Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best working nVidia card for linux?

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

  • #11
    Best look at the memory, 512 mb cards are usually a tiny bit more expensive but faster. That's why the 8800 gt 256 is so slow compared against a 9600 gt 512 in higher res in the latest 8800 gt review...

    Comment


    • #12
      Originally posted by GoBBLeS View Post
      Hmm. I have been searching prices and perfomance chards.
      A card like yours costs the same as most of the 8800gt's, but the 8800gt is generally about 20% faster it seems..
      Yeah, prices changed after I bought it. 512MB 8800GT's were $200ish at the time.

      Comment


      • #13
        Originally posted by _txf_ View Post
        As far as I'm aware no 8 series and above has adequate 2d performance. If you're after pure 3d speed then nvidia is good and stable (mostly). the 2d issue is awful and as far as I can tell it is up to the individual tolerance of the user to determine whether they can take it...oh yeah keep away from firefox and kde4 if you can't take it...

        p.s. If you have a beefy computer you might get away with alright speed (C2Q especially)...

        Well, i'm looking for a card that works the best overall. Using Opera(donno if that makes a difference), watching movies/series and some good 3d graphics(not really newest of the newest though, they don't make any interesting games atm. imho.)

        My rig is a C2D [email protected], 3GB 6400 RAM on a Gigabyte GA 965P DS4 Mobo.. Running 1650x1050 on a 22"

        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
        I've got a couple of 8800GT's (Palit and PNY) and they are working fine here.
        Good. I think i might go for a 8800gt then, specifically it may be a "ZOTAC GeForce 8800GT AMP! Edition (512 MB)"

        Originally posted by Kano View Post
        Best look at the memory, 512 mb cards are usually a tiny bit more expensive but faster. That's why the 8800 gt 256 is so slow compared against a 9600 gt 512 in higher res in the latest 8800 gt review...
        I was also going for a 512MB card
        Last edited by GoBBLeS; 28 July 2008, 09:10 PM.

        Comment


        • #14
          I'm planning on buyng a 9800GT based card, is that a bad idea, would a 8800 based one be just as fine for "normal" usage, desktop use, video playback(xv) and some occasional 3d-gameing.. 512MB ofc.. wait.. come to think about it, 512MB 8800:s are exensiver than 9800GT /w 512MB..
          Well, what you think?

          Comment


          • #15
            Originally posted by slanbarn View Post
            I'm planning on buyng a 9800GT based card, is that a bad idea, would a 8800 based one be just as fine for "normal" usage, desktop use, video playback(xv) and some occasional 3d-gameing.. 512MB ofc.. wait.. come to think about it, 512MB 8800:s are exensiver than 9800GT /w 512MB..
            Well, what you think?
            Grab what ever is cheaper. Most of the 9800GT's are just rebranded 8800GT's out there at the moment.

            Comment


            • #16
              Originally posted by Moustacha View Post
              7 series hehe. 8 series and up is hit and miss with working in 2d, and you don't get xvmc support either.
              Hmm, maybe it's just me or my setup, but I own a 7800 GTX card myself and its 2D performance is also utterly crap.

              Comment


              • #17
                My 8800 GTS runs just fine but I have to use the 177.13 beta driver for stability and fast 2D performance. The 173.xx.xx driver just causes crashing and instability for me. I've had this card for three months now, and really not that many issues. As much as I like ati, nvidia is deviantly still more stable.

                Comment

                Working...
                X