Timothy Miller wrote:
I forgot about that, and you're right. I guess we'll be doing 2.0.
Will an AGP 2.0 board work in a 3.0 slot?
As far as I'm aware, generally yes. The nomenclature becomes somewhat doizzying though, especially with "universal" cards thrown in. There is what seems to be a useful "AGP Compatibility Chart" on page 3 of:
http://www.xfxforce.com/articles/pdf/agp%203%20article.pdf
From that, a "Universal AGP 2.0" looks about right. A universal 3.0 card would get you 8x but seems to consist of somewhat of a "combined" 2.0 and 2.0 card, that you have to choose modes on.
Moreover, I'm going to have a go again at convincing you that a version with a regular old VGA connector is worth it.
I don't see why an extra connector is needed when there will be an adaptor from the DVI-I port to VGA. The adaptor isn't going to
impact signal quality.
If you promise, I will stop trying to convince you... :-)
Another, overlapping, part of the market is obviously open source enthousiasts, probably runing Linux. A panel only has a _chance_ of looking good in its native resolution meaning that a plain VGA console is not something you want to display on them.
By "plain VGA", do you mean the port or the resolution? The VGA resolution is only useful for boot (or pre-boot if you're using fbconsole). The port is part of DVI-I.
The resolution, and I beg to differ. Granted, I _usually_ start X but by no means always. Certainly not when I'm testing kernel-level stuff and just want a quick boot to verify something. In those cases, I just boot up in the 80x25 VGA console my BIOS sets up and linux doesn't change.
Framebuffer I do not use at all. The couple of times I've tried it I've spent more time trying to figure out which parts of it were broken ("is it just me, is it the documentation, do I need newer userspace tools, is it a plain bug?") then doing anything even semi-useful.
We need one single version of the board that meets as many different needs as possible. This is the ONLY way keep the cost down to something reasonable. Volume is everything.
Sounds like a very valid argument. If you promise the adapter's not some bulky contraption that I'll have to tie-wrap to the back of my computer with the electrons leaking out the sides... then I'm okay.
Consolidating the thread:
BTW, I don't want you to think that your particular needs aren't important. I'm sure there are a good number of people in the same position as you are. It's just that we, as a project, cannot afford to do anything that would either increase cost or limit the market. Therefore, some people will get a solution which is slightly less convenient than they want. That's what you get when you make compromises.
Do not worry about it. I'm just stating what I want here, you are the one that gets to decide on what you think still makes sense. Hey, we got you to change your mind on the TV-Out thing... why not try for another feature I wanted :-)
Rene. _______________________________________________ Open-graphics mailing list [email protected] http://lists.duskglow.com/mailman/listinfo/open-graphics List service provided by Duskglow Consulting, LLC (www.duskglow.com)
