ATI and Linux compatibility

[mugginz]

you read what you highlighted???

Yes.

(on wine and natively)?

See that big word. At the moment it means it's most sensible to go with nVidia at the moment. If you have to go ATI you may be able to get your Windows program going as well under fglrx as you can with nVidia, but it's certainly not guaranteed.

[Jimbo]

(on wine and natively)?

a lot of better now, only highligh wine. In this case nvidia is better. I already said this on 3rd post.

[mugginz]

a lot of better now, only highligh wine. In this case nvidia is better. I already said this on 3rd post.

But last time I checked nVidias drivers supported GTX 480 and the 480 is faster than a 5870 so no, your assumption that ATI is always better than nVidia for NATIVE games is flawed.

[Jimbo]

Obviously not on all. This is difficult, there are always a game that runs better on some drivers or specific GPU. I have no idea at all on this. I only pointed that ati hardware is good, and native opengl too.

For exemple i would love to see a unigine benchmarks of ati 5950 vs fermi.

[mugginz]

Obviously not on all. This is difficult, there are always a game that runs better on some drivers or specific GPU. I have no idea at all on this. I only pointed that ati hardware is good, and native opengl too.

For exemple i would love to see a unigine benchmarks of ati 5950 vs fermi.

But to base any decisions of FPS would likely end up in sadness if the use case is not only native games but also wine. And then there are the GPU high-def decode issues as well as the XV ones mentioned earlier.

When your OS/driver/hardware combo will support your selected software, only then can FPS be a determining issue. If your software doesn't run to begin with then I guess that could be considered 0 FPS.

[Jimbo]

You argued that nvidia blob was better. I was arguing that fglrx can compete with native opengl (not 2d and video accel).

wine 3d devs work with nvidia hardware and develops focusing mainly on nvida. No discussion here, i am with you, nvidia = more compatibility with wine.

[mugginz]

You argued that nvidia blob was better.

Yes because I belive it is better.

I was arguing that fglrx can compete with native opengl (not 2d and video accel).

You're also arguing other things as well, but to your point re fglrx and nVidia native 3D. Sometimes fglrx can compete with the nVidia blob and sometimes it can't. On the balance of probabilities you're far more likely to have a more satisfying Linux gaming experience with an nVidia card at the moment. You seem to be sugesting that this isn't the case. This I can't agree with.

wine 3d devs work with nvidia hardware and develops focusing mainly on nvida. No discussion here, i am with you, nvidia = more compatibility with wine.

Wine was one of the OP's requirements. Not to mention that when a composited desktop is thrown in the mix there have been many reported issues with fglrx for native 3D as well.

[pingufunkybeat]

mugginz, you clearly stated:

The strawman of opensource vs closed source drivers is often brought up by those ATI fanbois

You were talking about the issue of open source drivers in general, not only when applied to OpenGL 3+ running under Wine.

And my replies were related to that.

"The strawman" of open source vs. closed source is hardly a strawman for many people in many circumstances.

The fact remains that nVidia does not release specs, and you can't sweep that under the carpet just because their drivers work better under Wine. This reason alone is enough for me to choose ATi, even if this means that I can only run 30% of Windows games through Wine instead of 15%, and even if I get 60 fps in Quake instead of 80.

For the vast majority of uses today, the open ATi drivers are just fine, and in some cases (Kernel modesetting) even superior to the blobs. And THIS is why the ATi fanbois "often" argue the point.

[mugginz]

mugginz, you clearly stated:

The strawman of opensource vs closed source drivers is often brought up by those ATI fanbois

You were talking about the issue of open source drivers in general, not only when applied to OpenGL 3+ running under Wine.

No, I'm talking about the level of reliable functionality that one can expect of a graphics card under Linux. Others wish to recast the debate into one of open vs closed source software development.

And my replies were related to that.

"The strawman" of open source vs. closed source is hardly a strawman for many people in many circumstances.

Again, what does the developement methodology of the device driver have to do with whether or not you can play a game under wine on a Linux box?

The fact remains that nVidia does not release specs, and you can't sweep that under the carpet just because their drivers work better under Wine.

Who's sweeping what under the carpet? People want to ignore the nVidia blobs superiority and instead try to steer the discussion away from that and onto whether it's morally correct to use closed or open source drivers.

This reason alone is enough for me to choose ATi, even if this means that I can only run 30% of Windows games through Wine instead of 15%, and even if I get 60 fps in Quake instead of 80.

But then you're putting the cart before the horse. If you need the card to support a wide range of software then you don't have the luxury of deliberately reducing you're range of software just to satisfy the development process the drivers are developed with.

For the vast majority of uses today, the open ATi drivers are just fine, and in some cases (Kernel modesetting) even superior to the blobs. And THIS is why the ATi fanbois "often" argue the point.

How does nice virtual terminal switching or nice boot splash screen help me to run games under wine?

[mugginz]

How does nice virtual terminal switching or nice boot splash screen help me to run games under wine?

Apart from being able to see the kernel oopses without a serial terminal when a device driver goes belly up.