Recommended Graphics Card
I'm in the market to upgrade my graphics card. I know it's an emotive subject, but can anyone recommend a good quality card that works well with Xorg? I don't do games, I do do photo graphics though. I'm currently using a fully up to date ver 9.3 and will go to ver 10 soon. Thanks Phil
I'm in the market to upgrade my graphics card. I know it's an emotive subject, but can anyone recommend a good quality card that works well with Xorg? I don't do games, I do do photo graphics though.
If you don't need 3d then an entrylevel card of ether ATi or nVidia will suffice. Yes, it is a much debated subject, but in fairness, there are people who have problems with either. Granted, nVidia's binary driver has been around longer, so it's a bit more polished. But I use a Radeon 9250 with the binary driver, and I've had no problems with the installation. Just follow the directions included. If you're only dealing with 2D images, and you want to avoid the binary driver issue completely, you could use an older Radeon 7500 or even a 7000. They are fully supported (in 2D and 3D) by XFree and X.org. I have a 64MB Radeon 7000 in my PC at work and even at 1280x1024 I cannot say I have to wait for anything. I don't know what the driver situation is like, but you should also look at Matrox. I know a number of people doing graphics/CAD work who swear by them. Hans
Hans du Plooy wrote:
I don't know what the driver situation is like, but you should also look at Matrox. I know a number of people doing graphics/CAD work who swear by them.
Hans
I would have to agree here, I use a matrox g550, and before that a g200. I have always found the quality excellent with no set up problems at all. Steve
On Saturday 12 November 2005 12:41 pm, Hans du Plooy wrote:
I'm in the market to upgrade my graphics card. I know it's an emotive subject, but can anyone recommend a good quality card that works well with Xorg? I don't do games, I do do photo graphics though.
If you don't need 3d then an entrylevel card of ether ATi or nVidia will suffice. Yes, it is a much debated subject, but in fairness, there are people who have problems with either. Granted, nVidia's binary driver has been around longer, so it's a bit more polished. But I use a Radeon 9250 with the binary driver, and I've had no problems with the installation. Just follow the directions included.
If it is any help, I've had no problems with either. My machines all have ATI (Radeon) cards and my mom has nVidia. All systems run great, including 3d. -- kai www.perfectreign.com linux - genuine windows replacement part
On Saturday 12 November 2005 12:41 pm, Hans du Plooy wrote: If it is any help, I've had no problems with either. My machines all have ATI (Radeon) cards and my mom has nVidia. All systems run great, including 3d.
Oh I've had plenty of problems with both ATi and nVida, but I've always managed to get it working one way or another. I've used both sets of binary drivers since they were first released, so I've been through all the stages. These days there are SUSE specific instructions for either, and if you follow them closely you will get it working. So the choice is really a matter of personal preference. I prefer ATi, because: 1. To my eye, the image quality is superior to nVidia 2. The nVidia driver still prevents my TV card from working full screen at anything 640x480x16bit But that's just me.... Hans
Hans du Plooy wrote:
I prefer ATi, because: 1. To my eye, the image quality is superior to nVidia 2. The nVidia driver still prevents my TV card from working full screen at anything 640x480x16bit
But that's just me....
Hans
About three months ago, I did a comparison of nVidia and Radeon cards for a 3D/OpenGL project I'm working on. We had everything from an old Quadro2Pro to the latest Radeon that Dell is shipping. We had two evaluation critieria (1) smoothness of screen movement, e.g., when rotating or panning a sceen and (2) quickness of screen updates, e.g., recompiling OpenGL display lists. ATI/Radeon scored highest for #1 but was significantly slower for #2 nVidia scored a little lower for #1 but was significanlty faster for #1 My conclusion is that the ATI drivers to a better job at optimizing the OpenGL display lists, hence their zippy graphics response. The downside is that the extra optimization takes time and CPU cycles, slowing down screen updates. Hope this helps, Buddy Coffey Advanced Electromagnetics
Phil Burness wrote:
I'm in the market to upgrade my graphics card.
Why?
I know it's an emotive subject, but can anyone recommend a good quality card that works well with Xorg? I don't do games, I do do photo graphics though.
I have about a dozen machines anywhere from 8 years old to 8 months old. My newest graphics card is 7 years old; with RAM anywhere from 4M to 16M; Tseng, ATI & Matrox. The old stuff tends to be bulletproof as long as you don't need 3D, and they don't need extra fans either. -- "I can do all things through Him who gives me strength." Philippians 4:13 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/
On Saturday 12 November 2005 21:49, Felix Miata wrote:
Phil Burness wrote:
I'm in the market to upgrade my graphics card.
Why? Main reason is that I am also upgrading my monitor to a 19" TFT that can support 1280x1024. My current monitor can't, also my current graphics card has 32Mb memory and I suppose more is better?
I know it's an emotive subject, but can anyone recommend a good quality card that works well with Xorg? I don't do games, I do do photo graphics though.
I have about a dozen machines anywhere from 8 years old to 8 months old. My newest graphics card is 7 years old; with RAM anywhere from 4M to 16M; Tseng, ATI & Matrox. The old stuff tends to be bulletproof as long as you don't need 3D, and they don't need extra fans either. --
If your newest machine is 8 months old how come your newest graphics card is 7 years old? did you buy a bare bones and have an old card lying around?
"I can do all things through Him who gives me strength." Philippians 4:13 NIV
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/
Phil Burness wrote:
On Saturday 12 November 2005 21:49, Felix Miata wrote:
Phil Burness wrote:
I'm in the market to upgrade my graphics card.
Why?
Main reason is that I am also upgrading my monitor to a 19" TFT that can support 1280x1024. My current monitor can't, also my current graphics card has 32Mb memory and I suppose more is better?
If you aren't going to be running more than 32 bit color @ 1280x1024, more than 32M of RAM won't do you any better with any video cards I'm familiar with. Those big RAM video cards are for serious high resolution, well beyond 1280x1024 Standard non-widescreen video modes are for displays with an aspect ratio of 4:3. 1280x1024 is not a standard aspect mode, being 5/4 instead. See http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/aspect.html and http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/std-resolutions.html before you spend your money.
I have about a dozen machines anywhere from 8 years old to 8 months old. My newest graphics card is 7 years old; with RAM anywhere from 4M to 16M; Tseng, ATI & Matrox. The old stuff tends to be bulletproof as long as you don't need 3D, and they don't need extra fans either.
If your newest machine is 8 months old how come your newest graphics card is 7 years old? did you buy a bare bones and have an old card lying around?
I build my own machines and have no use for games, while games are precisely what the latest and greatest video cards are made for. That's overkill by several orders of magnitude for folks who use their puters for work instead of games. 5+ year old video cards are cheap and plentiful on eBay and well up to the task. I last spent less than $30 including shipping to get one lot of 4 G400s pulled from IBM brand PCs, designed something like 8 years ago, one of which ATM I'm running at 1792x1344. -- "I can do all things through Him who gives me strength." Philippians 4:13 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
I build my own machines and have no use for games, while games are precisely what the latest and greatest video cards are made for. That's overkill by several orders of magnitude for folks who use their puters for work instead of games.
You are assuming that image quality has not improved at all in the last seven years, but it has. Entry level graphics cards these days are cheap, and even the cheapest that nVidia and ATi offer far superior image quality than any but the most expensive cards of seven years ago. Also, features like Antialiasing etc that cards can do in hardware these days, have to be passed off to the CPU on those older cards. The OP said they use graphics software, and buying a new LCD display. That I would think is good justification to get a graphics card that is a bit more up to date. Hans
Hans du Plooy wrote:
You are assuming that image quality has not improved at all in the last seven years, but it has.
What I'm assuming is that each of us has unique eyes, and that the OP may be unable to detect any improvement newer hardware offers, or find the detected difference does not justify the investment.
Entry level graphics cards these days are cheap, and even the cheapest that nVidia and ATi offer far superior image quality than any but the most expensive cards of seven years ago. Also, features like Antialiasing etc that cards can do in hardware these days, have to be passed off to the CPU on those older cards.
Not everyone has teenage eyes. Some of use can't detect any difference between 16 bit and 24 or 32 bit color. Antialiasing is pointless with larger fonts used with high resolution. New hardware may or may not provide a perceptible difference. Most of today's CPUs not used for gaming have more than ample reserve cycles for video, spending most of their time waiting on I/O.
The OP said they use graphics software, and buying a new LCD display. That I would think is good justification to get a graphics card that is a bit more up to date.
I believe testing your existing equipment with the new display before spending money for an improvement you might never perceive is a prudent plan. -- "I can do all things through Him who gives me strength." Philippians 4:13 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
On Sunday 13 November 2005 19:23, Felix Miata wrote:
What I'm assuming is that each of us has unique eyes, and that the OP may be unable to detect any improvement newer hardware offers, or find the detected difference does not justify the investment.
Personally upgrading video systems is the #1 most cost effective thing. Followed closely by a better keyboard. Too bad nobody makes a really good keyboard anymore.
Not everyone has teenage eyes. Some of use can't detect any difference between 16 bit and 24 or 32 bit color.
If I had teenage eyes I wouldn't need better quality.
Antialiasing is pointless with larger fonts used with high resolution.
Most older cards can't handle what I consider high resolution. At least not in ways I'd want to look at the screen. When this monitor dies I'll seriously consider a 21" monitor or bigger. I'll want a card that can drive that at higher then 1280x1024 and do it well.
I believe testing your existing equipment with the new display before spending money for an improvement you might never perceive is a prudent plan.
Hard to argue with that. Of course you can get a new video card today for $50 Canadian. Nick
Nick Zentena wrote:
On Sunday 13 November 2005 19:23, Felix Miata wrote:
What I'm assuming is that each of us has unique eyes, and that the OP may be unable to detect any improvement newer hardware offers, or find the detected difference does not justify the investment.
Personally upgrading video systems is the #1 most cost effective thing.
To do what? Waste money?
Followed closely by a better keyboard. Too bad nobody makes a really good keyboard anymore.
You can get them, if you don't mind spending upwards of US$150: http://www.cvtinc.com/products/keyboards/menu.htm
Not everyone has teenage eyes. Some of use can't detect any difference between 16 bit and 24 or 32 bit color.
If I had teenage eyes I wouldn't need better quality.
When the resolving power of the hardware exceeds the resolving power of the eyes, improving the resolution of the hardware will not be detected by the eyes.
Antialiasing is pointless with larger fonts used with high resolution.
Most older cards can't handle what I consider high resolution. At least not in ways I'd want to look at the screen. When this monitor dies I'll seriously consider a 21" monitor or bigger. I'll want a card that can drive that at higher then 1280x1024 and do it well.
My eBay US$5 G400 does 16 bit 1792x1344 perfectly fine, thankyouverymuch. -- "I can do all things through Him who gives me strength." Philippians 4:13 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
On Sunday 13 November 2005 20:00, Felix Miata wrote:
To do what? Waste money?
Sorry but seeing and not squinting isn't wasting money for me. Not getting a headache is a bonus in my book.
You can get them, if you don't mind spending upwards of US$150: http://www.cvtinc.com/products/keyboards/menu.htm
And how does it feel? My idea of a good keyboard is an old Northgate. Which used to cost more then $150.
When the resolving power of the hardware exceeds the resolving power of the eyes, improving the resolution of the hardware will not be detected by the eyes.
Are we looking at test charts?
My eBay US$5 G400 does 16 bit 1792x1344 perfectly fine, thankyouverymuch.
Glad you're happy with that. $5 on Ebay. Plus shipping. Plus how much time looking for it? Or About $40 from a local shop with a full warranty. I think you over paid. I'd never waste $5 on something I can walk into a store front and get a new one for $40. Nick
Nick Zentena wrote:
On Sunday 13 November 2005 20:00, Felix Miata wrote:
You can get them, if you don't mind spending upwards of US$150: http://www.cvtinc.com/products/keyboards/menu.htm
And how does it feel?
Exactly like a Northgate, because that's the company that took over Northgate's keyboard manufacturing.
My idea of a good keyboard is an old Northgate. Which used to cost more then $150.
My Northgates cost me in the $89-$99 range when I bought them in 1990. I didn't pay extra for function keys wasting space where junk keyboards have them up top.
My eBay US$5 G400 does 16 bit 1792x1344 perfectly fine, thankyouverymuch.
Glad you're happy with that. $5 on Ebay. Plus shipping. Plus how much time looking for it? Or About $40 from a local shop with a full warranty. I think you over paid. I'd never waste $5 on something I can walk into a store front and get a new one for $40.
Lowest price around here on new is around $60. Mine were bulk purchase. The $5 was just the share including shipping allocable to one item. Locally I'd never find one like I have new or used, much less a bunch of them pulled from old IBM puters for one low money. Once they've survived breakin, they need no warranty, particularly at that price. -- "I can do all things through Him who gives me strength." Philippians 4:13 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
* Felix Miata
Nick Zentena wrote:
And how does it feel?
Exactly like a Northgate, because that's the company that took over Northgate's keyboard manufacturing.
I still use my Gateway2000 AnyKey (dated 10-02-92). Clean it every five years or so whether it needs it or not. Plastic and weighs a ton. No windoz kees, but _every_ key is programmable in the keyboard rom. -- Patrick Shanahan Registered Linux User #207535 http://wahoo.no-ip.org @ http://counter.li.org HOG # US1244711 Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
On Sunday 13 November 2005 21:28, Patrick Shanahan wrote:
I still use my Gateway2000 AnyKey (dated 10-02-92). Clean it every five years or so whether it needs it or not. Plastic and weighs a ton. No windoz kees, but _every_ key is programmable in the keyboard rom.
My Northgate might be 20 years old or close to it. The problem is the connector. It's an AT connector not PS/2. For awhile I used an adaptor but it's not working any more. If it had a PS/2 connector I might still be using it. Nick
Nick Zentena wrote:
My Northgate might be 20 years old or close to it. The problem is the connector. It's an AT connector not PS/2. For awhile I used an adaptor but it's not working any more. If it had a PS/2 connector I might still be using it.
Check with the people at http://www.cvtinc.com/products/keyboards/menu.htm to see if they have a replacement cord. If not, I know there is a place Google will find that refurbs Northgates. I bet they can fix you up. -- "I can do all things through Him who gives me strength." Philippians 4:13 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/
On Monday 14 November 2005 6:07 pm, Felix Miata wrote:
Nick Zentena wrote:
My Northgate might be 20 years old or close to it. The problem is the connector. It's an AT connector not PS/2. For awhile I used an adaptor but it's not working any more. If it had a PS/2 connector I might still be using it.
Check with the people at http://www.cvtinc.com/products/keyboards/menu.htm to see if they have a replacement cord. If not, I know there is a place Google will find that refurbs Northgates. I bet they can fix you up.
Or get an adapter from Cyberguys: http://www.cyberguys.com/templates/searchproducts.asp?s=SP&dept=lch26&search=1ca02&child=1ca02-4&across=2&sort=new&ureq=y ************************************** Powered by Mepis Linux 3.3.1 KDE 3.4.2 KMail 1.8.2 This is a Microsoft-free computer Bryan S. Tyson bryantyson@earthlink.net **************************************
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 06:20 -0500, Felix Miata wrote:
Phil Burness wrote:
Main reason is that I am also upgrading my monitor to a 19" TFT that can support 1280x1024. My current monitor can't, also my current graphics card has 32Mb memory and I suppose more is better?
Standard non-widescreen video modes are for displays with an aspect ratio of 4:3. 1280x1024 is not a standard aspect mode, being 5/4 instead. See http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/aspect.html and http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/std-resolutions.html before you spend your money.
X can cope quite happily with 1280x1024 5:4 TFTs. I'm typing this on one (Samsung SynMaster 910T) and the aspect ratio is correct. Please don't spread FUD. More relevant to the choice of graphics card would be whether the monitor is VGA-only or has a DVI input. It's worth getting a graphics card with DVI if the monitor has it :) Cheers, Dave
On Sunday 13 November 2005 4:14 am, Phil Burness wrote:
On Saturday 12 November 2005 21:49, Felix Miata wrote:
Phil Burness wrote:
I'm in the market to upgrade my graphics card.
Why?
Main reason is that I am also upgrading my monitor to a 19" TFT that can support 1280x1024. My current monitor can't, also my current graphics card has 32Mb memory and I suppose more is better?
to the OP, If you have a new(ish) box, do you have pci-E capability? If so, and you aren't in the mood to overclock.. e-GeForce 6800GT works really well at 1600x 1600 on a 20" flat Mitsubishi monitor. ( I don't use it that high because it seems silly to have that sort of resolution and then have to make everything bigger in order to actually see it. Tho I must say , it will be good to do photo stuff at that level. This card has 256MB memory on it.. currently the most I could find.. video processing is a memory hog.. and needs all it can get.. I am using the Nvdia driver and everything seem to be happy happy... installed it from the YOU update when 10.0 installed.. ATI might be better for whatever.. but this card was also happy w/ the xorg nv driver.. I just wanted to use some of the stuff that wasn't available w/o the Nvdia driver.. But.. as they say this sort of thing is definately in the eye of the beholder.. so get yourself to a big computer place and look at some displays w/ some of the cards you are considering.. BTW there is a water cooled version of the 6800 in case things in your box (or overclocking ideas) are heating things up ;-) -- j Morning, Evolution in action. only the grumpy will survive
participants (11)
-
Bryan S. Tyson -
Buddy Coffey -
Dave Howorth -
Felix Miata -
Hans du Plooy -
jfweber＠bellsouth.net -
Kai Ponte -
Nick Zentena -
Patrick Shanahan -
Phil Burness -
Stephen Allewell