[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Nvidia drivers



Trond Eivind Glomsrød a écrit :

> Juha Saarinen <juha saarinen org> writes:
>
> > Matrox and ATi don't have the 3D performance of Nvidia's cards,
> > unfortunately.
>
> The Radeons are very nice (and in Linux, the difference will be huge to
> ATI's avbantage, as Nvidia cards only have software rendering without
> using binary-only drivers. Binary-only drivers isn't an option when
> I want own kernels and not-quite-released-yet software, as I'm doing)
>

I am using Wolverine kernel.   I just recompiled the src.rpm for the  kernel
module and it worked.
If I refer to several performance tests I have seen, NVIdia cards not only beat
the
pants to other cards of same generation but Linux drivers gave (a few months
ago)
pêrfomance nearly as good as Windows ones.  That was not the case for other
cards.

>
> > That's funny, because I've been running Linux on Nvidia cards only. They
> > don't seem useless to me.
>
> They're not useless, they just don't have (or will have) support out
> of the Linux distribution box or for a developer box.
>

The problem is not binary driver but NVidia copyright who forbids you to
redistribute
their drivers.  That means distribution authors cre not able to iinclude them
in distributions
and that means that the Linux beginner gets the impression he cannot use Linux
for games.
And we all  know a good part of Windows and Mac success was due to the
propaganda made by people
who originally had bought one of them for games

>
> > What's important to remember is that drivers for video cards are a
> > "competitive advantage" -- they make all the difference in benchmarks, and
> > hence, games weenies' buying decisions.
>
> I'm not saying "open source your drivers" - that's one decision. The
> thing I think is bad is "we won't tell you the specs of this card so
> you can create a driver for it". Doing both of them would certainly be
> an option.
>

Open source  or distribute their specs  would be nice but I understand a
company who
does not want to do this.  What I don't understand is a company who does not
want people
redistribute something who is freeware (their drivers).


>
> >I assume that Nvidia doesn't want to give away all its secrets to the
> >competition. They must get some of the coding right, because there's
> >a huge performance difference for 3D with the nvidia driver compared
> >to the XF86 nv driver, which is supposedly accelerated.
>
> Only in 2D. NVidia refuses to release specs. Buy something else.
>
> > I don't see anything on Matrox' site apart from note telling people to
> > check out commercial X implementations as well as XF86...
>
> They are actively working with us and XFree86 to make sure their
> drivers are as good as possible. They are Good People, and still have
> the crispest images in the industry. Unfortunately, I'm still waiting
> for a G800.
>

Again NVIdia Linux driver 90% speed of the Windows driver (that was the old
one).
Matrox Linux driver was something like 60% speed of the Windows driver.
Matrox is treating us as second class
customers.

                                                                        JFM





[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]