Which (high end) graphics card to buy?

[deanjo]

I don't recall saying that it was alright on OS X. But at least it does offer full 3.2 support, video decode acceleration and gpgpu which is more then what foss drivers can do. Nevermind the fact that the OS X blobs still outperform the Linux foss drivers. Also if you want to kill some time bench power consumption on a Mac running linux vs OS X. Bye bye battery life.

[ahlaht]

The nvidia blob certainly offers fast and complete OpenGL 4+, but struggles with simple things like randr

everyone should decide on their own where their priorities lie.

That much I agree. The truth: There are NO perfect Linux drivers. They are all compromises.

I don't want to support Nvidia these days, but I have had to switch to their blob on several occasions in the past. Even fglrx hasn't always provided the latest OpenGL extensions. (I don't know if they currently do. I guess they do, but would need to compare glxinfos again.)

About bugs: There have been serious bugs on both sides (which I have experienced). And there will be new bugs. But they get fixed if reported. I personally don't see them as a problem.

Those who care about open source, should probably get AMD. AMD may even provide good enough out-of-the-box experience for many users soon after the release of Mesa 7.11.

On the other hand, Nvidia already has almost everything implemented and there is a good chance everything really just works. So it's not a bad choice either.

While I support and use AMD I'm thankful to NVIDIA. They have supported the Linux Desktop for so many years already and often with more complete drivers than Ati/AMD.

[liam]

I don't recall saying that it was alright on OS X. But at least it does offer full 3.2 support, video decode acceleration and gpgpu which is more then what foss drivers can do. Nevermind the fact that the OS X blobs still outperform the Linux foss drivers. Also if you want to kill some time bench power consumption on a Mac running linux vs OS X. Bye bye battery life.

You didn't say that but I think it important to point out that OSX graphics support is terrible b/cit doesn't take full advantage of the hardware.
Also where dis you get the info about Mac blob outperforming Linux blob? The latest test I found comparing the two was http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ws_part3&num=5 and Linux won every test (excluding win7).
Btw, where did you find that info about 3.2 on OSX?

[deanjo]

You didn't say that but I think it important to point out that OSX graphics support is terrible b/cit doesn't take full advantage of the hardware.
Also where dis you get the info about Mac blob outperforming Linux blob? The latest test I found comparing the two was http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ws_part3&num=5 and Linux won every test (excluding win7).
Btw, where did you find that info about 3.2 on OSX?

Read what I posted I said the OS X blobs outperform the foss drivers and yes it is a shame that they don't take full advantage of ogl 4 yet.

[deanjo]

Btw, where did you find that info about 3.2 on OSX?

Developers documentation for OS X that is not public yet but Ars covered it as well a few months ago.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews...ng-start.ars/4

There is also development work being done to extend it further past 3.2 as well going on at apple.

[liam]

Read what I posted I said the OS X blobs outperform the foss drivers and yes it is a shame that they don't take full advantage of ogl 4 yet.

I apologize for that. I must've read that many times but I truly thought it was a blob-to-blob comparison. Ah, clearly i had blinders on.

[liam]

Developers documentation for OS X that is not public yet but Ars covered it as well a few months ago.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews...ng-start.ars/4

There is also development work being done to extend it further past 3.2 as well going on at apple.

I saw this vaguely recall this article but it didn't seem too interesting.
Thanks for the info!

Best/Liam