NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Linux & Other OS's › Why is Ati not good?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Why is Ati not good?

post #1 of 7
10/25/06 at 6:14pm
Thread Starter 
Hello,

After reading alot of posts here and elsewhere I noticed Nvidia seems to not have any probs with linux, and Ati does. Why is that? Is it hardware design or drivers? Ive heard a few people say that Ati's chips are better than Nvidia, but Nvidia's drivers are better than Ati. I have had bad luck with Nvidia so i use Ati, but if linux likes Nvidia better I will switch.
Reply
Reply
post #2 of 7
10/25/06 at 6:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sygen
Hello,

After reading alot of posts here and elsewhere I noticed Nvidia seems to not have any probs with linux, and Ati does. Why is that? Is it hardware design or drivers? Ive heard a few people say that Ati's chips are better than Nvidia, but Nvidia's drivers are better than Ati. I have had bad luck with Nvidia so i use Ati, but if linux likes Nvidia better I will switch.


Actually both companies approach Linux at the moment with the same attitude, they both provide binary drivers and no source code.

The catch is how each is implemented, or installed. NVidia tends to be the easier to deal with and as such people in general have less problems with their drivers. However both are capable of causing problems in linux and not being able to be diagnosed by any means as they both load kernel modules and since the source is not availiable, cannot be debugged.

Seablade
Reply
Reply
post #3 of 7
10/25/06 at 7:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by seablade
Actually both companies approach Linux at the moment with the same attitude, they both provide binary drivers and no source code.

The catch is how each is implemented, or installed. NVidia tends to be the easier to deal with and as such people in general have less problems with their drivers. However both are capable of causing problems in linux and not being able to be diagnosed by any means as they both load kernel modules and since the source is not availiable, cannot be debugged.

Seablade

Sucks that neither will open source their drivers, though I somewhat understand their logic (being that they would then steal from each other). My next lappy is going to have SOME kind of dedicated GPU, even it just a minor one (I'm not a gamer or anything, just want to get away from onboard intel).

-olly
Reply
Reply
post #4 of 7
10/25/06 at 7:52pm
as a full time linux user on ati and nvidia machines i can say that although ati isn't completely horrible, if i had a choice i'd prefer nvidia.

the problems with ati lie in the completely horribe fglrx driver:
1 -- when you suspend2ram or suspend2disk, when you unsuspend the system will lock up and you'll need to restart (the entire system, not just x). Some ati owners claim their stuff unsuspends, but thats a minority compared to those who are stukc with this issue. if you read the release notes for the latest version of fglrx, ati is familiar with this issue but are not looking to resolve it any time soon.

2 -- in xgl/compiz (or beryl) stability with fglrx is substantially worse than that with nvidia.

3 -- ati is really slow to release drivers for new hardware, when the x1900 or whatever came out, there was not a driver for it for months. nvidia is generally quicker about it.

4 -- conflicts with some games, and cedega. if you check the cedega wiki for Vice City (for exmaple, among others) in the "Notes" it says "does not work with ati"

in the long run though, ati will give you decent 3d acceleration and will play (most of) your linux games just fine... but if the rig is a laptop that will be suspended periodically, not always shut down, then it could be an issue. an alternative is to use the open radeon drivers but you won't get 3d.
Reply
Reply
post #5 of 7
10/26/06 at 9:03pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seablade
Actually both companies approach Linux at the moment with the same attitude, they both provide binary drivers and no source code.

The catch is how each is implemented, or installed. NVidia tends to be the easier to deal with and as such people in general have less problems with their drivers. However both are capable of causing problems in linux and not being able to be diagnosed by any means as they both load kernel modules and since the source is not availiable, cannot be debugged.
Oh that sucks. Where are all the disassembler's w/their IDA at? I wish companies would be more helpful to linux and open source.


Quote:
Originally Posted by abf
in the long run though, ati will give you decent 3d acceleration and will play (most of) your linux games just fine... but if the rig is a laptop that will be suspended periodically, not always shut down, then it could be an issue. an alternative is to use the open radeon drivers but you won't get 3d.
Oh man, mine is a laptop (Alienware 51m 5500) with Ati 9800 128MB.
Reply
Reply
post #6 of 7
10/26/06 at 11:28pm
Quote:
Oh that sucks. Where are all the disassembler's w/their IDA at? I wish companies would be more helpful to linux and open source.
Where did you think the open source drivers came from? Not from dissassembling, but from reverse engineering. And that takes a LONG time. Give it a shot on your laptop and see if it works. Seablade
Reply
Reply
post #7 of 7
10/29/06 at 1:07pm
Thread Starter 
Yeah I know thats where they came from, I just wasn't thinking when I posted it ><. I would love to become knowledgeable enough to become a reverse engineer. That would be badass.

I do plan on installing it anyways just to see if it works, I just need to finish backing up my stuff.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux & Other OS's
NotebookForums.com › Forums › General Notebook Discussions › Linux & Other OS's › Why is Ati not good?