14 Aug
2006
14 Aug
'06
12:20 p.m.
Paul Coccoli wrote:
On 8/13/06, carmen <_(a)whats-your.name> wrote:
Intel video is desirable if
one of this conditions is met:
a) you need a decent (PCIe) system and need open source drivers
b) you only need "light" 3D acceleration (eg. OpenGL screen savers, glX,
quake3, etc) and want to save some money.
as for open source gfx drivers, there is:
1) fully supported: ATi up to R9250. recent Intel gfx is as least as
fast as this chip, but i don't know the stat of the Intel driver for
recent Intel gfx.
2) partially supported: ATi up to R9800XT. this one is faster than
recent Intel gfx. i don't know about the state of this driver either.
those radeons are both AGP only.
if you don't care if your drivers are open source or closed source, and
want performance, get an nvidia card.
On Sun Aug 13, 2006 at 10:10:39AM -0400, lanas
wrote:
I'm confused. Is Intel video desirable in any way? Folks,
First of all, I always appreciate reading the comments and
replies to
the questions. They are very useful.
Recently there was a thread about a AMD64 setup but there was no
clear mention of specific mobos that Simply Works. So I'd like to
have
recommendations from folks who actually are
running successfully an
AMD
dual-core processor.
you know that Intel's Core 2 Duo is 64bit, faster than Opteron, and
equal in price, right?
its just that its going to be damn difficult (impossible?) to find an
AMD64 mobo that has Intel video onboard, and Intel doesnt make PCIx
videocards afaik.