1 |
Hello, |
2 |
|
3 |
I can only comment about my experience (facts). |
4 |
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:42:22 +0430 |
5 |
Platoali <platoali@×××××.com> wrote: |
6 |
|
7 |
> Well, last night the graphic card of my laptop got broken. So I'm |
8 |
> considering to replace it with a workstation for some graphic |
9 |
> applications (Mainly blender and gimp.) I need 3d acceleration, and my |
10 |
> poor laptop was rendering for hours to get my job done. So I decide to |
11 |
> buy a workstation instead a laptop. I want to ask, which graphic cards |
12 |
> are better supported in Linux. I know that ATI have freed or in the |
13 |
> process of freeing their graphic cards driver. |
14 |
|
15 |
No, they just released some specs. They did not release a single line of the |
16 |
fglrx driver source. |
17 |
|
18 |
> But I did not have any |
19 |
> good memory from my previous experience with ATI. My previous card was |
20 |
> ATI radeon 9600m and it never worked the way it had to until broken. |
21 |
> I want to know, what is the current status of ATI drivers in Linux? |
22 |
> Does the problems have been solved? Can they compete with Nvidia? |
23 |
> |
24 |
I tried it yet-once-more a couple of months ago, it did not work, just like the |
25 |
few dozens I've tried before. Particularly I found: |
26 |
|
27 |
1.- 100% cpu usage under any wm, while idle |
28 |
2.- xinerama just plainly doesn't work, it's not usable, and provoqued xorg |
29 |
log spamming due to a bug |
30 |
|
31 |
This was with an hd2600. |
32 |
|
33 |
> And I want to know which one is better supported in Linux kernel |
34 |
> regardless of how much open/free the drivers is. I'm currently |
35 |
> thinking between Nvidia Quadro fx 1700 and Ati firegl 5600. Does |
36 |
> anyone have any comment about them? |
37 |
|
38 |
I never found a nvidia card with did not work with a simple |
39 |
"emerge nvidia-drivers". They just work. |
40 |
|
41 |
In any case, luck with anything you choose. |
42 |
-- |
43 |
Jesús Guerrero <i92guboj@×××××.es> |