Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 67

Thread: Which (high end) graphics card to buy?

  1. #51
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    You were giving genral statements, and you know it. You post the same thing in every single thread.
    Specific enough for you?



  2. #52
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    32

    Default

    WTF guys, stop fighting!

    I already ordered the GTX 580, so it's pointless to argue. It's true that I will play on Windows, as new games are not really working with WINE.

    The binary drivers will work with the newest _upcoming_ releases on Linux as well (just saying this because the lack of games that require performance is always one argument). FOSS drivers are not an option until GPGPU works. As I stated, I want to learn doing stuff on my GPU as well (-> pyrit).

    In short: I need the binary drivers anyway. So if both of them are a POS, then I'll choose the Nvidia one this time, as I already had the ATi one.

    The card will hopefully last 2-3 years and then it's time to have a look at the drivers again. Maybe it will be an ATi the next time...

    And 1024x768 is not really common any more... I use 1920x1200.

  3. #53
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    In his case, the nvidia blob is likely the best option.
    The point I was making is that both nvidia and AMD have blobs that offer similar performance. deanjo decided to go raving about how the nvidia blob is [sarcasm]so much better in every single way[/sarcasm] than the AMD OSS driver, and FAILED TO CONSIDER THE AMD BLOB. They both suffer from the same major issues, which are primarily a function of ***being a blob***.

    My point in bringing up the OSS driver wasn't to suggest that it was 10 times faster than the nvidia blob (which seems to be deanjo's only argument), but that it has a tendency to... work while offering more than adequate performance for the VAST VAST VAST majority of uses. No questions asked, you just drop in your favorite distro's install disk, and it works.

    Well at some point, everybody grows up and the GAMES seem less important. When that moment arrives, it is very nice NOT to have to screw with blobs. Its nice to have the thing *just work*. And then of course, serious gamers really don't use linux to begin with due to lack of availability of recent popular games.... so a serious gamer will end up frustrated with the gaming aspect of Linux anyway, use some other system for playing games, and want the Linux side to **just work**.

  4. #54
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    2,117

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spitfire View Post
    WTF guys, stop fighting!

    I already ordered the GTX 580, so it's pointless to argue. It's true that I will play on Windows, as new games are not really working with WINE.

    The binary drivers will work with the newest _upcoming_ releases on Linux as well (just saying this because the lack of games that require performance is always one argument). FOSS drivers are not an option until GPGPU works. As I stated, I want to learn doing stuff on my GPU as well (-> pyrit).

    In short: I need the binary drivers anyway. So if both of them are a POS, then I'll choose the Nvidia one this time, as I already had the ATi one.

    The card will hopefully last 2-3 years and then it's time to have a look at the drivers again. Maybe it will be an ATi the next time...

    And 1024x768 is not really common any more... I use 1920x1200.
    The fighting has nothing to do with you any more... its about abuse of power. Sorry that your thread got hijacked for this childishness.

    Question for you..... what's an "ATi"?
    (yeah, yeah.... FYI: They don't exist any more. Its all AMD now, even in marketing literature, the hardware is called "AMD Radeon". They had to shed the bad name.)

  5. #55
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    68

    Default

    Hi Yall & kudos deanjo,

    for correcting the wall of BS from the zealots of dogma. I find all the ATI/AMD astroturfing hereabouts a dishonest turn off.

    I love my EVGA GTX 570 and it's drivers. To all the people on the fence, go with nVidia, cause the sell you hardware that is supported proper in Tux. ATI/AMD sell gfx cards, that have nice hardware & trash drivers that have more bugs than a Tibetan Buddhist group, monitored by the CCP.

    Keep it up Mr D.

    GreekGeek :-)

  6. #56
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GreekGeek View Post
    Hi Yall & kudos deanjo,

    for correcting the wall of BS from the zealots of dogma. I find all the ATI/AMD astroturfing hereabouts a dishonest turn off.

    I love my EVGA GTX 570 and it's drivers. To all the people on the fence, go with nVidia, cause the sell you hardware that is supported proper in Tux. ATI/AMD sell gfx cards, that have nice hardware & trash drivers that have more bugs than a Tibetan Buddhist group, monitored by the CCP.

    Keep it up Mr D.

    GreekGeek :-)
    I think you should practice what you preach there....
    But more to the point, and it's about time I asked this again (as I do every so often in threads): what bugs with AMD's drivers? Really, point out some examples. We'll go with the blobs. Let's also make it from this year, because some obscure bug from 3 years ago doesn't count.
    AMD's drivers aren't as bad as you make them out to be. Or if you want to go that way, then nvidia's drivers are equally as trash.

  7. #57
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,416

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Mesa is generic band aid solution. While it may be the "linux way" it is not necessarily the "proper" way of supporting the hardware itself given the fact that effectively neuters the cards capability on features that are present in the hardware.
    What version does OSX support? The latest version I was able to find referenced at developer.apple.com seemed to be 2.1. Is that right?

  8. #58
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by liam View Post
    What version does OSX support? The latest version I was able to find referenced at developer.apple.com seemed to be 2.1. Is that right?
    That can't be right. That would mean that nvidia gives you a crippled product with no support, and that the binary drivers are even inferior to the FLOSS ones, and we all know that this is not true.

  9. #59
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,584

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pingufunkybeat View Post
    That can't be right. That would mean that nvidia gives you a crippled product with no support, and that the binary drivers are even inferior to the FLOSS ones, and we all know that this is not true.
    It is actually Apple that dictates the level of openGL and with 10.7 it supports 3.2 for applications using the forward context API.

  10. #60
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,929

    Default

    Ah, they dictate.

    I thought it was a band-aid solution, and not the "proper" way of supporting the hardware itself given the fact that [it] effectively neuters the cards capability on features that are present in the hardware.

    But Apple dictates, that changes everything. Apple users do not look for droids, and that's OK!



    Here's the interesting question: If I install Linux + Mesa on a Mac, is it OK not to need OpenGL4, and will then FLOSS drivers become great, and the right way to do things???
    Last edited by pingufunkybeat; 06-15-2011 at 09:29 AM.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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