Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Which video card do you Ubuntu users use?  (Read 16896 times)
poldie
Nub


Cakes 0
Posts: 32


« on: January 20, 2010, 05:08:08 PM »

I'm after a cheap-ish pci express x16 graphics card for my Ubuntu 9.10 64 bit system.  Literally the only game I play is Open Arena, so it's sort of important it'll work for that!  What do you guys use?  I've been googling like crazy for the last hour but 99.99% of reviews deal with windows, so I've no idea if the cards are even supported, let alone faster than what I'm currently using (on-board graphics).

Any ideas?
Logged
sago007
Posts a lot
*

Cakes 62
Posts: 1664


Open Arena Developer


WWW
« Reply #1 on: January 21, 2010, 07:49:48 AM »

I run Ubuntu 9.10 64 bit with a 7600 GT card or a 8800 GT card depending on the machine.

I have a strong preference for nvidia cards especially then I need 3D in Linux. I once owned a ATi 9700 pro and I was not satisfied with it, its OpenGL performance was not better than my previous GeForce 4200 Ti and it was back in time where everything worth playing (apart from UT2004) was openGL. And it was not just the Linux drivers that was the problem: The Windows 2000 drivers always crashed openGL.

I do run other games than OpenArena so the card might be overkill but I have experienced bad drivers on the <x600 cards. Apparently nvidia skips some of the tests on the lower end cards.

Things might have changed since AMD took over but it is hard to get away from a bad reputation.
Logged

There are nothing offending in my posts.
HelloKitty!
Lesser Nub


Cakes 12
Posts: 115



« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2010, 09:33:46 AM »

Things did indeed get better since AMD took over. Both the proprietary driver (Catalyst) and the open source drivers (which I currently use). Open source drivers are under heavy development but are extremely stable and provide OpenGL 2.0 and GLSL at the moment. This is plenty for OpenArena and fancy desktop effects.

In terms of performance, though, nVidia makes better Linux drivers at this moment. But people who want to support open drivers (which might appeal to the OpenArena community) often support AMD/ATi for their openness and the manpower they have been putting into things like X, Mesa, and other parts of the open source stack.

I play OpenArena on open drivers on a cheapo HD 4550 and it works in 1920x1080. Not the best framerates, but playable.
Logged
poldie
Nub


Cakes 0
Posts: 32


« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2010, 02:05:56 PM »

Things did indeed get better since AMD took over. Both the proprietary driver (Catalyst) and the open source drivers (which I currently use). Open source drivers are under heavy development but are extremely stable and provide OpenGL 2.0 and GLSL at the moment. This is plenty for OpenArena and fancy desktop effects.

In terms of performance, though, nVidia makes better Linux drivers at this moment. But people who want to support open drivers (which might appeal to the OpenArena community) often support AMD/ATi for their openness and the manpower they have been putting into things like X, Mesa, and other parts of the open source stack.

I play OpenArena on open drivers on a cheapo HD 4550 and it works in 1920x1080. Not the best framerates, but playable.

If you played OA on that card at, say, 800x600, or 1280x1024, do you get good framerates?  I don't see the point of higher than 60fps - would you achieve that with most of the graphics detail fairly high, or would you need to reduce bit depth, texture quality etc?

Currently I'm using my on-board gfx, which is the intel gma 3100, and I have literally every last option disabled or on the most minimal setting to get a sensible frame rate!

I don't want to sound like too much of a skinflint, but that card looks more in the price range I can justify than the 7600/8800 previously mention (thanks, though - I appreciate you taking the time to help out).

Thanks for your help.
Logged
fromhell
Administrator
GET A LIFE!
**********

Cakes 35
Posts: 14520



WWW
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2010, 02:11:38 PM »

Terrible framerates on HD4550!??! Nonsense!
OA was developed on:

* A Voodoo Banshee
* A Geforce2
* A GeforceFX 5200
* Several 2003-05 generation Radeons

But seeing a very recent card dip in a game like this is kind of mind imploding.

I don't see the point of higher than 60fps
Monitor sync, less input latency, and most 'importantly' (to some few here), advantageous physics exploits (which means the whole rush to get 333fps by any means possible).
Logged

asking when OA3 will be done won't get OA3 done.
Progress of OA3 currently occurs behind closed doors alone

I do not provide technical support either.

new code development on github
HelloKitty!
Lesser Nub


Cakes 12
Posts: 115



« Reply #5 on: January 21, 2010, 02:32:21 PM »

It's a driver issue, not a gfx card issue. The new open source memory manager is still not optimised. You'll get much better framerates if you drop the resolution, or use the proprietary Catalyst driver. Besides, I get more than 50fps at full HD resolution. That's not terrible at all.

Many servers use pmove_fixed, so I don't bother with going for 125 fps anymore.

Another cool thing about the HD4550 is that it is passively cooled.
Logged
fromhell
Administrator
GET A LIFE!
**********

Cakes 35
Posts: 14520



WWW
« Reply #6 on: January 21, 2010, 02:59:27 PM »

Radeons are nice at high resolutions, i've achieved 50-70fps at max detail at 2048x1536 on an x800 years ago. It was great, think I still have shots of those.
Logged

asking when OA3 will be done won't get OA3 done.
Progress of OA3 currently occurs behind closed doors alone

I do not provide technical support either.

new code development on github
poldie
Nub


Cakes 0
Posts: 32


« Reply #7 on: January 21, 2010, 03:23:54 PM »

Amazon have them for £30:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gigabyte-GV-R455D3-512I-Radeon-512MB-Graphics/dp/B001NFPXG2/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1264108142&sr=1-1

so perhaps I'll get that one.

Thanks for the help.

ps. 333fps?  One day, all monitors will refresh that fast... Smiley

pps:  https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RadeonHD
that page had a list of supported cards and the 4550 isn't on it - is that bad?

ppps:  is this really going to work on my 64 bit system?!
« Last Edit: January 21, 2010, 03:59:17 PM by poldie » Logged
HelloKitty!
Lesser Nub


Cakes 12
Posts: 115



« Reply #8 on: January 21, 2010, 04:23:51 PM »

Ubuntu doesn't support much out of the box. This is what you should be checking.

There are experimental repositories for Ubuntu, I think they are called "edgers". You'll need to install opensource drivers from there, and a recent kernel. You want the radeon driver, not RadeonHD, despite the name.

Alternatively, you can install the binary driver from ATi which is less stable and worse for desktop usage, but will give you better 3D performance and OpenGL 3.2.

But this is just a suggestion. You might want to look into a low-end nVidia card too, especially if you don't feel comfortable with installing experimental drivers from source. ATi drivers are work in progress atm and not everyone enjoys this. Be warned.
Logged
poldie
Nub


Cakes 0
Posts: 32


« Reply #9 on: January 21, 2010, 04:43:42 PM »

Ubuntu doesn't support much out of the box. This is what you should be checking.

There are experimental repositories for Ubuntu, I think they are called "edgers". You'll need to install opensource drivers from there, and a recent kernel. You want the radeon driver, not RadeonHD, despite the name.

Alternatively, you can install the binary driver from ATi which is less stable and worse for desktop usage, but will give you better 3D performance and OpenGL 3.2.

But this is just a suggestion. You might want to look into a low-end nVidia card too, especially if you don't feel comfortable with installing experimental drivers from source. ATi drivers are work in progress atm and not everyone enjoys this. Be warned.

It's a tough one to call.  On the one hand, I want to learn more about Linux, and I don't mind compiling source etc if instructions are given.  On the other hand, I don't want to buy a card, spend hours faffing around and end up with a less stable system.  Perhaps there is truth in the idea that nvidia is more stable?   You seem happy with your 4550/OpenArena, though.  Which version of Ubuntu do you use, and are you on 32 or 64 bit?

Logged
Falkland
Member


Cakes 6
Posts: 590


« Reply #10 on: January 21, 2010, 04:54:23 PM »


There are experimental repositories for Ubuntu, I think they are called "edgers". You'll need to install opensource drivers from there, and a recent kernel. You want the radeon driver, not RadeonHD, despite the name.


https://wiki.ubuntu.com/XorgOnTheEdge

You don't necessarily need a new kernel if the specific distribution repository could provide only a drm-source package to be compiled and installed with module assistant.

Updated but more stable drivers are available here instead : https://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-x-swat/+archive/x-updates
Logged
HelloKitty!
Lesser Nub


Cakes 12
Posts: 115



« Reply #11 on: January 21, 2010, 05:38:48 PM »

Quote
It's a tough one to call.  On the one hand, I want to learn more about Linux, and I don't mind compiling source etc if instructions are given.  On the other hand, I don't want to buy a card, spend hours faffing around and end up with a less stable system.  Perhaps there is truth in the idea that nvidia is more stable?   You seem happy with your 4550/OpenArena, though.  Which version of Ubuntu do you use, and are you on 32 or 64 bit?
nVidia has had a huge headstart because they started supporting Linux sooner. ATi ignored it for a long time and is now catching up.

Once the free drivers are completed, they will be the best thing to use, and probably more comfortable and stable than the nVidia binaries. But until then, it might have a few bumps here and there. You should get ATi if you believe in the open source philosophy. If you don't care, nVidia's driver is more advanced at this particular moment.

I don't use Ubuntu, I'm running 64-bit Gentoo Linux. But the drivers are the same, obviously.
Logged
Udi
Member


Cakes 25
Posts: 536


i do my own stunts


WWW
« Reply #12 on: January 21, 2010, 06:40:52 PM »

You should get ATi if you believe in the open source philosophy. If you don't care, nVidia's driver is more advanced at this particular moment.

You can actually use the nouveau driver for nVidia cards if you want open source drivers. But I can't say much about that, I use the binary nVidia driver under Debian Lenny 64 bit, nVidia GeForce 8400M GS (notebook).
Logged

http://udionline.hu/en/projektek/openarena/
Todo list: 1. q3dm17 textures replacement (95% done)
HelloKitty!
Lesser Nub


Cakes 12
Posts: 115



« Reply #13 on: January 21, 2010, 08:25:59 PM »

The nouveau guys are doing a great job, but the 3d only works on older chips at the moment.

And nVidia is not helping them in any way. All of their specs are still closed.

AMD has opened the specs on all chips, and has promised to do so in the future. They are also funding several developers to work on Mesa, kernel and the open source drivers. So they are actively supporting free drivers, which is a good thing in my eyes.
Logged
poldie
Nub


Cakes 0
Posts: 32


« Reply #14 on: January 23, 2010, 05:15:45 PM »

I think it's looking like it's worth the extra £15 or so getting the 4650 over the 4550.   Ie this:  (http://www.amazon.co.uk/Gigabyte-GV-R465OC-1GI-Radeon-Graphics-DVI-I/dp/B001Q7MW2A/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1264288409&sr=1-1) It's ATI, so to the extent that I'm helping the open source community at all by buying a single card then I'm doing that!  It sounds like I can run Catalyst drivers if the open source ones are no good.

Why aren't the 4650 cards listed here:

https://wiki.ubuntu.com/HardwareSupportComponentsVideoCardsAti

Logged
HelloKitty!
Lesser Nub


Cakes 12
Posts: 115



« Reply #15 on: January 23, 2010, 05:18:28 PM »

The Ubuntu wiki is probably not up to date. 4650 and 4550 use the same chip family, all HD 4xxx chips are supported and plenty of people are running HD 4650 with open drivers. Both cards will run OA just fine.

I'd suggest starting with Catalyst. The 2D experience is a bit worse, but 3D will work well. Then you can experiment with the open drivers once you get that working.
Logged
poldie
Nub


Cakes 0
Posts: 32


« Reply #16 on: January 23, 2010, 05:37:08 PM »

The Ubuntu wiki is probably not up to date. 4650 and 4550 use the same chip family, all HD 4xxx chips are supported and plenty of people are running HD 4650 with open drivers. Both cards will run OA just fine.

I'd suggest starting with Catalyst. The 2D experience is a bit worse, but 3D will work well. Then you can experiment with the open drivers once you get that working.

Thanks.  I was thinking that.  You've said 2D is worse, but worse than what?  And do you mean performance or stability/incorrect rendering etc?   2D would have to be pretty inefficient to be worse than my current on-motherboard gfx.

I actually used to work on graphic card drivers, back in 1997-9, and even then I laughed at the pointlessness of bothering to optimize 2d;  who gives a s**t, it's already fast enough.  They were fast enough then, I'm sure the 4650 is fast enough now - even with open source drivers!   
Logged
HelloKitty!
Lesser Nub


Cakes 12
Posts: 115



« Reply #17 on: January 23, 2010, 06:07:36 PM »

2d things like video (Xv), resizing windows, moving windows around, etc. are a bit slow under Catalyst. The open source drivers really kick ass at this stuff.

But you get hardware video decoding with the latest Catalyst, which is cool.
Logged
poldie
Nub


Cakes 0
Posts: 32


« Reply #18 on: January 24, 2010, 11:46:35 AM »

2d things like video (Xv), resizing windows, moving windows around, etc. are a bit slow under Catalyst. The open source drivers really kick ass at this stuff.

But you get hardware video decoding with the latest Catalyst, which is cool.

Thanks for all your help - I've gone for the Gigatech 4650. Hopefully it won't prove too traumatic.

Logged
Marble of Doom
Bigger member


Cakes 4
Posts: 151

Caketastic


« Reply #19 on: January 24, 2010, 08:25:07 PM »

That's a nice card. I hope it works out for you!
Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to: