Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Tom's Hardware Reviews ATI and Nvidia on Linux 201

Posted by CowboyNeal
from the pretty-pictures dept.
Beuno writes "I stumbled upon a GeForce vs Radeon review on Tom's Hardware, which seems normal enough. The big surprise is that it was actually a comparison of those two video cards on Linux (Fedora Core 5). The review isn't as thorough as I would like, but it does review all aspects ranging from tools available, complexity of getting them to work and benchmarks on performance. To me, this is a clear signs of Linux finally making a long expected breakthrough into common desktops."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tom's Hardware Reviews ATI and Nvidia on Linux

Comments Filter:
  • Performance issues (Score:5, Interesting)

    by also-rr (980579) on Saturday July 15, 2006 @11:11AM (#15724788) Homepage
    Generally performance running games on Linux has been a mixed bag (on the same hardware).

    NWN, WoW and UT have all been slightly faster than the Windows version, and crashes have been less of a problem (ctrl-alt-f1, kill task, no need to reboot - which _is_ required for some reason under Windows as games seem to offer best performance off a fresh reboot... resource recovery problems in the DirectX subsystem maybe?)

    On the other hand EVE runs slower, with more graphical artifacts. Yes I'm aware that this is because it doesn't play that nicely with WINE and the fact that it runs in a playable fashion is a small miracle. It is still the case that if you want the best performance then you have to play it on Windows, for now.
  • by Locutus (9039) on Saturday July 15, 2006 @11:15AM (#15724803)
    ...on their face. Most laptops with ATI Mobility Express chipsets can't use the onboard video memory. ATI broke this a year ago and has not fixed it.

    So don't trust ATI for Linux capabilities on notebooks.

    Maybe Toms Hardware can do a notebook comparison since they've already done the desktop. I'm pretty sure that would expose this failure to far more than the few who already are aware of this. And just maybe, it'll get ATI to fix this.

    LoB
  • by Baloo Ursidae (29355) <dead@address.com> on Saturday July 15, 2006 @11:32AM (#15724849) Journal
    Just as easy to install, and even the exact same framerate.

    I've found, on the same hardware, that GTA: Vice City runs *smoother* with higher graphics settings in Cedega on Linux than natively in Windows. That really surprised me.

  • Re:Compatibility... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by SanityInAnarchy (655584) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Saturday July 15, 2006 @11:49AM (#15724906) Journal
    This is an important distinction, by the way. While it does probably mean slower performance than running the same program natively under Linux, there have been instances where games run faster under Wine or Cedega than under Windows.

    Cedega does cause a price problem, though. I would encourage everyone to use Cedega and wipe out their XP partitions so that games start being ported, but I can't really recommend it for the price alone. New Windows every 7 years: $200. Cedega: $5/mo = $120/year. Thus, Cedega is more expensive than Windows.

    Wine is better for everything but games, though. While I would like to see something similar to the Point2Play interface, especially if I could get some nice sandboxing, it isn't really necessary. But, right now, Wine seems to have a better overall architecture than Cedega -- cleaner design -- and it does seem to support things that Cedega does not.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 15, 2006 @12:47PM (#15725067)
    Need an AGP card for a desktop that'll be running Linux 24x7. Don't want to spend an arm and a leg, can anyone recommend a decent card for under $100?

    Thanks!
  • by pdh11 (227974) on Saturday July 15, 2006 @01:54PM (#15725306) Homepage
    I'm still looking for any graphics card with amd64 Linux drivers that supports either dual-dvi with accelerated portrait mode (1200x1600 x2), or dual-link DVI (2560x1600). Matrox have some that will do it, but only with proprietary drivers and only on ia32.

    Peter
  • Re:Compatibility... (Score:2, Interesting)

    by WCD_Thor (966193) on Saturday July 15, 2006 @03:57PM (#15725676) Homepage
    I am one of these people-I hate the crap that Windows XP sends my way, but I am a gamer first and foremost, so I put up with anoying bugs, shitty features, and idiotic crashes. If games because Linux compatable, I would move to a linux opperating system in seconds. I am already planning on installing Suse 10.1 (the free dvd iso version) on my computer as a second opperating system, I just need more hard drive space so I can wipe my windows system disk (it really needs a fresh install). So far I have been using single layer dvd+r's to back up divx movies and save files from games, but I still need more space. I have lost a bunch of shit in the past due to my computer being stolen, and I know how shitty it is to try and replace lost data. Sorry, I just has my Tonsills taken out and I am hopped up on drugs, I'll shut up now and stop rambling.
  • Re:XGL (Score:2, Interesting)

    by init100 (915886) on Saturday July 15, 2006 @04:51PM (#15725837)

    does anyone actually find that unaccelerated desktop windows are slowing them down?

    Are you sure that the driver is unaccelerated? I thought that the open source drivers (both ATI and nVidia) were 2D-accelerated, but lacked 3D acceleration. I haven't had slow performance on the (2D) desktop for ages.

Mr. Cole's Axiom: The sum of the intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing.

Working...