19 Dec
2006
19 Dec
'06
12:25 a.m.
On 12/18/06, Tim Howard <tdhoward(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 12/18/06, Mark Knecht <markknecht(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Granted. 3D accel works better in fglrx than radeon. No question about that.
The question I have is what are you doing on a Linux music box that requires it?
I decided not to do any of those things on this Linux box and just
stock with the radeon driver from xorg so that I didn't have to deal
with any of this.
Have fun,
Mark
Now, why do you need the ATI driver vs. just
using the Xorg radeon
driver in the kernel? What are you doing that requires either 3D
accelleration, which may or may not not work with that version of the
9200 anyway, or composite/SVideo outputs. Those are the only reasons I
know to use the ATI driver.
Well, once upon a time I had a SuSE installation on this very machine,
and hardware 3D acceleration did not work at all. (software rendering)
But when I installed the binary drivers, it worked quite well. I
have since heard that for various reasons, that's not so good.
So when I did this FC5 install, I found that the 3D acceleration was
not up to par with what I had before, and I assumed that FC5 didn't
come with the drivers for my card. But I'm finding out that maybe
they do, and I'm still not quite getting the acceleration that I'm
used to. mark@lightning ~ $ lsmod | grep radeon
radeon 109600 2
drm 73448 3 radeon
mark@lightning ~ $
I'll run that command when I get home, and see what it says...
Thanks,
-TimH