supported cards graphics

[Russell Shaw]

René Rebe wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> On Thursday 28 June 2007 17:52:33 Russell Shaw wrote:
>> Instituto de Ingenieria Área de Sistemas Unix/Linux wrote:
>>> Hello:
>>> I'm going to buy an Intel QuadCore system and I would like to install
>>> FreeBSD, I'm going to use it with graphic applications so I need it to
>>> work well with 3D graphic acceleration cards.
>>>
>>> In the Freebsd list people reply me by sending a link to the Freebsd
>>> supported hardware web site, but there isn't any information about
>>> graphic cards, so they tell me to check the Xorg site but i can't find
>>> any information regarding supported cards.
>>>
>>> Could anyone help me with this?
>>>
>>> Thank you very much
>> ATI proprietory linux drivers are utter garbage and NVidia ones are
>> infinitely better i've found.
> 
> "Infinitely better" of "utter garbage" is still utter garbage, and if you
> define "utter garbage" to live on the negative scale and multiply or
> accumulate that it would expand even more so into the negative
> dimension :-)
> 
>> The FOSS drivers won't give you much if any acceleration.
> 
> ??? Not yet for NVidia, because they make our life so hard. But on the
> other hand: the Intel, and ATi r200 FOSS drivers are quite good, and
> the FOSS r300 is getting better. Hopefully the Nouveau driver for
> NVidia chips (e.g. my G5 is hapily avaiting this).

I've been using an ATI RV280 [Radeon 9200 SE] in my pc with the FOSS
driver for years because i never do anything that needs acceleration.
The ATI FOSS driver does dual head well, whereas the NVidia FOSS one
didn't (at the time i tried it).

OTOH, my dad regularly looks at a newspaper site that for some reason
makes the cpu go to 90+% and is very slow to render. Putting in the
ATI fglrx driver for his 9550 card made it fast but it crashed and
burned far too frequently. Putting in an NVidia card and proprietory
driver fixed that. I'll always recommend against ATI now (unless they
release decent hardware specs for writing a driver).