Pigeon wrote:
> Paul Surgeon wrote:
> > The FX5200 is a budget card based on Geforce 2 hardware that has
> > been made DirectX 9 compliant (which is of no use to FlightGear
> > since we are using OpenGL anyway).
That's not strictly correct. AFAIK, the 5200 shares the same
architecture as all the 5x00 cards, just with fewer pipelines and less
memory bandwidth. Having "DX9" compliance refers to the ability to do
programmable texturing ("shaders"), which is exposed in OpenGL as the
ARB_fragment_program extension et. al.
> Speaking of OpenGL, I'm also looking into buying a new display card,
> and I'm wondering is it worthwhile to get a card that can do OpenGL
> 2.0 , in general and for flightgear specifically? (Not that I know
> what 2.0 can do anyway...)
The standard suggestion is a recent NVidia card (5x00 or newer), due
to the generally high quality of the drivers undre both Windows and
Linux. Under Windows, recent ATI hardware (9000 or Xn00 series,
although the 92x0 cards are actually an older architecture) also works
well, but the Linux drivers have had some growing pains. I haven't
tried them recently.
Note that there are now bleeding edge *free* Linux/x.org drivers for
new ATI cards available from http://r300.sourceforge.net . They claim
that they can run Doom3, so it looks promising. My next card may be a
Radeon just so I can try these. I'd be curious to hear any reports if
someone else has one...
As far as OpenGL 2.0, recent NVidia drivers seem to support most of
the feature set through extensions like ARB_shading_language_100,
etc... They only claim compliance with OpenGL "1.5.3", however. I'm
not sure what the status is with ATI.
Andy
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
