Hi,
> > I know this from 1st hand, I got one ATI card in my notebook and one
> in my
> > multimedia jukebox, am subscribed to gatos-devel (the mailing list for
> > opensource drivers for ATI cards), am following the progress very
> closely, I
> > took a look at the driver source a couple of times and tried to
> manipulate the
> > registers to get the frellin' tv-out workin' which resulted in a
> couple of
> > freezes.
>
> Maybe pointing to ATI as an example wasn't a good choice from my part.
>
> Forget I mentioned ATI. Unfortunately I don't have another example.
> What's Matrox' position on open source? :-)
Matrox is very good. I have G400MAX DH, and works very well.
Opensource drivers, open docs etc. TV-out also working.
OpenGl is ok too, both X 3.3.6 and 4.0.3. Even faster than its win98 driver!
And the same is true for 3dfx cards too!
Btw I have an ATI Xpert98 (mach64 chip) at work, and it's also good under
linux. Xv with GATOS drivers, OpenGL with Utah-GLX or under-development DRI
drivers.
Btw I have no problems with closed drivers. I understand if nvidia doesn't
release its drivers. My problem is that nvidia driver is much more unstable
and buggy than matrox or ati drivers. The only disadvantage of closed-source
driver is that advanced users can't fix problem, they must send tons of
bugreports and support requests to nviaia guys and wait and wait...
We (at MPlayer project) got tons of bugreports regarding to nvidia drivers
(Xv problems, DGA hangups, opengl glTexSubImage() doesn't work at all, etc).
Much more problems, than with all other cards summarized!
So please, don't tell me that nvidia's drivers are so good compared to
opensource drivers! It isn't true.
It's true that nvidia is good in hardware. Their new cards are fast as hell.
But who needs a fast card with unstable and buggy drivers?
(same can apply to ATI Radeon too, but I don't know this, I've
NOT tried Radeon yet)
I ran and benchmark the same opengl applications on Asus V3800U TNT2 Ultra
Pro and G400MAX DH 32MB SGRAM cards. G400 wins, about 30% faster avg. under
linux. Under Win98 (same apps) TNT2 won, about 20% faster! So driver does
matters a lot! Here tnt2 was about same speed under linux and win98, while
g400 is much faster under linux.
(TNT2 with their 0.96 driver, G400 with Utah-GLX. CPU was celeron366@550)
I have experiments with many video cards, so what I tell here is true,
and happened with me, not just info heard from someone!
But it's getting offtopic...
A'rpi / Astral & ESP-team
--
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://esp-team.scene.hu
_______________________________________________
Avifile mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://prak.org/mailman/listinfo/avifile
