On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 01:00:18 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(II) R128(0): [drm] dma control initialized, using IRQ 11
Right after this line I get (for my radeon):
(II) RADEON(0): [drm] Initialized kernel GART heap manager, 5111808
Followed by:
(II) RADEON(0): Direct
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 11:10:15 +0100, Godwin Stewart [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
You're probably on to something there. I *do* get the Direct rendering
enabled message on the Linux setup, although the logs also say that
there's a problem with AGP and that it's falling back to PCI mode.
That was
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 22:07, Godwin Stewart wrote:
And yet:
$ glxinfo | grep direct
direct rendering: No
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
G.
Sure you don't have nvidia GL, or bog standard MESA libraries installed for
some crazy reason?
(Wild stab in the dark..)
--
Daniel
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:03:15 +1030, Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Sure you don't have nvidia GL, or bog standard MESA libraries installed
for some crazy reason?
(Wild stab in the dark..)
Not that wild...
I only installed what is included with the ports version of xorg, which I
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:12, Godwin Stewart wrote:
Not that wild...
I only installed what is included with the ports version of xorg, which I
assume to be MESA. If the ATI R128 requires something extra then that would
be a good reason for this not working...
It shouldn't need anything but the X
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:20:46 +1030, Daniel O'Connor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What does..
pkgdb /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so
say?
$ pkg_info -W /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so
/usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so was installed by package xorg-libraries-6.7.0_3
Could it be that this is just a stub? I ask because I
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 23:26, Godwin Stewart wrote:
wrote:
What does..
pkgdb /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so
say?
$ pkg_info -W /usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so
/usr/X11R6/lib/libGL.so was installed by package xorg-libraries-6.7.0_3
Hmm, well I didn't use pkg_info because it stops at the first find..
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 12:37:35PM +0100, Godwin Stewart wrote:
(II) R128(0): Direct rendering enabled
That's beginning to look like it...
And yet:
$ glxinfo | grep direct
direct rendering: No
OpenGL renderer string: Mesa GLX Indirect
Hmm. Bummer. What kind of framerate does glxgears
Matthias Buelow wrote:
Pertti Kosunen wrote:
The newer cards work very well. I have a X800se PCI-Express card
and it works like a charm with X.org 6.8.1 on 5.3. The only thing
that's
Isn't that pretty expencive for 2d use?
Yes.. that's why I also have Windows installed for a game every now
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:26:20 -0500, Jason Andresen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
IMHO, if you just want 2D, pretty much any bottom of the barrel card
will work.
I'd add that Matrox cards are excellent in the 2D arena. I still have an old
G200 here and It beats the socks off the ATI Rage128 I also
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 07:34:50PM +0100, Godwin Stewart wrote:
On Fri, 03 Dec 2004 13:26:20 -0500, Jason Andresen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
IMHO, if you just want 2D, pretty much any bottom of the barrel card
will work.
I'd add that Matrox cards are excellent in the 2D arena. I still
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:45:32 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For 3D you have to load the agp and radeon modules.
This is a Rage128, not a Radeon.
agp is built into the kernel and r128 is already kldloaded.
I tried kldloading radeon anyway and running glxgears. It can't do any
On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 11:09:06PM +0100, Godwin Stewart wrote:
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:45:32 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For 3D you have to load the agp and radeon modules.
This is a Rage128, not a Radeon.
I was indeed referring to a Radeon.
agp is built into the kernel
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:01:29 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried kldloading radeon anyway and running glxgears. It can't do any
better than about 10 fps at 1024x768/24bits.
My radeon gives 560 - 580 fps with direct rendering. An R128 would
probably be somewhat slower.
On Sat, Dec 04, 2004 at 12:35:49AM +0100, Godwin Stewart wrote:
On Sat, 4 Dec 2004 00:01:29 +0100, Roland Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried kldloading radeon anyway and running glxgears. It can't do any
better than about 10 fps at 1024x768/24bits.
My radeon gives 560 - 580 fps
Godwin Stewart wrote:
I'd add that Matrox cards are excellent in the 2D arena. I still have an old
G200 here and It beats the socks off the ATI Rage128 I also have as far as
clarity and general piqu are concerned.
Obviously, the Rage128 does better than the G200 in the 3D department,
although not
I've been experimenting with various cards, most cheap. The monitors are
HP P1110 21 surplus, very bright (too bright) and very sharp. These are
the PC version with VGA connectors, not the ones with BNC connectors.
I currently have a Matrox G450 in dual-head mode under 5.3-STABLE with
Xorg,
Michael Nottebrock wrote:
Paulo wrote:
You are forgetting that there are many people that really need fast
3D graphics. In the place I work there are people working on computer
animation, 3D models visualization on linux, solaris and freebsd.
I wonder what kind of applications they would use on
On Tuesday, 30. November 2004 09:53, Paulo wrote:
Michael Nottebrock wrote:
I wonder what kind of applications they would use on FreeBSD for such
tasks. Custom developed? And if so, why on FreeBSD, which really isn't
a logical choice for a 3D graphics workstation platform?
Yes custom
On Tuesday, 30. November 2004 10:08, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
I shouldn't edit around in my replies so much. I meant to say:
Well, that's exactly the reason why not freebsd. I didn't know research
labs these days choose the software they're working with based on what
the software could do
Michael Nottebrock wrote:
On Tuesday, 30. November 2004 10:08, Michael Nottebrock wrote:
I shouldn't edit around in my replies so much. I meant to say:
Well, that's exactly the reason why not freebsd. I didn't know research
labs these days choose the software they're working with based on what
On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 19:23, Paulo wrote:
There is something that intrigates me, I use FreeBSD since 1.x and I
still see people saying that
FreeBSD is not for this kind of application or that. Sorry but I don't
know of any limitation in the OS that precludes its use with computer
graphics
Maybe a little OT, but:
IMHO the 3D-acceleration issue is too much considered a gamer's
problem: There are software producers around like us that use FreeBSD
and Linux for their 3D visualization programs. As an example, display
of large CFD models needs an excellent VM and good 3D acceleration.
I think it's important that companies such as yours that depend on 3D
performance write to the various video card manufacturers. As others
have pointed out, the home market for 3D support is and will continue to
be nill until gaming becomes common on *BSD and Linux. Companies that
need good
Matthias Buelow wrote:
Yes.. that's why I also have Windows installed for a game every now
and then. I just wanted to point out that the current generation
Radeons do, in contrast to what has been claimed before, actually work
with the current Xorg release (which unfortunately hasn't arrived
Paulo wrote:
You are forgetting that there are many people that really need fast 3D
graphics. In the place I work there are people working on computer
animation, 3D models visualization on linux, solaris and freebsd.
I wonder what kind of applications they would use on FreeBSD for such tasks.
Am Mo, den 29.11.2004 schrieb Michael Nottebrock um 22:07:
Paulo wrote:
You are forgetting that there are many people that really need fast 3D
graphics. In the place I work there are people working on computer
animation, 3D models visualization on linux, solaris and freebsd.
I wonder
On Monday 29 November 2004 05:32 pm, Marc Santhoff wrote:
Am Mo, den 29.11.2004 schrieb Michael Nottebrock um 22:07:
Paulo wrote:
You are forgetting that there are many people that really need fast
3D graphics. In the place I work there are people working on computer
animation, 3D
Matthias Buelow wrote:
The newer cards work very well. I have a X800se PCI-Express card and
it works like a charm with X.org 6.8.1 on 5.3. The only thing that's
missing in the newer Radeons under Xorg/XFree is 3d acceleration
(which the OP might or might not need on FreeBSD, since it's mostly
Pertti Kosunen wrote:
The newer cards work very well. I have a X800se PCI-Express card and
it works like a charm with X.org 6.8.1 on 5.3. The only thing that's
Isn't that pretty expencive for 2d use?
Yes.. that's why I also have Windows installed for a game every now and
then. I just wanted
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 09:52:48AM -0800, Joe Kelsey wrote:
I always tell anyone who asks to run very fast and very far away from
anything with NVIDIA in it.
IMHO NVidia is the only option if you want decent 3D acceleration on
FreeBSD or Linux desktops. Other manufacturers don't even care for
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 09:41:30PM +0100, Stein M. Sandbech wrote:
On Nov 25, 2004, at 9:03 PM, Matthias Buelow wrote:
Harald Arnesen wrote:
All Radeons up to 9100 (9200, but that one is slower). Unfortunately,
that excludes all reasonably new cards.
The newer cards work very well. I
El Thu, 25 Nov 2004 23:23:57 +0100 Jorn Argelo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
escribió:
[...]
Also, I don't think many people will exactly understand how it works
anyway. At least, one may assume that GPUs are really complicated.
From what I've heard to the x.org guys, programming such drivers is a very
alex bustamante [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there any graphicscard that is known to work better than others with
freebsd/x11? (open sourcecode for the drivers, etc)
Here are my two (Euro) cents ...
If you don't want to play the latest 3D ego shooter games,
get a Matrox MGA G400 (or even
Uwe Laverenz wrote:
I love my G400max and still use it but: for their (slow+expensive)
Parhelias there is absolutely no support from Matrox, no drivers or
specs that would make them work with FreeBSD or other systems besides
RH 7.3-9.0. The only trouble-free cards are G400 or G550 if you don't
Hi all,
Is there any graphicscard that is known to work better than others with
freebsd/x11? (open sourcecode for the drivers, etc)
-Alex
--
alex bustamante - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Quoth alex bustamante on Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 17:02:12 +0100
Is there any graphicscard that is known to work better than others with
freebsd/x11? (open sourcecode for the drivers, etc)
-Alex
I've had no problems with Radeon cards at all. But what you need to
look at is www.x.org and check
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 05:02:12PM +0100, alex bustamante wrote:
Hi all,
Is there any graphicscard that is known to work better than others with
freebsd/x11? (open sourcecode for the drivers, etc)
-Alex
Hello!
Matrox MGA G400.
Serg.
___
[EMAIL
Quoth alex bustamante on Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 17:02:12 +0100
Is there any graphicscard that is known to work better than others with
freebsd/x11? (open sourcecode for the drivers, etc)
-Alex
I've had no problems with Radeon cards at all. But what you need to
look at is www.x.org and check
On Thursday 25 Nov 2004 16:13, alex bustamante wrote:
Yes, i know i can check out what cards are supported. I have a Nvidia card
now, it works ok. I was just curious to know of other cards that maybe
runs faster or some like that.
Nvidia are a good option. They supply their own (binary only)
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 17:06 +, Mark Dixon wrote:
On Thursday 25 Nov 2004 16:13, alex bustamante wrote:
Yes, i know i can check out what cards are supported. I have a Nvidia card
now, it works ok. I was just curious to know of other cards that maybe
runs faster or some like that.
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 06:07:36PM +, Mark Dixon wrote:
On Thursday 25 Nov 2004 17:52, Joe Kelsey wrote:
The NVIDIA drivers are completely crap! They do not work and contain
countless errors which will cause system failures on every single
machine I have tried to use them with. Do
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 19:43:28 +0100
Fredrik Eriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't think this is about which card is better than the other, more
about NVidia being reactionary bastards who refuse the idea of open
source. NVidia graphic cards are probably great for playing games in
windos.
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 19:43 +0100, Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 06:07:36PM +, Mark Dixon wrote:
On Thursday 25 Nov 2004 17:52, Joe Kelsey wrote:
The NVIDIA drivers are completely crap! They do not work and contain
countless errors which will cause system
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 20:36 +0100, alex bustamante wrote:
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 19:43 +0100, Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
On Thu, Nov 25, 2004 at 06:07:36PM +, Mark Dixon wrote:
On Thursday 25 Nov 2004 17:52, Joe Kelsey wrote:
The NVIDIA drivers are completely crap! They do not work
Joe == Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joe Matrox supports developers by actually publishing the specs.
Joe NVidia does not publish any information about its hardware.
They used to.
Just check Matrox forums to see complete lack of interest in giving
access to specs for Parhelia range
alex bustamante [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi all,
Is there any graphicscard that is known to work better than others with
freebsd/x11? (open sourcecode for the drivers, etc)
All Radeons up to 9100 (9200, but that one is slower). Unfortunately,
that excludes all reasonably new cards.
--
On Thu, 2004-11-25 at 20:51 +0100, Eric Masson wrote:
Joe == Joe Kelsey [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Joe Matrox supports developers by actually publishing the specs.
Joe NVidia does not publish any information about its hardware.
They used to.
Just check Matrox forums to see complete
Harald Arnesen wrote:
All Radeons up to 9100 (9200, but that one is slower). Unfortunately,
that excludes all reasonably new cards.
The newer cards work very well. I have a X800se PCI-Express card and it
works like a charm with X.org 6.8.1 on 5.3. The only thing that's
missing in the newer
alex bustamante wrote:
Why is it so hard for the manufacturers to release everything in the
open? every *ix/bsd user on the planet would run and buy their cards if
everything was open.
Every *ix/bsd user is still a lot less than 0.5% of their clientele,
so they simply don't bother.
--
Matthias
alex bustamante wrote:
How many manufactures release their drivers in open source? Does Matrox
do it?
No. In fact, Matrox was one of the pioneers in the concept of binary-only
driver stubs with open-source interfaces (Matrox calls it HAL/hallib), which
is now a pretty common way of providing
On Nov 25, 2004, at 9:03 PM, Matthias Buelow wrote:
Harald Arnesen wrote:
All Radeons up to 9100 (9200, but that one is slower). Unfortunately,
that excludes all reasonably new cards.
The newer cards work very well. I have a X800se PCI-Express card and
it works like a charm with X.org 6.8.1 on
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 21:04:51 +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote
alex bustamante wrote:
Why is it so hard for the manufacturers to release everything in the
open? every *ix/bsd user on the planet would run and buy their cards if
everything was open.
Every *ix/bsd user is still a lot less than
Jorn Argelo wrote:
It's simple why they don't make it open source. Making it open source makes it
easier for ATi to steal their ideas and they can figure out construction of
their GPUs (think of bugs or flaws in the driver or the architecture).
I wonder what secrets that might be? After all, a
Matthias Buelow [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
(but are probably well-known to the competitor). With the drivers
getting bigger and bigger (the ATI Catalyst graphics driver component
alone is over 8 megs), maybe a lot of the logics is actually in the
proprietary driver code?
Likely. The same
55 matches
Mail list logo
