Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Which is better for 3d acceleration

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Which is better for 3d acceleration

    ATI 5750
    GTX 460
    GTS 450

    How do these cards compare for 3 acceleration? (in linux of course)

    Also is there any significant performance difference between Ubuntu and Fedora (using the same drivers)? and for 3d in general (regardless of brand/video card)?

    cheers

  • #2
    The GTX-460 will give you the best performance in linux with the nvidia binary drivers.

    Comment


    • #3
      If amd blob won't be that buggy and feature-less, and would be supporting legacy hardware - there would be some equality. Opensource is barely supported(nvidia unsupported at all).
      Yep, modern graphics hardware sucks. OpenGL is patented. Only windows drivers have attention. Everyone is proud to be microsoft slave.

      Comment


      • #4
        Buy the 5750. Proper open source support rather than flaky and useless blob drivers.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
          Buy the GTX 460. Full featured and full performance support rather than flaky and useless opensource drivers.
          Fixed that for you.

          Comment


          • #6
            No you didn't.
            The nvidia blob is unreliable trash from a hostile organization. Let that be well understood.

            And isn't it about time for you to go back to your blob OS? What do they call it? Oh right, Winbloze.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by droidhacker View Post
              No you didn't.
              The nvidia blob is unreliable trash from a hostile organization. Let that be well understood.

              And isn't it about time for you to go back to your blob OS? What do they call it? Oh right, Winbloze.
              DH, nvidia blob is extremely stable. It is very polished. It has nearly every feature that windows driver has and features sameday support. It covers broad range of cards. And it is very proprietary.

              The only chance for AMD to innovate is to put WAY more effort in opensource. Nvidia has already matched every single aspect in blob form for 5 years what AMD has TRYING to achive now with Catalyst.

              AMD opensource support is very lacking (as "in serious" vs "hobby" effort). It is not planned to be feature-full. It is not planned to replacement for proprietary. The financial mechanism to connect regular linux users investing in card with supporting opensource driver that they prefer - is absent.

              Now this moment: If you go out and purchase hardware in scope of 5 years, you expect it to WORK efficiently. AMD does NOT see opensource as efficient and it is NOT efficient. Their closed source initiative is CONTINUED and falls back MUCH to nvidia.

              And with nvidia - it is already efficient as in go, buy, install, use.

              If you are hacking linux and want it to have own opensource efficient gfx/3D subsystem, and you really want to support it - there is NO hardware manufacturer to date that has you as target customer.
              The only chance for AMD to innovate is to put WAY more effort in opensource. Nvidia has already matched every single aspect in blob for 5 years what AMD has TRYING to achive now.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                Fixed that for you.
                No, you're just being obnoxious. Give it a rest, will ya?

                Comment


                • #9
                  In truth, BOTH answers are the right one, depending on what you're looking for.

                  If you're doing "hardcore" gaming, aggressive 3D operations, or GPGPU stuff, you're going to probably want the NVidia solution that deanjo suggests. AMD's high end will serve you well, but the drivers have off and on issues more often than NVidia's do- but keep in mind that you're beholden to their production schedule and priorities- and sometimes they DO break things, sometimes badly.

                  If you're in a mind to be all FOSS, don't mind a dramatically lower performance profile (or are willing to run with the somewhat less robust AMD blob while waiting for a higher performance answer in FOSS drivers...), then your choice is also pretty clear and droidhacker's telling you the truth of things. The other observation would be that there's a better chance of AMD getting more people on the task of the drivers (both proprietary AND FOSS) if they see more sales in that space. In the case of the FOSS drivers, they'll perform well enough for the eye-candy desktops, lighter duty gaming (With titles like Caster or perhaps World of Padman and the like...) while you're free to keep using the card well past when AMD would otherwise support it.

                  In short, the best card's going to be more based on what you're looking for.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I have no idea why last line was typed twice. And I cannot remove it due to the cult 1-minute edit window.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                      In truth, BOTH answers are the right one, depending on what you're looking for...
                      Very well put. Opensource is second class. Is it better to have 1st class support or 2nd class opensource support depends on you. At last they have put it so and demand you agree.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Svartalf View Post
                        No, you're just being obnoxious. Give it a rest, will ya?
                        Well he did give the wrong answer to the question. The title of the thread is:

                        "Which is better for 3d acceleration"

                        I have yet to see any better solution for 3d in linux then nvidias. It is on par with their windows drivers for performance, it handles all the modern openGL levels, it is just as reliable (if not more) then any of the open source drivers. Because of it's superior performance it is also more efficient.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          If you wish to use multiple monitors or open-source drivers, go ati. Otherwise, go nvidia.

                          Both drivers have their sets of problems, although nvidia's are probably less annoying for the average user (but quite a bit more annoying for the power user).

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Nvidia makes a decent closed-source driver which breaks things regularly (recently: vim, kde, suspend&resume), but is still remarkably stable, considering that they totally replace half of your distribution with their own proprietary stuff. They are fast to support new kernels, and many people are happy with them. They don't support modern X technologies such as xrandr, or proper framebuffers and modesetting because it's essentially a repackaged Windows driver.

                            AMD offers an OK closed driver, which is fast, but has nagging issues that people complain about. It's more fussy than the nvidia one, and does not support new kernels in a timely fashion.

                            AMD also funds open-source development, releases virtually all docs they are allowed to release, helps volunteer Mesa and X developers with driver development. They have excellent and full-featured open source drivers for older cards, and decent drivers for all newer hardware. You get OpenGL 2.1, excellent 2D and video playback, the drivers are very stable, but 3d is still nowhere near as fast as the blobs.

                            The short and 99% correct answer is that people who support open source and open documentation buy AMD, while people who don't care about these things buy Nvidia.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                              Well he did give the wrong answer to the question. The title of the thread is:
                              No... You did a FTFY post. That's just being obnoxious. You answered the question "correctly" in your FIRST post. What you did that I called out wasn't answering the question, it was trolling...

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X