New Video Card Recommendation

[user1397]

okay so which make of video card do you think I should get for my next video card, and which version of that make do you recommend?

I only use 3D in ubuntu for America's Army and Google-earth (and some other small-games).
I do play commercial, high-end games on my windows partition (like HL2, COD2, BF2, RTW), so i care about the video card more for windows than linux.
It has to be AGP 8X (I don't have a PCI-Express slot).
Preferably high-end (like 512 MB ram, 16 pixel pipelines).
Please state your opinion on why you're recommending that card and past experiences (if any).

[Johan!]

nVidia, they have better drivers (in linux)

[user1397]

nVidia, they have better drivers (in linux)well that's true, but i've had no problem installing the ati flgrx driver from the repos, it worked perfectly for me.

[arsenic23]

Personally I've been urging people who want a new video card but have no PCIe slot to get another motherboard while they're at it. With currant CPU prices it's really not that much more on your investment.

I could sit here and rant and attempt to explain the reasoning behind this, but it'd be better if you went out and compared relative benchmarks for AGP 7800s and PCIe 7800s (nVidia).


Of course if you don't care about xx% performance hits: I'd recomend Nvidia.

I don't recomend ATI to people running linux because the drivers suck.
AND
I don't recomend ATI to people running windows because the drivers pretty much suck.

I've always felt that ATI made slightly better hardware... I just can't stand the software that runs it. ((( Here's hoping that over the next few years AMD improves on this. )))

------
EDIT:
-----
After re-reading this post I've decided it's pretty sloppy and doesn't really add to the conversation. If I get a moment tomorrow I'll come back here and post some actually facts... but right now, I'ma going to bed.

[user1397]

Personally I've been urging people who want a new video card but have no PCIe slot to get another motherboard while they're at it. With currant CPU prices it's really not that much more on your investment.

I could sit here and rant and attempt to explain the reasoning behind this, but it'd be better if you went out and compared relative benchmarks for AGP 7800s and PCIe 7800s (nVidia).


Of course if you don't care about xx% performance hits: I'd recomend Nvidia.

I don't recomend ATI to people running linux because the drivers suck.
AND
I don't recomend ATI to people running windows because the drivers pretty much suck.

I've always felt that ATI made slightly better hardware... I just can't stand the software that runs it. ((( Here's hoping that over the next few years AMD improves on this. )))thanks for the suggestion, but i don't have enough funds currently for a new motherboard.
so you're saying ati catalst is bad software???

[arsenic23]

thanks for the suggestion, but i don't have enough funds currently for a new motherboard.
so you're saying ati catalst is bad software???

Well.... basically yes. It's not really trash bad, but the nvidia driver is much more stable and too the point. With the nvidia driver you get one install that covers nearly every card you might be running. I've been avoiding ATI when it comes to gaming because I've had to go get specific drivers for specific tasks for specific cards. We set a chum of mine up with a.... ah crap I'm no good with ATI model numbers.... I beleive it was an x850GTO... but I could be off in the number department.

ANYWAY, it was a very good card for the money he put on it, but the drivers were not only buggy, but he had to uninstall and reinstall different versions of them whenever he switched between WoW and Call of Duty 2. ( Of course I'm talking about windows play here. )


What I'm saying is please don't take my 'ATI drivers suck' statement to mean that they're the worst things ever put together. It's just they're not so great when compared to the nvidia driver. ( Also I'm about an inch away from asleep. )

I've never really played with an ATI card in linux. I mostly get paid to work on windowsPCs and Macs and all of my machines at home either don't have a 3d card or are running Nvidia hardware. I do remember I could never get my little portable machine's x400 to even work in a linux environment.... but I was only running that thing while I waited for money to build up for my 7800GT. I have heard alot of complaining about ATI video in linux though. I also know my ATI sata controller is not suported in linux (last time I checked at least).

.... well like I said, sleepy time, this is turning into a very unfocused rant.

[The Noble]

The ATI linux drivers work, but how well is another question. From what I have heard, even middle-budget cards are being beaten by my old Nvidia 420 Go on my laptop, merely by drivers. I have an x700 ATI on my desktop and it did run linux, but a few problems arose. Basically, any Nvidia card will be good, as long as it is in the 6xxx or the 7xxx range, as they are doing very well this generation. If anyone would like to compare, my glxgears -printfps is ~1300.

Remember: glxgears IS NOT A BENCHMARK! I realize this, but it is not bad for very basic statistics.

[majesticturkey]

I have an ATI, and it the fglrx drivers are very fickle. Even so, while the hardware is slightly better, under Linux with the drivers the way they are, my card (a Radeon 9800 Pro) doesn't run that well at all. Nvidia has always supported OpenGL much better than ATI anyway.

[user1397]

okay, after a lot of searching, i have come down to 2 cards, because they're unbelievably cheap for what they are.

an ati radeon x1600PRO: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814241017

an nvidia Geforce 6800XT:http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814141026R

(yep, i love newegg!)

so, considering the two options, which one should i get?

i have a suspicion that most would say the nvidia one off the bat, but check out their specs. the ati one has more pixel pipelines, faster core clock and memory clock speeds, but it has a 128-bit interface. the nvidia has a 256-bit interface, plus from what i've heard from you guys, nvidia works better in linux and in windows. they both have an amazing 512mb ram (which i like...), so no problem with vram.

so what do you guys think????????

[Wight_Rhino]

NVidia, I support those who show greater committment to Linux.

[Christmas]

I voted nVIDIA, I have a PNY GeForce FX 5900 XT with 128 MB RAM and it works very well with the "nvidia-glx" driver. I also keep reading here on the forums that Ati doesn't support Linux very well, I couldn't verify that as I never tried an Ati card, but I have nVIDIA and I can tell it works OK, so go for it.

[user1397]

maybe i didn't make things so clear, but i don't care too much about 3d graphics in linux, i care more about them in windows, because i have some commercial games on windows which i play sometimes.

so before you answer "nvidia because of their linux drivers" please consider the ati card possibility.

[jonzep]

i would go with the intel 965 express chipset. now that intel has released the source for their drivers it will offer a very good inexpensive and open way of getting 3d gfx and being able to use a completly free driver sponsored by the manufacturer.

more info available here (http://intellinuxgraphics.org/)

[Christmas]

so before you answer "nvidia because of their linux drivers" please consider the ati card possibility.
I'd still say nVIDIA, if not for 3D, then just to support them for releasing good Linux drivers. As far as I remember the Ati vs. nVIDIA charts and reviews on Windows, they were pretty much the same in performance. I remember there were rumours (or real facts, never verified it deeper) that the 3DMark benchmark was made special to work with nVIDIA, but on 3DMark2005 my card scored very very low, which it was crap, because in every game I tried it had very good performances. Go with nVIDIA, on Windows it has the same performances as Ati and on Linux it has the plus that supports it through good drivers.

[user1397]

okay, but out of those two cards i have made links to, there is basically one debate: should i go with more pixel pipelines (ati), or a higher memory interface (nvidia)? which one is more important?

[user1397]

well in the end, i went for the ati card because of the pixel pipelines, plus it was cheaper.

[NoTiG]

Keep in mind a couple things however. as of now Nvidia is better ... but. There is a possibility of ATI open sourcing their drivers which would put them ahead (eventually) ... or rather force nvidia as well.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/08/02/32OPcurve_1.html

ALso, if you are a purist... and dont want proprietary stuff on your computer, then ATI is actually the way to go because of the open source DRI drivers ... that is if you want 3d.

[Polygon]

Keep in mind a couple things however. as of now Nvidia is better ... but. There is a possibility of ATI open sourcing their drivers which would put them ahead (eventually) ... or rather force nvidia as well.

http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/08/02/32OPcurve_1.html

ALso, if you are a purist... and dont want proprietary stuff on your computer, then ATI is actually the way to go because of the open source DRI drivers ... that is if you want 3d.


i thought i read somewhere that they couldent opensource the drivers because of some problem of ati using other companies code in the drivers... or something like that

[NoTiG]

well there is proprietary code for certain things... but they can still open up the core part of it.... or provide full specification like they did for their older cards so open source drivers can be run *shrug*

[slimdog360]

your going to be paying extra for the agp card. I was going to get something like this (http://www.computeralliance.com.au/parts.aspx?qryPart=6793)
but have decided to just go out and get a new computer.

[user1397]

your going to be paying extra for the agp card. I was going to get something like this (http://www.computeralliance.com.au/parts.aspx?qryPart=6793)
but have decided to just go out and get a new computer.i already bought it, this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16814102680) one to be exact. the price wasnt too bad, plus i cant afford a whole new computer at the time.

[Rhapsody]

Honestly, I would recommend nVidia. After years of using ATI drivers (under Windows no less, I've never tried them on Linux) I can report dozens of bugs and glitches that I ran into, from fullscreen DirectDraw applications mysteriously having raised brightness, to alpha blending just 'not working', to entire graphical applications that wouldn't start anymore after driver updates. nVidia has been a lot more pleasent both before and after.