[lkml]   [2003]   [Dec]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: best AMD motherboard for Linux
    On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Tomas Szepe wrote:

    > On Dec-30 2003, Tue, 12:32 -0600
    > Derek Foreman <> wrote:
    > > > > > planning to get GeForce FX graphics card, if it makes a difference.
    > > > >
    > > > > Ask here before if you are planning to change your video card.
    > > >
    > > > nVidia translates to "trouble" around here. Selected Radeon cards,
    > > > on the other hand, work perfectly with opensource drivers and should
    > > > perform comparably.
    > >
    > > I'm not sure how you're defining "comparably". If you mean they get
    > > similar numbers from glxgears, that's possible. But the feature sets are
    > > not at all comparable. Nvidia's linux driver actually exposes the
    > > features available on modern graphics hardware.
    > >
    > > If you're going to advise against the use of their products in a public
    > > forum, I suggest you be a lot more specific.
    > The person asking for advice was very articulate in what their primary
    > concerns in choosing hardware were, and my suggestion was made with those
    > in mind.

    His primary requirement was that it (the motherboard) work well with
    linux. He stated that he was capable of installing drivers if he had to,
    but it would be even better if it wasn't required.

    Open source drivers, or whether nvidia fits your idea of a "linux
    supporting company" were not on the stated list of requirements.

    In fact, the message wasn't even asking for an opinion on the graphics

    > Yes, I'm convinced that a binary only driver is not an adequate
    > solution in "supporting linux."

    Paying people to write the driver, write documentation for the driver, and
    provide technical support for the driver does not meet your requirements
    for "supporting linux"... Your requirements seem steep indeed.

    There are a lot of drivers in the linux source tree itself that are
    just as closed to you and I as the nvidia ones. Lots of companies only
    give out their documentation under NDA to "appropriate open source
    developers" (I thought one of the great things about opensource was that
    everyone was an "appropriate developer"). So while we can look at the
    source code, we don't have enough information about it to provide adequate
    peer review or to fix bugs in it ourselves.

    We still have to contact whoever has the complete documentation, and we
    still have to wait for them to make a fix available.

    > And by the way, you are not being specific in naming the "features
    > available on modern graphics hardware," either.

    Vertex programs, fragment programs, vertex buffer objects, to name a few
    things. These are also available in the closed source ATI drivers.

    Run glxinfo and look at the gl version strings and the supported
    extensions. I'll send you the output of mine off-list if you'd like to do
    a comparison.

    If you really do have specific complaints about nvidia's drivers, it
    would be polite to email them first - they do reply to their linux-bugs
    email address.

    Just claiming "nvidia translates into trouble" is really nothing more
    than FUD.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:59    [W:0.025 / U:3.400 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site