Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

brenix · 2010-02-23 23:10:14

Ok, so I know there's other threads on this, but I would like to know in everyone's opinion which chipset/manufacturer will work best in arch with a new computer that I am about to purchase. I'm mostly focused on finding a video card that will support dual monitors as well as perform well for games (possibly with the least amount of configuration needed).

I tend to prefer NVIDIA over ATI, but I know that NVIDIA only has proprietary drivers and ATI uses both proprietary and open source.

Quick HW specs on what I plan on buying:
AMD Phenom II X4 965 (3.4ghz)
GIGABYTE GA-790FXTA-UD5 (PCI-E 2.0 16x w/CrossfireX support, unsure if this supports SLI??)
Dual 22" Flatscreen monitors (probably @ 1920x1200 resolution)
EVGA or GIGABYTE NVIDIA GTS 250 (1GB, 256-bit, PCI-E 16x 2.0) Any other suggestions?
8GB DDR3

Any suggestions will help!

Last edited by brenix (2010-02-23 23:12:39)

flamelab · 2010-02-23 23:13:25

Nvidia for now, if you don't want headaches. ATi, after 2 years or so, so that everything (KMS/DRI2.x/powersaving/G3D) have settled a bit and stabilized.

GTS250 is excellent, but if you want lower power consumption and/or you don't play games on Windows partition, choose a GT240.

brenix · 2010-02-23 23:16:49

Thats what I was thinking so far. From what I've read though, is there problems with configuring dual displays with NVIDIA on Arch? I don't have it to try, but I don't see where it should be a problem.

n0dix · 2010-02-23 23:18:21

@flamelab, agreed. I have an old ATI, but if you buy a new one, probably you should use property driver to get more fps. However, for simple things the difference is none.

ozar · 2010-02-23 23:27:18

I just keep on buying nVidia cards and have never regretted it!

1LordAnubis · 2010-02-24 00:38:40

phoronix did some linux benchmarking with the 240; seems the 220 may run faster....
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a … _240&num=1

mrunion · 2010-02-24 01:20:25

nVidia

pickboy87 · 2010-02-24 01:42:06

I'll also toss my opinion in too. I would suggest Nvidia simply on the fact that things tend to go smoother (working with displays and games, not necessarily FPS) than ATi in linux. I've tried using an ATi card with linux and had all sorts of problems, as well as not having WoW run properly. Stick with Nvidia right now until ATi improves upon it's proprietary drivers.

flamelab · 2010-02-24 01:55:55

pickboy87 wrote:

I'll also toss my opinion in too. I would suggest Nvidia simply on the fact that things tend to go smoother (working with displays and games, not necessarily FPS) than ATi in linux. I've tried using an ATi card with linux and had all sorts of problems, as well as not having WoW run properly. Stick with Nvidia right now until ATi improves upon it's proprietary drivers.

The proprietary one hasn't *improved* since March 2008, when AIGLX support was added. After that, only newer devices' support (and DROP of support for X1xxx and older) and newer OpenGL 2.x/3.x support. And invisible documentation on XvBA.

So we have only the foss driver (forget about radeonhd, I can't really understand why it still exists) xf86-video-ati, which in 2 years from now, shall be very usable.

kras1001 · 2010-02-24 09:23:31

Nvidia

linuxgod · 2010-02-24 09:53:40

nvidia of course

panosk · 2010-02-24 10:32:19

brenix wrote:

Thats what I was thinking so far. From what I've read though, is there problems with configuring dual displays with NVIDIA on Arch? I don't have it to try, but I don't see where it should be a problem.

Definitely nvidia. I've never had a single problem with nvidia drivers, they are very stable and they perform superb. On the other hand, I had a really bad time with the ati card in my brother's pc when I was trying to configure his system. I have a gigabyte 9600GT 1GB RAM with passive cooling which works great in low temperatures. A few days ago I plugged a second touch screen that was collecting dust in a closet just to test dual display. I didn't have to tamper with the xorg.conf manually, just opened the nvidia-settings utility as su and configured the dual display mode in there. After logging out and in again I had dual display.

EDIT: That's a hell of a monster you are building . If you don't plan to use sli or crossfire, then you can save some money by choosing the Gigabyte GA-MA770T-UD3P motherboard. It is a fantastic board, very cheap, with excellent reviews, and the one I chose when I built a system similar to yours a few months ago. If you want sli or crossfire, then the mb you chose is simply unmatched.

Last edited by panosk (2010-02-24 10:41:17)

Mr.Elendig · 2010-02-24 10:54:32

Somewhat relevant: http://twitter.com/NVIDIAGeForce/statuses/9503345711

brenix · 2010-02-24 15:01:17

Wow, great suggestions! I appreciate it. I'm definitely going with an NVIDIA!

panosk wrote:

That's a hell of a monster you are building. If you don't plan to use sli or crossfire, then you can save some money by choosing the Gigabyte GA-MA770T-UD3P motherboard. It is a fantastic board, very cheap, with excellent reviews, and the one I chose when I built a system similar to yours a few months ago. If you want sli or crossfire, then the mb you chose is simply unmatched.

Wow, that is a good deal for a mobo. To be on the safe side, I'm probably sticking with the one I found since it's got USB 3.0 and SLI support for scalability.. Thanks for the suggestion though. It was a tough decision on all the hardware

axel668 · 2010-02-24 15:05:07

+1 on Nvidia

jimbok · 2010-02-24 16:13:12

Definite +1 for nvidia!

slon · 2010-02-25 15:22:51

I have an ati 3650 and believe me I suggest getting nvidia, despite the fact that the ATI drivers are getting better and better, but they will be as good as the nvidia ones' after about a year. Nvidia goes better with linux

JohannesSM64 · 2010-02-25 15:50:39

ATI with Linux is a nightmare. NVIDIA, however, "just works". That's my experience.
Actually, my experience with ATI drivers in Windows is also horrible. Just stay away from ATI.

brendan · 2010-02-25 19:25:46

I'm on an ATI HD4850 for my desktop.

If you want working dual monitors and enough 3D power to run Xmoto, then ATI is the way to go on linux. Absolutely no configuration needed and in a few months we might have full KMS support.

If you want more 3D power or HD video playback then go NVIDIA for now.

I have an NVIDIA ION board and with VDPAU it's brilliant as a media center box. To be fair the only configuration needed is to remember to reinstall the nvidia drivers at every kernel change.

As for on windows, I've had way more problems with my Nvidia 8800GT, 7900GTX and 6800GT than with my ATI 4850...

LukynZ · 2010-02-25 19:34:47

Well, today there is no nVidia card compared to ATI's. If you buy nVidia, you buy worse card....however in linux....with better drivers at this moment. We'll see what can do catalyst with new xorg support. OSS drivers are very good...I like them at this moment. No power as catalyst, but working nicely...

brendan · 2010-02-25 19:48:30

LukynZ wrote:

Well, today there is no nVidia card compared to ATI's. If you buy nVidia, you buy worse card....however in linux....with better drivers at this moment. We'll see what can do catalyst with new xorg support. OSS drivers are very good...I like them at this moment. No power as catalyst, but working nicely...

Nvidia cards are only worst in the top top end.

Although if you buy nvidia you buy some possibly dodgy silicon:
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/new … -defective

mrunion · 2010-02-26 04:02:36

@brendan: If you use pacman and official Arch repos, you don't have to remember to reinstall nVidia drivers -- they pull as a dependency when the upgraded Kernel needs them.

extofme · 2010-02-26 06:45:54

brendan wrote:

I'm on an ATI HD4850 for my desktop.

yes that's a great card, i have two of them in mine.

i know this is kind of a PC vs. Mac (whats leenucks) kind of topic, but i don't buy anything but AMD/ATi and i've never had any issues. every machine i've built for others is the same. i would agree that Nvidia has a nice proprietary driver vs. ATi, but since when is that important? why support that? from sources i've read about the proprietary driver, its pretty all over the place, and applies some rather intrusive things to the xserver; but i'm not an expert. nvidia will never open source their driver because 95% of it is shared with the windows/mac driver code; very little is platform specific.

the fact of the matter, like it or not, is these sorts of things are indeed political, and you should consider siding with the party that intends to promote a long term relationship with you and the product (gnu/linux) you wish to integrate, instead of whats "easiest" ATM. money makes decisions. ATi has demonstrated a long term commitment to us by ensuring that their products will have lasting support, even if not by them directly, by releasing the necessary information and funding the initial efforts to produce a quality integration with our platform.

bottom line: buy ATi. demonstrate your dedication to open implementations, and your demand for community involvement in proprietary, "component type" hardware products. this is how we make things better for gnu/linux. do you intend on buying a new card every 6mos? each year? the ATi driver code is on a fast development track; i wouldn't worry too much, unless you turn cards around faster than a year or two.

my 2c.

raf_kig · 2010-02-26 08:05:51

Well - given your requirements you'll have to use the proprietary drivers either way - so I'd say go for nvidia.
Any mention of atis binary and I want to run around screaming and repeatedly bang my head against hard surfaces. Yes, I've been burned :-)

In 5 to 10 years you might consider buying ATI, maybe until then the open source drivers will deliver half the performance of the closed source ones.

If you want some hints take a look here:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=a … a_3d&num=2
I know those are phoronix' numbers - but they'll give you a pretty good idea of 3d support using the open source drivers.
Just look at tremulous - maxing out at 3x fps @ 800x600 on an Intel Core i3 530 clocked at 3.31GHz. Tremulous' engine
is a slightly modified quake engine and thus CPU-Bound (!) on any recent[0] hardware[1].
The results should at least be an order of magnitude higher with even atis closed source drivers.

[0]: not older 8 years
[1]: When running the game using real graphics drivers

Last edited by raf_kig (2010-02-26 08:07:54)

Gen2ly · 2010-02-26 22:46:53

extofme wrote:

brendan wrote:
I'm on an ATI HD4850 for my desktop.
yes that's a great card, i have two of them in mine.
i know this is kind of a PC vs. Mac (whats leenucks) kind of topic, but i don't buy anything but AMD/ATi and i've never had any issues. every machine i've built for others is the same. i would agree that Nvidia has a nice proprietary driver vs. ATi, but since when is that important? why support that? from sources i've read about the proprietary driver, its pretty all over the place, and applies some rather intrusive things to the xserver; but i'm not an expert. nvidia will never open source their driver because 95% of it is shared with the windows/mac driver code; very little is platform specific.
the fact of the matter, like it or not, is these sorts of things are indeed political, and you should consider siding with the party that intends to promote a long term relationship with you and the product (gnu/linux) you wish to integrate, instead of whats "easiest" ATM. money makes decisions. ATi has demonstrated a long term commitment to us by ensuring that their products will have lasting support, even if not by them directly, by releasing the necessary information and funding the initial efforts to produce a quality integration with our platform.
bottom line: buy ATi. demonstrate your dedication to open implementations, and your demand for community involvement in proprietary, "component type" hardware products. this is how we make things better for gnu/linux. do you intend on buying a new card every 6mos? each year? the ATi driver code is on a fast development track; i wouldn't worry too much, unless you turn cards around faster than a year or two.
my 2c.

Huh, I was thinking the same thing. ATi has actually invested in Linux by doing this, it's a longer commitment down the road, and will probably provide better benefit in the future. As for nvidia they do make a great driver but I think they might be less adaptable to new Linux technologies and in fact be able to hold Linux adaptability to creating new ones because they have the market.

Arch Linux

#1 2010-02-23 23:10:14

Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#2 2010-02-23 23:13:25

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#3 2010-02-23 23:16:49

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#4 2010-02-23 23:18:21

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#5 2010-02-23 23:27:18

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#6 2010-02-24 00:38:40

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#7 2010-02-24 01:20:25

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#8 2010-02-24 01:42:06

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#9 2010-02-24 01:55:55

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#10 2010-02-24 09:23:31

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#11 2010-02-24 09:53:40

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#12 2010-02-24 10:32:19

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#13 2010-02-24 10:54:32

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#14 2010-02-24 15:01:17

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#15 2010-02-24 15:05:07

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#16 2010-02-24 16:13:12

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#17 2010-02-25 15:22:51

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#18 2010-02-25 15:50:39

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#19 2010-02-25 19:25:46

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#20 2010-02-25 19:34:47

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#21 2010-02-25 19:48:30

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#22 2010-02-26 04:02:36

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#23 2010-02-26 06:45:54

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#24 2010-02-26 08:05:51

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

#25 2010-02-26 22:46:53

Re: Should I buy ATI or NVIDIA?

Board footer