Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:13:33 +0200 Nicolas Sebrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
On Monday 23 June 2008, ionut cucu wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:13:33 +0200 Nicolas Sebrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
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=articleitem=amd_evolutionnum=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
On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:40:38 +0200 Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Monday 23 June 2008, ionut cucu wrote: On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:13:33 +0200 Nicolas Sebrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
ionut cucu [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
Thu, 19 Jun 2008 07:06:10 +0200 Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thursday 19 June 2008, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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 ;) signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
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
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
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
Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 22:04:40 +0200 Enrico Weigelt [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
-Original Message- From: Enrico Weigelt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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, U...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
On Thursday 19 June 2008, Nicolas Sebrecht wrote: Volker Armin Hemmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
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
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
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Hal Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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] Re: Ati or Nvida
Galevsky schrieb: On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 3:13 PM, Hal Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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! signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
On 2008-06-17, Platoali [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.comYOURS ... -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
On 2008-06-17, Platoali [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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.comDISTRICT ... -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
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=articleitem=fosdem_08_bridgmannum=1 -- gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
On 2008-06-17, Stroller [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
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
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
Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
[gentoo-user] Re: Ati or Nvida
On 2008-06-17, Nicolas Sebrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Grant Edwards [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
Grant Edwards wrote: On 2008-06-17, Nicolas Sebrecht [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
