So is the fact that us Linux users are having Nvidia vs ATi flame wars mean we're another step closer to being feature-complete with the Windows guys?
All joking aside, I think a little flaming action is a good sign, because it's proof we have more than one legitimate option. Before ATi started their open source initiative, no one had a reason to like them.
Eventually Nouveau rather than nv driver will be handling the old cards so that people can still keep using them till they drop dead
Originally Posted by GreatWalrus
That's just the trouble isn't it. Its the only thing they have going for them. Still.
Originally Posted by chaos386
Nvidia on the other hand seems to only have one thing against them. The evil closed blob.
So what it comes down to is you do this balancing act between what's philosophically better for you vs something that, imo, is more tangible such as functionality and features.
Just about every Linux ATI vs NV flame war I've ever seen comes down to
Nathan: Mine works.
Jack: Mine's open.
Jack argues his point to no end even though he uses fglrx. Nathan alt+tabs out of his game (running thanks to Wine) to laugh at Jack.
As of Catalyst 9.3, fglrx delivers excellent OpenGL performance (I actually get measure better FPS on Linux than on Vista, way to go!)
As workstation cards, Ati on Linux is very competitive both hardware- and performance-wise. As consumer cards (I want Compiz & Wine, wee!) they are not up to par yet. As far as openness is concerned, Ati fares much better than Nvidia.
In other words, pick the card that performs best to your needs.
Point in case: my father's PC (internet, Compiz & videos) uses a fanless Nvidia 7600GS. My fallback box (internet, Compiz & videos) has an Ati X1950 running on the open drivers. My main box (3d programming and modeling) sports an Ati 4850.
All three work just fine.
Don't forget to mention that XV still crashes when you go to fullscreen, you get odd video effects with XV and composite, and occasionally X won't start.
Originally Posted by BlackStar
But when it does, man, that framerate is great. It really makes that 1 out of 20 times that things work with fglrx just so worth it.
Originally Posted by BlackStar
Measured with? With ATI's recent history of not rendering full scenes again it wouldn't be surprising that the linux binary is actually rendering less. Also what modes were you running in? What were the renderers? Ogl, DX9, DX10? Have you taken screenshots of both screens to compare?
Originally Posted by deanjo
Nexuiz runs identical in Windows XP and Ubuntu. Same for Alien Arena.
That's not surprising. Nexiuz isn't exactly a game that pushes systems hard.
Originally Posted by Melcar
36 61 139
36 66 181
Ultimate preset. Only settings on CCC being forced on both OS' are mipmaps (High) and Catalyst AI (Advanced). Latest end-user drivers.
Alien Arena performs identical on both OS' with the same settings. The same goes for Urban Terror and Warsow. Furmark (running under Wine in Ubuntu) gives out the same scores.
Fglrx has good 3D performance. No surprise really. Where it sucks is in common desktop situations, specially when you try to accelerate them. Again, no surprise given where the driver comes from. These issues are being worked on. Sure, even I would like all these things fixed as quickly as possible, but given that the codebase is rather "new", the delays are understandable.