Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 57

Thread: Any update: HD Radeon 4xxx v.s. Nviida 260?

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,000

    Default Any update: HD Radeon 4xxx v.s. Nviida 260?

    Could someone give some info on these cards in Linux?

    I hope to upgrade sometime and I think it's between these series of cards:

    Nvidia 260 GTX and the ATI Radeon HD 48xx series, 4870? Whatever is available at the time I'm ready to buy that is under $200.

    I want to support ATI so I'd like to choose it but I get the impression there are so many restrictions or limitations currently (still? :-( ).

    You need to use open source drivers for 3D or gaming? Whereas, 2D is fine with the proprietary fgrlx drivers? As long as the Catalyst utility/drivers are updated or something?

    Maybe game in Windows on Windows partition and then it doesn't matter which you go with either AMD or Nvidia? I watch movies or video a lot with my computer (Online videos, movies both DVD and .avi or mpeg/mpeg4 etc. etc.) so I was wondering how either ATI or Nvidia cards plus the respective drivers effect this. I know the older Nvidia cards are fine and probably newer Nvida cards are supported via proprietary/binary drivers. There's a limitation there but at least there is not as many video issues? Or is there some tearing in certain cases? Or does that apply to ATI (only?)?

    Could someone comment, explain and compare (perhaps?)?

    Also, if ATI's drivers have both pros and cons depending whether you're using the open source or proprietary and what you're using them for, 2D or 3D, can you switch back and forth easily or does it involve installing and uninstalling? If so, how complicated is that process?

    I've only dealt with Nvidia so far.

    Thanks in advance for any replies. Sorry, if this post became rather lengthy and if I could have summarized it with less wordiness, I did try to address all the various comparisons and topics as briefly as I could. ;-)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,516

    Default

    Just to clarify a couple of things - the Catalyst drivers *are* the proprietary drivers, ie Catalyst for Linux = proprietary fglrx.

    You need to uninstall the proprietary drivers in order to use open source drivers.

    Right now the proprietary drivers are the only option for 3D and gaming, but open source 3D drivers are making good progress.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,641

    Default

    Well fglrx compared to nvidia binary is really bad. If you want to play games go for Nvidia - provides even vdpau if needed.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    772

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Panix View Post
    You need to use open source drivers for 3D or gaming? Whereas, 2D is fine with the proprietary fgrlx drivers?
    Actually it's pretty much the opposite: 2D tends to be good with the open-source drivers, and open-source 3D support is currently nonexistent in mainstream distros for the 4000 series. Likewise, Nvidia omits 3D support from its open-source driver.

    Also, if ATI's drivers have both pros and cons depending whether you're using the open source or proprietary and what you're using them for, 2D or 3D, can you switch back and forth easily or does it involve installing and uninstalling? If so, how complicated is that process?
    It depends on the distro. It's not usually that bad, but it's not something you want to be doing every couple of hours.

    If you want to do 3D gaming on Linux, especially if you want to use Wine, Nvidia is currently the clear winner. The main advantage of ATI's products is that they will support the next-generation open-source graphics stack (DRI2/TTM/KMS/Gallium3D), but that's still a work in progress and will take a while before mainstream distros ship it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    206

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ex-Cyber View Post
    The main advantage of ATI's products is that they will support the next-generation open-source graphics stack (DRI2/TTM/KMS/Gallium3D), but that's still a work in progress and will take a while before mainstream distros ship it.
    I don't know any advantages there, from what I see, nouveau is in much better shape regarding DRI2/TTM/KMS/Gallium3D.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    167

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hax0r View Post
    I don't know any advantages there, from what I see, nouveau is in much better shape regarding DRI2/TTM/KMS/Gallium3D.
    To me it's quite the opposite. KMS working since Fedora 10 and DRI2 working since F11 on a Radeon 9500 AGP.
    On the contrary KMS means blank screen in F12 alpha both for 8400M and 8800GT, while Radeon 9500 still work as it's supposed to work.
    And I don't see a Gallium3D nouveau driver coming anytime soon.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,641

    Default

    I don't think that cards which need fglrx for full performance (unlike the really extra cheap lowend cards) are a good buy. I think the drivers will be dropped too soon like you see for r500. X1950 cards are definitely not slow, but since fglrx 9-4 they are not supported but that driver is needed for Xserver 1.6+. And the oss driver is definitely no full replacement - too many features are missing and speed is really low. I don't know when r600/r700 will be dropped but DX11 cards should be out this year for Win7/Vista. And then DX10.x is legacy.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    1,000

    Default

    After spending several agonizing minutes trying to find any kind of info on open source ATI drivers (for any type of graphics card or integrated graphics), I decided to give up. I'll definitely be going with an Nvidia card. The AMD/ATI website is absolutely abysmal.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    2,159

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    I don't think that cards which need fglrx for full performance (unlike the really extra cheap lowend cards) are a good buy. I think the drivers will be dropped too soon like you see for r500. X1950 cards are definitely not slow, but since fglrx 9-4 they are not supported but that driver is needed for Xserver 1.6+. And the oss driver is definitely no full replacement - too many features are missing and speed is really low. I don't know when r600/r700 will be dropped but DX11 cards should be out this year for Win7/Vista. And then DX10.x is legacy.
    R8xx is still R6xx architecture. There will be new R8xx based cards from the end of 2009 until mid-2010 or so. So if AMD is going to drop R6xx+ support, it won't happen until early 2011 at the very earliest.

    Also, fglrx in general is in a pretty good shape right know. Wine is working better with every release, crashes are getting rare and Composite is becoming usable.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Toronto-ish
    Posts
    7,516

    Default

    The open source driver work is managed as part of the xorg development effort so information is primarily maintained on the x.org site :

    http://www.x.org/docs/AMD/

    http://www.x.org/wiki/radeon

    http://www.x.org/wiki/radeonhd

    http://www.x.org/wiki/RadeonFeature

    We mirror the documents on amd.com but in general we work with the xorg community and maintain the information there.

    The drivers are already in most distributions out-of-the-box, and our goal is to have any distro that picks up relatively recent drivers from freedesktop.org "just work". Different distros have different priorities so the level of support you get varies between distros; for example Ubuntu 9.04 has solid support for all GPUs except the ones which shipped after Jaunty was released, including backported drm support for 6xx and 7xx EXA/XV acceleration, while Fedora 11 is the showcase for next generation drivers including Kernel Modesetting and GEM/TTM. Other distros, typically the "stable" releases, ship much older versions of the driver and require updates in order to support current hardware.

    Is there something specific you are looking for ? We can put more info on amd.com about the open source drivers but my preference is to work with the community and keep all the important information on www.x.org instead.

    In general we find that people looking for open source drivers go to the xorg pages not to the vendor pages. It probably wouldn't hurt to cross-link www.amd.com and www.x.org a bit more but I'm trying hard not to misrepresent what is essentially a community effort with significant AMD support.

    EDIT - just out of curiosity I took a quick look at the NVidia site; the only mention of open source drivers I could find there was for chipset drivers; ethernet, disk etc...
    Last edited by bridgman; 07-06-2009 at 02:21 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •