[Ubuntu-gaming] AMD/ATI vs NVIDIA vs Intel
macoafi at gmail.com
Mon Jun 22 00:25:45 UTC 2009
On Sunday 21 June 2009 8:04:16 pm Danny Piccirillo wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 21, 2009 at 05:12, Joe Sloan <joe at tmsusa.com> wrote:
> > Intel graphics have generally not been as high performance as nvidia or
> > but they have the benefit of "just working" out of the box, with 3D support
> > in the official linux kernel, with open source drivers based on intels
> > published video card specs. They do work nicely for desktop effects and
> > gaming. The folks at intel are in the process of revamping the video
> > drivers, and ubuntu 9.04 users with intel video are suffering with a half
> > baked driver situation - however by 9.10 the intel video situation will be
> > greatly improved. Even with 9.04 there are repositories for kernel updates
> > and intel video drivers, which dramatically improve the video performance.
> > So, who hates intel? They seem to have done fairly well by linux, compared
> > to most firms.
That's why Intel's all I use. Getting ATI working on dual-head with 64bit
Ubuntu was um....well, I never did figure it out. Worked on 32bit. Works fine
on 64bit Karmic with Intel graphics though.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss