best graphics card for "out of the box"

Rashkae ubuntu at
Tue May 20 13:52:22 UTC 2008

NoOp wrote:

> I'm curious about this (Nvidia); I don't have any NVidia cards/graphics
> and all of my systems graphics are ATI or Intel. Not because I've
> anything against Nvidia, but instead because pretty much take what I get
> with my recycled/rebuilt systems.
> I've often seen many posts against ATI on the list (and elsewhere) but
> seldom have had any problems at all with the ATI cards and onboard
> Intel's that I do have, yet there seem to be hundreds of posts regarding
> Nvidia - particularly following upgrades.
> Are Nvidia cards/graphics really "best out of the box" with
> Ubuntu/linux, or are they really best in class for graphics overall?
> Anyone know of a reasonably reliable link that compares "best out of the
> box" linux graphics cards?

Yes and yes.  I've had all kinds of gltiches with Intel's new chips even
though they were open source (this was back with Gutsy, however, things
like video freezing if I try to switch virtual X servers with
Ctrl-X-F7-12) and ATI binary drivers were horrible.  (problems with my
notebook like XV not working with binary driver, but 3d not working with
open source driver.)  Mind you, those examples are purely anecdotal and
 don't mean much, and certainly people have had reason to complain about
Nvidia (power saving mode still defective?), but I think in total, the
experience and support with Nvidia has been top class.

If you check Tom's Hardware VGA chars, Nvidia are indeed, usually, the
best in class for graphics overall.  And regardless of a difference of a
few fps here and there, Nvidia cards have been, for more than 4 years,
the only graphic cards on linux that can achieve the same performance on
games as the same game would on Windows.  There aren't many games being
made for linux anymore, but if you plan on using transgaming at all, an
Nvidia card is a must.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list