Jason Costomiris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 11:45:39AM -0500, Trond Eivind Glomsrød wrote:
>: > I have no idea. I refuse to use ATI boards. Every time I've run into a
>: > machine that has an ATI board, the video board is nothing but trouble.
>: > I moved away from ATI and used Matrox, and later Nvidia boards, and have
>: > had a much happier time since.
>:
>: The radeons are very nice cards, and they have 3D support in XFree CVS
>: - while Nvidia isn't telling how to use their chips. Don't buy Nvidia
>: if you can avoid it.
>
> Uhm, you meant, "Nvidia can't release certain portions of their drivers,
> due to copyright issues."
No, I didn't. I didn't complain about them not releasing their
drivers, I complained about them not releasing info on their cards so
others can write drivers within the exising
> About the only useful feature I can see in the Radeons is the tivo-like
> functionality.
Same performance, better company. Radeons will work out of the box
with fast 3D when XFree 4.1 arrives, Nvidia is just a 2D card as far
as Linux distributions are concerned. If you have the kernel they're
using, you can download, remove some files and twiddle with
configuration files - if you're not, tough luck.
> Besides, I've always found the picture produced by a Matrox, Nvidia, or
> even a 3dfx to be better than the ATI boards.
I beg to differ - Matrox has always had the best output. 3dfx also
used to have good ramdacs, and ATI certainly has so now - I've still
not seen anybody claim that Nvidia is anywhere near the top of that
list, while I've seen quite a few requests for Nvidia to demand that
designs using their chips have better ramdacs than now.
--
Trond Eivind Glomsrød
Red Hat, Inc.
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
