PDA

View Full Version : ATI or Nvidia



darkksyde
October 30th, 2009, 03:55 PM
Hey guys, whats everyones opinion on the better graphics card for performance and linux support.

NightwishFan
October 30th, 2009, 03:59 PM
I have only used Nvidia cards, I would have to say I am very happy with the performance of the proprietary drivers. In the future I am going to use Intel cards though.

Open source Nvidia Nv driver is very basic, and no 3d support.

There is a project to get 2d acceleration and 3d support for nvidia in open source. It is called Nouveau, and it already has good 2d support. If that project gets off the ground well I may stick with Nvidia cards.

juanvdb
October 30th, 2009, 03:59 PM
After ATI decided to drop their development and Linux support of their older cards I would recommend Nvidia. I had a Radeon X1900 and could not get the drivers to work on the new releases of Ubuntu without some hacking. I replaced it with a Nvidia card since my 6 year old Nvidia card in my old PC was still supported in Linux.

Paul41
October 30th, 2009, 04:07 PM
I have never had a problem with Nvidia. I was given a computer with a ATI card and never could get it to work so I gave up.

Xbehave
October 30th, 2009, 04:09 PM
ATI have better open source offerings
Nvidia have better closed offerings

Apart from people who care about open source there are a few other advantages to using ATIs open drivers:

Support for kms (and eventually rootless X) (nvidia may catch up)
Always works with current kernels (nvidia are pretty good though)
Out of the box support
Better xrandr and hal configuration support
In my experience more stability (I haven't used nvidia for years so nvidia might be stable now)


I voted for ATI because of 5, however for now the nvidia drivers are faster.

cascade9
October 30th, 2009, 04:20 PM
Aww, wheres the Martox option? :D

Nerd King
October 30th, 2009, 04:29 PM
I use both. NVidia has been solid as a rock for me all the way through, with the 180 drivers being a big breakthrough for me, making gaming in Wine really feasible on my system. AMD proprietary drivers have come on leaps and bounds, and while it still trips up with game+compiz sometimes it's getting very close. The open-source ATI drivers are wonderful in 2D, better than the ATI ones, and 3D is on the way. I'm inclined to say that ATI is going to be very very good within 12 months judging by the pace I've witnessed over the last year or so. Your choice.

JDShu
October 30th, 2009, 04:38 PM
At exactly this moment, nvidia proprietary drivers are the best. Having said that, when I get a new computer I'm going with ATI... for the future.

SuperSonic4
October 30th, 2009, 04:43 PM
nvidia for the foreseeable future.

gn2
October 30th, 2009, 04:57 PM
I will never buy ATI again after a very bad experience of trying (and failing) to get a Radeon 8500 A-I-W working in Xp.

dstarzfn72
October 30th, 2009, 05:01 PM
I am currently using an ATI card but next time I buy it will be Nvidia. I have had tons of problems trying to get ATI to work with several different distros. The only ones I can get it to work on are Ubuntu and Mint. Slackware wanted nothing to do with it and after several days of trying I just gave up.

Simian Man
October 30th, 2009, 05:04 PM
Nvidia of course. I'm actually surprised ATI got as many votes as it did. The last poll I saw on a Linux forum was on the order of 50:1 for Nvidia.


There is a project to get 2d acceleration and 3d support for nvidia in open source. It is called Nouveau, and it already has good 2d support. If that project gets off the ground well I may stick with Nvidia cards.

I'm on Fedora 12 and am actually quite impressed with the Nouveau progress. I am running the Xfwm compositor with shadows and transparency and everything is very smooth and snappy. Not to mention the fast and pretty Plymouth boot. Running 3D games is still a no-go, but it's already way better than the old nv drivers at this point.

gradinaruvasile
October 30th, 2009, 05:15 PM
ATI have better open source offerings
Nvidia have better closed offerings

Apart from people who care about open source there are a few other advantages to using ATIs open drivers:

Support for kms (and eventually rootless X) (nvidia may catch up)
Always works with current kernels (nvidia are pretty good though)
Out of the box support
Better xrandr and hal configuration support
In my experience more stability (I haven't used nvidia for years so nvidia might be stable now)


I voted for ATI because of 5, however for now the nvidia drivers are faster.

I dont know what cards u use, but i used Ubuntu (7.10-9.04) with Intel, Ati and Nvidia cards and i have to say Nvidia (closed source drivers) is FAR ahead of the others performance and stability wise.
Maybe the very old (Ati 7000/9000 series old) Atis are stable enough (i have a laptop with Mobility 7500 card, it is slow but stable) but here at work we have a X1300 and X1600 on Ubuntu 9.04 and they are unstable (crashing X at times) compared to a nvidia Quadro NVS 285 i have on my comp here;
i had 60 days uptime (until we had a power outage) and i did everything from watching movies, playing games and running Compiz on it (dual monitor setup). My X crashed once in this period (not talking about Compiz-only crashes, cause those dont really affect productivity if u use the fusion-icon).
At home i have a GeForce 7600 GS card that is rock stable and even my built-in 8200 is performing wery well.
I am really fan of open source stuff and drivers, but IMO at this time Ati's radeon is not really an option for some1 who wants performance and stability.

Dimitriid
October 30th, 2009, 05:16 PM
Honestly, after hearing a whole bunch about ATI's new line of cards the only thing I saw was a bunch of "out of stock" and "backordered" nearly everywhere.

To me this tells me that they decided to launch the products before good enough yields were there on manufacturing to try to gain some ground on Nvidia. Thats a bad move in my opinion, specially since the specs that Nvidia are promising on their new line are quite impressive.

So Linux drivers are still better with Nvidia cards, several of the card manufacturers I trust the most ( BFG, EVGA, etc ) work with nvidia cards, I think it was insecure of ATI to rush the new line before availability was there, so ATI might not be able to come on top this round-generation if you ask me, unless Nvidia releases a hugely underwhelming line ( which they have in the past )

Dimitriid
October 30th, 2009, 05:20 PM
Aww, wheres the Martox option? :D

Meh, I want an option for my Voodoo Extreme! :popcorn:

Firestem4
October 30th, 2009, 05:27 PM
I'm an ATI Fanboy and it goes against my better judgement to say, but Nvidia definitely has better driver support for Linux. ATI should be catching up soon though.

(My desktop has an X1950 and my laptop an nvidia 8600M GS)

CharmyBee
October 30th, 2009, 05:30 PM
ATI all the way.
nVidia's business practices are nasty, and their marketing is elitist.

Kazade
October 30th, 2009, 05:35 PM
ATI.

Simply because Nvidia doesn't intend to even release specifications for the Nouveau guys whereas AMD have done and will continue to.

The open source ATI drivers are improving at an incredible rate now and the closed ATI driver is quite stable for me now. (Incidentally, the nvidia driver corrupts text when Compiz is enabled on my laptop and on my girlfriend's nvidia based laptop I have to specify an EDID dump file in xorg.conf to get a fullscreen resolution).

Xbehave
October 30th, 2009, 05:48 PM
I dont know what cards u use, but i used Ubuntu (7.10-9.04) with Intel, Ati and Nvidia cards and i have to say Nvidia (closed source drivers) is FAR ahead of the others performance and stability wise.
As my main desktop (roughly speaking, not been on ubuntu all the time)
6(ish)-7.04 (nvidia) [nvidia drivers would crash]
7.10-8.04 (intel) [never crashed, card was too slow for compiz]
8.10-now (ati open source drivers) [only crashed in F11 with a kms bug, drivers too slow for compiz]


here at work we have a X1300 and X1600 on Ubuntu 9.04 and they are unstable (crashing X at times)flgrx or radeon? I've only had problems with radeon+kms


not talking about Compiz-only crashes, cause those dont really affect productivity if u use the fusion-icon
I don't use compiz anymore (time under intel taught me i didn't need it), so I can't argue about the stability of 3d (apparently compiz didn't work at a good speed until 9.10 anyway)


Ati's radeon is not really an option for some1 who wants performance and stability.
For somebody who wants stability>powersaving>performance, then the radeon drivers really are!

JDShu
October 30th, 2009, 06:05 PM
Nvidia of course. I'm actually surprised ATI got as many votes as it did. The last poll I saw on a Linux forum was on the order of 50:1 for Nvidia.


Heh, could be a testament to the apparently fast improvement in the ati drivers since then.

Simian Man
October 30th, 2009, 06:09 PM
Heh, could be a testament to the apparently fast improvement in the ati drivers since then.

That's true, I will have to some research next time I buy a graphics card apparently!

ssri
October 31st, 2009, 09:49 AM
wow, a lot of misinformation in this thread. I'll make it easy for everyone.

Here are the features covered in the opensource radeon(hd) drivers:

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

If any of these features are not up to your standards, you are not blind to ideology and want something that just works, then go with nvidia.

For example, powersaving features in the radeon are nowhere near ready, unlike what one poster mentioned earlier. Apparently, AMD's inhouse devs won't work on it until 3D features are more mature.

http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showthread.php?t=19437&highlight=power

So, please do not listen to the radeon cheerleaders in this thread. Go to phoronix and read/search ati's opensource thread to get the latest news from the radeon devs themselves.

handy
October 31st, 2009, 12:54 PM
I run both nVidia & ATi GPUs. Up until roughly 4 months or so ago I would always recommend nVidia. Since then I'm all for AMD/ATi, due to the changes that have been & will continue to be implemented the GNU/FOSS Linux system.

Here is a rough roadmap cut from a thread in the Arch forums, it's timings are mostly guesstimates but it gives a good general idea of what's going on:


1) Kernel mode setting on <R500 (Linux Kernel 2.6.31/Mesa 7.6) : DONE
2) Κernel mode setting and 3D on >R500 (Linux Kernel 2.6.32 / Mesa 7.7) : Done by January 2010

(and in the future)

3) 2D support for R8xx (still no specifications) : Maybe March 2010
4) 3D support for R600/R700 ) (it's going to happen in .32) : By January 2010
5) Hardware calls through KMS and AtomBIOS : By March or maybe January 2010
6) Powersaving through KMS and on the fly switching on/off (there are patches waiting for going on drm-2.6) : By March/April/May we are gonna have sufficient powersaving through KMS for <R5xx
7) Gallium3D 3d/networking integration (no idea how it's going to happen)
8) Leaving support for radeon and radeonhd, and have 3D without them. I don't know how it's going to happen, but it's underway. : Maybe by the end of 2010, or by the first months of 2011
9) KMS and 3D support για R8xx: By the end of 2010, or earlier if the code is not gonna be so much different.


Note: Except for 1 and 2, all the other dates are personal estimations.

Last edited by flamelab (2009-09-18 04:11:26)
__________________

By the way, I'm not an AMD/ATi cheerleader, I'm a FOSS cheerleader. :)

afeasfaerw23231233
October 31st, 2009, 05:33 PM
Aww, wheres the Martox option? :D
Matrox only produces very professional 2D cards right?


I have only used Nvidia cards, I would have to say I am very happy with the performance of the proprietary drivers. In the future I am going to use Intel cards though.
...


Has Intel ever made any dedicated graphic cards? Aren't those just IGP?

CharmyBee
October 31st, 2009, 05:44 PM
Has Intel ever made any dedicated graphic cards?
Intel i740?

cascade9
October 31st, 2009, 05:59 PM
Matrox only produces very professional 2D cards right?

Has Intel ever made any dedicated graphic cards? Aren't those just IGP?

Well, sort of on Matrox. They still make G550s- 3D support, hardware T&L, but they are amazingly expensive. The last time they tried to make a consumer level card was the Parhelia, but it was typical of Matrox, great image quality, lots of $$$, overshadowed by the ATI and Vidia cards of the time.

@ CharmyBee- bingo! that was the last time Intel released a standalone card. They are working on Larrabee though-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larrabee_(GPU)

apocalypse80
October 31st, 2009, 06:09 PM
There's actually a comparison?

I expect certain basic things from a modern graphics card.
3D acceleration, HD video decoding, working power management (so it doesn't howl like a banshee).
The FOSS ati driver does *NONE* of the above for newer ati cards.
FGLRX can be coerced (with hacks and workarounds and patched xservers) to do 3D and power management - again for newer ati cards.

What of the above sounds good?

Nvidia all the way.
Actually Working >>> all.

handy
November 1st, 2009, 12:20 AM
Patience & foresight, seem to be things that we develop as we age... ;)

Grifulkin
November 1st, 2009, 01:01 AM
ATI/AMD all the way, thats my opinion though.

xuCGC002
November 1st, 2009, 01:09 AM
Aww, wheres the Martox option? :D

Matrox? I'm still looking for the 3DFX button for my laptop!

Anywho, from what I've heard, and from what I've used (I have a Geforce4), nVIDIA seems to be better.

NightwishFan
November 1st, 2009, 11:58 AM
Nvidia of course. I'm actually surprised ATI got as many votes as it did. The last poll I saw on a Linux forum was on the order of 50:1 for Nvidia.



I'm on Fedora 12 and am actually quite impressed with the Nouveau progress. I am running the Xfwm compositor with shadows and transparency and everything is very smooth and snappy. Not to mention the fast and pretty Plymouth boot. Running 3D games is still a no-go, but it's already way better than the old nv drivers at this point.

That is good news. I read that NVIDIA will neither help nor hinder the progress of Nouveau, but they are "impressed" with its progress. I believe I read that in this article:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=nvidia_qa_linux&num=1

mivo
November 1st, 2009, 12:38 PM
I haven't made particularly good experiences with ATI cards over quite a few years, both in Linux and Windows. My last few cards were all Nvidia ones, and while one of my old desktops still has an ATI card (might replace it with a 8400 GTS since I have a spare one from upgrading another machine), I don't plan on buying an ATI card in the forseeable future.

ATI would have to offer significantly more powerful cards at the same price as Nvidia (or the same performance for significantly less money) to get me back as a customer.

CharmyBee
November 1st, 2009, 04:45 PM
Matrox? I'm still looking for the 3DFX button for my laptop!
Still waiting for acceleration features to be committed in the Trident driver...

DaveHi
November 1st, 2009, 06:21 PM
Nvidia for me. Never had a problem with any of their drivers.

Not a Gamer but Nouveau sounds interesting.

cement_head
November 12th, 2009, 03:17 AM
The new ATI drivers (opensource) are actually quite good. In approximately six months they will overtake the nVIDIA cars bcs the card info is open.

We just have to be patient and help out with bug reports.

:popcorn:

mivo
November 12th, 2009, 04:25 PM
The new ATI drivers (opensource) are actually quite good. In approximately six months they will overtake the nVIDIA cars bcs the card info is open.

Not even in a year will they be close to Nvidia's drivers when it comes to gaming.

kio_http
November 12th, 2009, 04:30 PM
Graphics by NVIDIA!

Grenage
November 12th, 2009, 04:38 PM
In each of my Linux machines I started off with an ATI card, and ended up replacing it with an Nvidia card within 2 months; their drivers are bloody terrible. When the new (and much hailed) drivers appeared a while ago, I tried an ATI card again; it wasn't much of an improvement.

cement_head
November 12th, 2009, 04:44 PM
Not even in a year will they be close to Nvidia's drivers when it comes to gaming.

Well, they've just gotten some more cash. I disagree - plus I'd rather have open source drivers - less hassle in the long run.

Check it out:

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

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/technology/companies/13chip.html

- CH ;)

mivo
November 12th, 2009, 06:07 PM
The Nvidia drivers are really good for gaming, and for advanced graphical stuff, and they are here right now, working and performing well. The ATI open source drivers, currently, don't come anywhere close. Do they support any 3D yet at all? So, no doubt, they will be better than now in half a year, but I really doubt that they will be as good as Nvidia's drivers in half a year, or really, any time soon, for gaming and more demanding graphical uses.

I don't doubt that the open source ATI drivers will eventually perform really nicely, but we disagree on the timeframe. :) Also, if he is buying a new computer now, it seems counter-productive to go with an ATI card and deal with inferior performance and various issues for half a year or longer.

I recently bought a GTS 250 and I'm very happy with it. If in 2-3 years the open source ATI drivers are as good or better than Nvidia's offerings, I'll go with an ATI card (provided the cards' price/performance ratio is comparable -- right now I feel Nvidia beats ATI even in that area).

I agree that open source drivers are desirable, for cards of both ATI and Nvidia.

Kazade
November 12th, 2009, 06:24 PM
It basically comes down to this: choose Nvidia and get a closed source driver that works NOW (excluding xrandr support!), but support a company that doesn't help the open source devs. Or choose ATI/AMD and get a card that works well (but maybe not as good as NV) with the closed driver, usable with the OSS driver (which will work great in the long term) and support an OSS friendly company.

Incidentally, I've suffered more problems with the closed source Nvidia driver than the closed source AMD driver.. YMMV.

Slug71
November 12th, 2009, 06:26 PM
For me, i think nVidia is and always has been better overall and in general.

I think nVidia will eventually support help Nouveau.

uberdonkey5
November 12th, 2009, 07:06 PM
not sure if AVI is better, but Nvidia appears to be better supported

cement_head
November 12th, 2009, 07:26 PM
The Nvidia drivers are really good for gaming, and for advanced graphical stuff, and they are here right now, working and performing well. The ATI open source drivers, currently, don't come anywhere close. Do they support any 3D yet at all?

Yes. They do. I can play Urban Terror at full screen/res with no problems using and R500 series card (35~70 fps). That's an OpenGL application.

- CH

ssri
November 13th, 2009, 05:46 AM
The new ATI drivers (opensource) are actually quite good. In approximately six months they will overtake the nVIDIA cars bcs the card info is open.

We just have to be patient and help out with bug reports.

:popcorn:

If your opinion is regarding performance, then the guys at AMD/ATI would beg to differ

http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showpost.php?p=97232&postcount=19

Exodist
November 13th, 2009, 06:09 AM
What is a better Graphics Card (chipset)?

IS this question for Quality or Performance?

Quality I go ATI.
Performance nVidia still pulls ahead. IMHO

wolfdale
November 13th, 2009, 06:12 AM
I had a horrible time getting my 4850 (ATI) card to work with fglrx, compiz didn't work, video tearing during movies, power saving mode didn't work. I gave up, sold my ATI card on ebay and bought a 9800gt NVIDIA card and I haven't had a problem since.

I will be sticking with NVIDIA for a long, long time.

Guilden_NL
November 13th, 2009, 06:12 AM
ATI/AMD falsely marketed themselves as Open Source supporters. Well yeah if you consider that also means a sweaty, worn out athletic undergarment. ATI walked away from supporting Linux drivers for cards that were less than a year old.

End of business for me - two new systems/yr is my norm and nothing will have ATI in it in the future. And because AMD owns ATI, same goes for my 15+ yr AMD relationship. See ya! Buh Bye!):P

pwnst*r
November 13th, 2009, 06:16 AM
i used nvidia ever since i can remember, but when i built my fairly recent gaming rig, i went with an ATI Radeon 4870x2, which was a beast of a card..when it worked. had a hardware problem and straight away i returned it and went back to Nvidia and purchased a GTX285. LOVE it.

Exodist
November 13th, 2009, 06:19 AM
I had a horrible time getting my 4850 (ATI) card to work with fglrx, compiz didn't work, video tearing during movies, power saving mode didn't work. I gave up, sold my ATI card on ebay and bought a 9800gt NVIDIA card and I haven't had a problem since.

I will be sticking with NVIDIA for a long, long time.

My ATI 4850HD works flawlessly.
I recommend you to use the 9.10 catalyst drivers from AMDs website.

pwnst*r
November 13th, 2009, 06:25 AM
My ATI 4850HD works flawlessly.
I recommend you to use the 9.10 catalyst drivers from AMDs website.

a little late.

cement_head
November 13th, 2009, 01:38 PM
If your opinion is regarding performance, then the guys at AMD/ATI would beg to differ

http://www.phoronix.com/forums/showpost.php?p=97232&postcount=19

Interesting comment. Well, I'm looking forward to the Gallium3D implimentation. I don't use the extreme capabilities of my card - but nVIDIA has been doing this longer, so they are better right now. I think ATI's approach to better hardware integration (not software workarounds) are a better approach. I'm really to happy to see this lawsuit settled. AMD chips have always been much better & cheaper.

- CH

redfoxkt
November 13th, 2009, 01:56 PM
Hey guys, whats everyones opinion on the better graphics card for performance and linux support.

i would say Nvidia i have never had an issue with any of their cards and when i had ATI i had a lot of problems with 2 of their cards..im using a Nvidia 9800 GTX+ and have never had any problems only problems i had was caused from windows being the S##ty OS it is. plus i hear nvidia has better benchmarks

mivo
November 13th, 2009, 02:42 PM
only problems i had was caused from windows being the S##ty OS it is.

The error was between the chair and the keyboard. Both Nvidia and (especially) ATI cards are better supported in Windows.

pwnst*r
November 13th, 2009, 03:24 PM
The error was between the chair and the keyboard. Both Nvidia and (especially) ATI cards are better supported in Windows.

^^i support this statement in its entirety.

cement_head
November 13th, 2009, 03:37 PM
The error was between the chair and the keyboard. Both Nvidia and (especially) ATI cards are better supported in Windows.

oh so wrong, oh so wrong....

mivo
November 13th, 2009, 03:55 PM
oh so wrong, oh so wrong....

Please explain in what ways Nvidia and ATI cards are better supported in Linux than in Windows. Name the features, link me to the benchmarks. The Linux ATI drivers don't even let you control the fan speed. That is fun with a loud card like, say, the X700. :)

Chame_Wizard
November 13th, 2009, 04:03 PM
Although ATI sucks sometimes,it never gave me real problems.:popcorn:

cement_head
November 13th, 2009, 04:03 PM
Please explain in what ways Nvidia and ATI cards are better supported in Linux than in Windows. Name the features, link me to the benchmarks. The Linux ATI drivers don't even let you control the fan speed. That is fun with a loud card like, say, the X700. :)

http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6281055297.html

http://www.blender.org/download/get-blender/

Paqman
November 13th, 2009, 04:17 PM
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6281055297.html

http://www.blender.org/download/get-blender/

Er, those links don't actually support your point.

pwnst*r
November 13th, 2009, 05:02 PM
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6281055297.html

http://www.blender.org/download/get-blender/

lol, AND?

RabbitWho
November 13th, 2009, 05:31 PM
Nvidia + laptop = broken laptop

But I'm sure in a computer without overheating problems they're lovely-jubbly.

khelben1979
November 15th, 2009, 08:22 PM
My vote went for nVidia, but I still prefer ATi myself. I still remember my ATi Radeon 9800 XT video card working excellent with Linux 5 years ago.

What's more important is if the video card has a good cooler or not.

Guilden_NL
November 18th, 2009, 02:56 AM
Nvidia + laptop = broken laptop



ATI + 11 month old laptop + Current Linux w/xorg-xserver 1.6 = broken nearly new laptop

ATI = Garbage support for Open Source

Ylon
November 25th, 2009, 10:41 PM
Nvidia proprietary driver are, actually, one of the most pupular (and successful) proprietary driver for Linux.

For myself I've to admit that nvidia driver had always gave me less problem....but, come on!



At the last fgldriver are update release every month!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fglrx

I can't test the last one (I've only legacy radeon), but after so many years of constant work they didn't manage do have decent support for linux?

Any ubuntu (with a most recent ATI board) user can confirm that their last driver are still such ******?

SR_ELPIRATA
November 25th, 2009, 10:59 PM
I voted for Nvidia because in my experience, running with Ubuntu, it has always been more trouble free than ATI. With that said, I currently dont own any Nvidia cards, I'm using this mobo with ATI onboard mostly becuase it had HDMI onboard, and right now I'm quite happy with it.

But one thing I miss doing problem free is gaming, and ATI can't (atm I guess) play as nvidia does on this.

ELP

speedwell68
November 25th, 2009, 11:17 PM
I have an ATI in my laptop and it has been a PITA since Edgy 6.10. I can get it to work, but it is always a fight. The Nvidia in my desktop always works flawlessly.

Ylon
November 26th, 2009, 02:18 PM
I am still curious to ear feedback from user that can actually use latest ATI driver (a recent videoboard).

I wouldn't be fair if we judge just by the past work.

zagz
November 26th, 2009, 02:20 PM
ATI never worked in linux ime.

LinuxFanBoi
November 26th, 2009, 05:47 PM
I've been drinking so if I sound line an ***, that's why.

I had an an ATI X1950 GT from sapphire and when J/J came out the X.org that was releases with it broke my driver. When I investigated, I discovered that ATI's Linux guy had up and quit. I sent them an e-mail explaining that I had only owned the X1950 GT for about a year before they had dropped Linux support for those cards and that support for such a short period of time was unacceptable. If their goal was to alienate their Linux users, they succeeded. Needless to say I was upset. Now, I vote with my wallet. I was loyal to ATI for about a decade and they betrayed me. So **** ATI I go with nVidia just to spite ATI. They left me hanging when I needed them the most.

nVidia will now benefit from my business and I can only hope that they benefit from ATI's complete abandonment of their Linux users. My only wish is that ATI's Linux community was as influential as their windows users and that their decision would put them out of business, but alas, they only give a damn about their windows people.

Plus, the WoW mini map works on Linux if you have an nVidia card yet, ATI could care less if their product is poorly supported here. so I could care less to give them my business. **** them.

Psumi
November 26th, 2009, 06:58 PM
I have had nothing but problems with ATI on linux. Though recently, it has gotten better. Someone resolved the ATI HD3200 issue where compiz would literally freeze for a few seconds due to intensity of xorg CPU usage.

Gateway users should rejoice thanks to that. So now I swear by nvidia, but I wish gtk-recordmydesktop would not have graphical glitches because of it.

repilce
December 8th, 2009, 01:27 AM
I had to vote for ati for various reasons that have been stated already. I had been a nvidia fan boy for a long time, until the purchase of my 4870, Pre HD series it was my cup of choice.

LinuxFanBoi
December 8th, 2009, 01:50 AM
oops, looks like I said the same thing twice, So disregard this post.

dragos240
December 8th, 2009, 01:53 AM
Nvidia. The only downside to the open source drivers is that it lacks 3D support. I hope these drivers get better, I hate using (MOST) proprietary software.

Sahkolihaa
December 8th, 2009, 09:08 AM
NVIDIA due to a closed-source driver that actually works.

I've tested an ATI HD3850 256MB in Xubuntu and Second Life using the closed-source driver. The performance? Absolutely terrible. 10 FPS when Windows was giving 20-30 shows some major issues, not to mention anti-aliasing wouldn't even enable.

On a GeForce 9800GT, Second Life ran at a wonderful 40-50 FPS with anti-aliasing enabled, and I could also use transparency and blur at the same time on Compiz.

Until a decent driver comes out for ATI, it's NVIDIA all the way for me.

PurposeOfReason
December 8th, 2009, 09:13 AM
Better card - ATI
Better linux drivers (and drivers in general) - Nvidia

But because the only graphical intense thing I do is gaming, which is on windows, then it is ATI for me.

SLEEPER_V
December 8th, 2009, 09:15 AM
havent had a problem with my ati radeon hd 4770 at all.

blueturtl
December 8th, 2009, 12:56 PM
I used to be for nVidia strictly, but now that AMD has bought ATi and open-sourced their video driver development I have turned to the dark side. It's not just for ideological reasons either:

I recently swapped my trusty Matrox Millennium G400 for an ATi Radeon 9200 (so that I could have some 3D capability).

With Ubuntu Karmic I now have full 3D working without touching any configuration options! I can run Compiz and I can play Unreal Tournament at the same time! No crashes, no glitches on screen!

Hooray for AMD/ATi!

beerguzzler
December 8th, 2009, 01:46 PM
I went with NVidia purely because no matter what I do I cannot rid my mediacentre of that bloody awful ATI flicker when watching any media.

Picture quality, I'd go with ATI but the flicker just gets on ya nerves and eradicates any quality advantages.

SunnyRabbiera
December 8th, 2009, 02:11 PM
NVidia overall, because of its co operation with linux compared to ATI, even intel works better then ATI

ophion
December 8th, 2009, 02:14 PM
I use open source drivers, so I choose ATI.

Ylon
December 8th, 2009, 02:20 PM
My only wish is that ATI's Linux community was as influential as their windows users and that their decision would put them out of business, but alas, they only give a damn about their windows people.


To tell the truth, my only wish is that ATI get back such seriously on work with Linux. And with this good work, ATI will be again able to drag many sells among Linux users.
Yeah, it's just a 1% (but we're talking about World Share).. but is a 1% that double (1% more for you, 1% less for competitors): ATI need to get some courage and start be entrepreneur.

You can't hope to pass the nvidia business just by following them when they (nvidia) lead the race. You had to change the rule, and linux can help them (as already helped with Asus's firsts netbook...too bad for the betray with windowsxp later <_<" )


Allowing better OpenSource for their hardware, challenge nvidia physix with OpenSource project Bullet, they are already doing this; just need to be more... entrepreneur.


I prefer have one more (good) challenger to choice, than have just one that make a fair job for you.

Ylon
December 8th, 2009, 02:26 PM
I use open source drivers, so I choose ATI.

That's already a merit for ATI, but we must remember that they..partially support opensource for their HW.

After so many efforts the linux communty was able to make a really good job with, even that little, offered by ATI.
If they were more courageous and support completely the OpenSource.. now, the "effort to fix" were substituted with "effort to improve".. and ATI boards were way to fast on Linux in a way that Windows user wouldn't be never able to dream about, even with Nvidia! :KS



But the fear that "Improving the Old" mean "No more buy for the new product", they prefer to stay quietly behind nVidia...

Nerd King
December 8th, 2009, 04:31 PM
Ok. I've been using NVIDIA on my desktop and ATI on my laptop since 8.04.

1. The NVIDIA card works perfect with proprietary drivers and my games run just fine in Wine. At present, if the rest of your hardware plays nice with your present kernel, NVIDIA is the way to go.
However... I'm stuck with whatever kernel Ubuntu gives me. It's proprietary so it won't play nice with new kernels.
2. The ATI proprietary drivers have improved immensely over the last 18 months and have got to a point where WINE gaming is fine as long as you turn off Compiz.
3. I'm now on ATI open-source and have 3D. Linux 3D games run just fine. Compiz is fine. World Of Goo is fine. Wine 3d, not quite there yet. To do this I went to the .32 kernel and added xorg-edgers to get bleeding edge stuff.

Now on the kernel bit from point 1. I needed a newer kernel as .30 and .31 don't play nice with my wireless. Proprietary drivers aren't working with it yet. Had I gone closed-source I'd not have got my wireless to stop locking up my laptop, so the open-source bit is important. It means it'll work with anything.

So.. buying for now, NVIDIA is the way if your other hardware doesn't need anything special in the kernel. Buying for the future, ATI. I've seen MASSIVE progress in the last 18 months from unusable junk to powerful and useful, don't expect that to slow down.

MaindotC
December 8th, 2009, 04:40 PM
I just got the nVidia card listed in my sig and after installing the proprietary driver it appears that nVidia is miles ahead of ATI for *nix integration. I still have an ATI x850 on my other machine and I never had any problems with it, but what you can do with the nVidia software versus what was available in the ATI software doesn't even compare. Now, maybe that's b/c the x850 is an older card and perhaps if I got a newer ATI card it would have a lot more features, but from a non-technical, non-developer, user standpoint the nVidia looks to be a lot better supported.

mivo
December 8th, 2009, 06:15 PM
However... I'm stuck with whatever kernel Ubuntu gives me. It's proprietary so it won't play nice with new kernels.

You can compile your own kernel even in Ubuntu, and the Nvidia drivers do work well with new kernels (my Arch box also has an Nvidia card and Arch is one of the most current distros: statistics here -> http://oswatershed.org/). There was an issue with Xorg 1.7 (Ubuntu is still using the 1.6 line) which Nvidia fixed within a short time by releasing updated drivers. Ubuntu isn't bleeding edge, so you never have to worry about this, unless you have an ATI card ;). (ATI stopped support for legacy cards, and that partly includes cards that were still sold a year ago.)

Edit: I saw you mentioned .32, and I can't comment on that. Arch uses 2.6.31.6, which I consider new, too. I haven't tried .32, and no pressing need for it, so no experience about the drivers.

Nerd King
December 9th, 2009, 06:34 AM
I just got the nVidia card listed in my sig and after installing the proprietary driver it appears that nVidia is miles ahead of ATI for *nix integration. I still have an ATI x850 on my other machine and I never had any problems with it, but what you can do with the nVidia software versus what was available in the ATI software doesn't even compare. Now, maybe that's b/c the x850 is an older card and perhaps if I got a newer ATI card it would have a lot more features, but from a non-technical, non-developer, user standpoint the nVidia looks to be a lot better supported.
You're comparing apples and oranges here really. An old ATI card, not properly supported anymore, vs a newish card that's powerful enough for GTA4?

On a newer card you'll be able to use a really decent driver, either the vastly improved proprietary ones (they no longer support your old ATI card) or the open driver. Not sure if the open driver works on older hardware mind. I don't have anything to hand to test it on.

Mivo, I know you can compile your own kernel but honestly I'm too chicken to try that! Agreed Ubuntu's not bleeding edge, but I like to run mine like it is! Also, sometimes you do need bleeding edge due to circumstances like what happened with me and kernels 30 and 31. 32 is a thing of beauty! That's why proprietary drivers are a pain. However, if NVIDIA were that quick then that's excellent, my NVIDIA at home is superb so really we're in a good position of having 2 good options now :)

MaindotC
December 9th, 2009, 08:01 AM
You're comparing apples and oranges here really. An old ATI card, not properly supported anymore, vs a newish card that's powerful enough for GTA4?


I already stated this possibility - please read my post before you comment thoughtlessly.

night-wing
December 9th, 2009, 08:27 AM
Because ATI broke the support for drivers for my x1250, I definitively choose nvidia the next time!

AllRadioisDead
December 9th, 2009, 09:29 AM
Because ATI broke the support for drivers for my x1250, I definitively choose nvidia the next time!
:-({|=

Nerd King
December 9th, 2009, 12:12 PM
I already stated this possibility - please read my post before you comment thoughtlessly.
Not thoughtless. I'm perfectly aware of what you said, I'm also stating that you are in fact correct about that possibility. Next time, your response should be more polite. That was a little rude.

ssri
December 9th, 2009, 05:03 PM
That's already a merit for ATI, but we must remember that they..partially support opensource for their HW.

After so many efforts the linux communty was able to make a really good job with, even that little, offered by ATI.
If they were more courageous and support completely the OpenSource.. now, the "effort to fix" were substituted with "effort to improve"


I am hardly an ATI cheerleader, but your comment above is factually untrue. ATI has released specs and documentation for their older and more recent cards, just what the opensource community has been yelling for during these past few years! Now the community has to put money where their mouth is. If that was not enough, they have a few in-house devs working on the opensource drivers with the community full time (see phoronix boards). Unlike some other people here, I understand that it will take time for the opensource drivers to mature and have most of the features offered by their proprietary counterparts, especially when people are waiting for gallium3D to mature and be merged into the kernel tree before work that I am interested in can move forward. Furthermore, 2D with the opensource drivers already outperforms the proprietary one's. Still, I use the legacy proprietary drivers for my own reasons (easily configurable s-video out, dynamic clocks, etc), but I cannot ignore the fact that I will we able replace it in the future with mature opensource drivers. Hopefully that future will not be too long in coming. Considering I do not play games in wine, I can wait.

realzippy
December 9th, 2009, 05:16 PM
"If that was not enough, they have a few in-house devs working on the opensource drivers with the community full time "

That is called "ineffectual"......

ssri
December 9th, 2009, 07:24 PM
"If that was not enough, they have a few in-house devs working on the opensource drivers with the community full time "

That is called "ineffectual"......

So, are saying that the combined work of ATI devs and the opensource community is ultimately futile? Or that the video driver work for ATI is too complicated, so the result, whichever it is, will ultimately fall short of the proprietary drivers? Hmm, from your opinion, sounds like Nvidia was right to keep their drivers close to their vest as proprietary blobs. Still, it does not matter to me whichever way, so long it works.