce go 6100.
>
>The proprietary drivers *never* worked for me - the binary kernel
>modules crashed the whole kernel (complete lockup) after a several
>seconds (doesnt even need X to come up for that).
>

Somehow you later statements make me distrust your opening one...

> I've analyzed their module a bit and seen really bad things. 

Really...You've "analyzed" a closed source module. Care to share 
the details of how you performed this "analysis" ?

>Looks it's a hand-written bunch of assembler code with massive 
>code obfuscation, 
>

Uhhhh...perfectly good C/C++ code that's been even moderately 
Optimized by any reasonably sane compiler will look like that
when it's disassembled...now how was it you did this "analysis"
on a *closed source* module again...? 

>IMHO, if someone spends so much work into machine code obfuscation,
>he *really* has something to hide. 
>

It's closed source driver, neither you nor anybody else who hasn't 
seen the source code has any basis whatsoever to justify such an 
"opinion" without making themselves look like a total dimwit. 

> Not just some "intellectual
> property" (which is outdated alfter a few months).

Uhhh...if the intellectual property is so "outdated", why is it so 
difficult to duplicate? So far no one advocating open source, can 
manage to duplicate even the functionality of the 3D driver, much 
less the performance?


> Of course, opensource 3D support is (almost) not existing, 
> (2D works very fine), and NVidia repeatedly states that they
> will NOT do the slightest attempt to improve the situation. 
>

Why should they, their providing for Linux, the same thing they 
provide for Windows, i.e. a binary driver that drives their GPU
and performs quite well in the experience of a lot of users. From 
their point of view the situation doesn't need improving

>So I strongly suggest, NOT to buy NV cards.
>

You've never written graphics drivers have you?

>(BTW: a few month ago, I managed to stop a customer from buying
>several hundreds of NV cards - yes, consulting jobs sometimes
>make really fun this way ;-P)

Maybe that was the correct decision, maybe not, depends on the
circumstances. Regardless, your clients are not well served by your
uninformed bias.

-- 
Regards,
Bob Young



-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Thursday 19 June 2008, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> a écrit:
> > ATI? Which 3d drivers are as bad as nvidia from 'obfuscation' point
> > of view and a lot worse if you compare the horror stories?
>
> The point is that *this* is changing with ATI.

really? it is? and how long do you want to wait? Two years? Three?
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Miika Linnapuomi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 536 bytes --]

Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:06:10 +0200
Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

> On Thursday 19 June 2008, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote:
> > Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> a écrit:
> > > ATI? Which 3d drivers are as bad as nvidia from 'obfuscation'
> > > point of view and a lot worse if you compare the horror stories?
> >
> > The point is that *this* is changing with ATI.
> 
> really? it is? and how long do you want to wait? Two years? Three?

Not as long as with Nvidia ;)

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Norberto Bensa]

Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> I've made the big mistake of bying an notebook w/ geforce go 6100.

I have one. Compaq Presario 3415LA (Sempron 3500+, GeForce 6150, Gentoo 
64bit.)


> So I strongly suggest, NOT to buy NV cards.

Too late buddy. All my current boxes (6) run on NVidia cards, and are the most 
stable boxes I ever had. 


> (BTW: a few month ago, I managed to stop a customer from buying
> several hundreds of NV cards - yes, consulting jobs sometimes
> make really fun this way ;-P)

Poor customer :-)

Perhaps you were running cheap PSUs or bad memory banks and that's why your 
box crashed so often.


Regards,
Norberto
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[ionut cucu]

On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:13:33 +0200
Nicolas Sebrecht <nicolas.s-dev@laposte.net> wrote:

> 
> Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> a écrit:
> 
> > ATI? Which 3d drivers are as bad as nvidia from 'obfuscation' point
> > of view and a lot worse if you compare the horror stories? 
> 
> The point is that *this* is changing with ATI.
> 
Just my late 2€:
Amd can't release the technology because it doesn't own it all.I'm not
to good with licence issue but I know that not all ATI techs are theirs
and they were bought from others under the agreement that they don;t
reveal it. For some new models things might be different but they
aren't allowed for older ones to just release the specs. Also I had
experiences with both ati and nvidia:nvidia just increases in
performance from driver version to driver version, while ati's just
might work, sometimes you need to get the drivers from official site to
work, other times work from portage, sometimes you need to search on
f.g.o for a solution, one is never sure with ati(I never was)
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Volker Armin Hemmann]

On Monday 23 June 2008, ionut cucu wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:13:33 +0200
>
> Nicolas Sebrecht <nicolas.s-dev@laposte.net> wrote:
> > Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> a écrit:
> > > ATI? Which 3d drivers are as bad as nvidia from 'obfuscation' point
> > > of view and a lot worse if you compare the horror stories?
> >
> > The point is that *this* is changing with ATI.
>
> Just my late 2€:
> Amd can't release the technology because it doesn't own it all.I'm not
> to good with licence issue but I know that not all ATI techs are theirs
> and they were bought from others under the agreement that they don;t
> reveal it. For some new models things might be different but they
> aren't allowed for older ones to just release the specs.

sorry to rain into your parade but they just did that. Release specs. All of 
them.




--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Andrey Falko]

I'm not sure if this was linked to this thread before, but here is an
aritcle that gives points to AMD:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd_evolution&num=1

As far as I understand AMD has given up good, "out-of-the-box" support
for the latest teraFLOP gpu.
-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[ionut cucu]

On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:40:38 +0200
Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

> On Monday 23 June 2008, ionut cucu wrote:
> > On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:13:33 +0200
> >
> > Nicolas Sebrecht <nicolas.s-dev@laposte.net> wrote:
> > > Volker Armin Hemmann <volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> a
> > > écrit:
> > > > ATI? Which 3d drivers are as bad as nvidia from 'obfuscation'
> > > > point of view and a lot worse if you compare the horror stories?
> > >
> > > The point is that *this* is changing with ATI.
> >
> > Just my late 2€:
> > Amd can't release the technology because it doesn't own it all.I'm
> > not to good with licence issue but I know that not all ATI techs
> > are theirs and they were bought from others under the agreement
> > that they don;t reveal it. For some new models things might be
> > different but they aren't allowed for older ones to just release
> > the specs.
> 
> sorry to rain into your parade but they just did that. Release specs.
> All of them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
he...talk about being outdated...silly me
--
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida

[Nicolas Sebrecht]

ionut cucu <cuciferus@gmail.com> a écrit:

> he...talk about being outdated...silly me

"Oudated" graphic card specs are not the current topic.

-- 
Nicolas Sebrecht

-- 
gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list