# Nvidia recommendation / Move

## jordelver

Hi,

I've been having long running problems with my ATI Radeon 9500. 

It seems to run ok while in Linux, but completely locks up Windows XP (using several different drivers).

I was thinking of an upgrade and a move to Nvidia because of the better Linux driver support.

I'd want something not too expensive, but obviously better than what I already have, any recommendations? Most FX cards seem to get bad reviews compared to the Radeons, but as I use Linux mostly Nvidia seems to be the way to go.

What will I need to do to switch over to the new card?

TIA,

Jord

----------

## adaptr

Buy an FX 5200, it shouldn't be more than about $100.

Do get a decent one, as bad cards have obviously bad performance.

Next, boot your Gentoo as usual, but into text mode.

If you try to start X things will fail - albeit rather spectacularly.

Then do an

```
emerge nvidia-glx
```

and sit back while that happens.

Edit your xfree config and change the "driver" part to "nvidia".

Restart X and watch that baby fly!

----------

## oumpah-pah

I think you should also do a :

```
emerge nvidia-kernel
```

----------

## jordelver

 *Quote:*   

> Buy an FX 5200, it shouldn't be more than about $100

 

Would a FX 5200 be faster than my current Radeon 9500?

Thanks

----------

## DocGonzo

I would not recomend a FX5200 if you are interested in gaming. It will be very slow. I had one, and it was slower than my GF2. If mony matters that hard you better go with a used GF4x00 (ebay). The FX5900XT has good price/value but its about 200  (in Germany). If you are not interested in OpenGL games and stuff, a FX5200 would be ok. 

What also matters is the CPU. Doesn't make any sense to put a FX5900 in a < 1GHz PC.

----------

## adaptr

 *oumpah-pah wrote:*   

> I think you should also do a :
> 
> ```
> emerge nvidia-kernel
> ```
> ...

 

I think you should do an

```
emerge -v nvidia-glx
```

and observe closely what it says  :Wink: 

----------

## adaptr

 *jordelver wrote:*   

>  *Quote:*   Buy an FX 5200, it shouldn't be more than about $100 
> 
> Would a FX 5200 be faster than my current Radeon 9500?
> 
> Thanks

 

www.tomshardware.com

Will tell you all you need to know.

----------

## adaptr

 *DocGonzo wrote:*   

> I would not recomend a FX5200 if you are interested in gaming. It will be very slow. I had one, and it was slower than my GF2.

 

You are joking.

I used to have a GF2 MX - obsolete by todays standards.

I bought an FX 5200 6 months ago and haven't been disappointed yet.

There is such a thing as value for money...

 *DocGonzo wrote:*   

> What also matters is the CPU. Doesn't make any sense to put a FX5900 in a < 1GHz PC.

 

Not nearly as true as you seem to think.

You can run a GF4 Pure/Ultra very nicely on a P3 500 MHz - maxing out the card but not the CPU every time.

You may be right about the FX series though, but the newer these cards, the more functionality they tend to put into hardware, meaning you need less CPU to do the same things.

What the CPU is used for is to do the non-graphical stuff, like physics simulation and pre-processing the scenes.

That does depend on the CPU power - and the system bus bandwidth - and is usually the bottleneck in the latest games.

Have you seen The Suffering yet ?

Has to be seen to be believed...

But when it comes to anything remotely 3D-related - the faster the graphics card the faster the game.

----------

## seppe

Hi,

I'm going to buy me a Dell Inspiron 8600 laptop in a few weeks. And I have the choice between a ATI Mobile Radeon 9600 and a nVidia GeForce FX 5200. First I was sure to chose the GeForce FX 5200, but then I read that this card is even performing worse than a GeForce4. 

The ATI card is very good, but ATI's drivers suck under GNU/Linux. I'm not really a gamer, but I will play Doom 3 and Vendetta sometimes. 

Can anyone tell me what to do? Because I really can't chose  :Sad: 

----------

## PrakashP

If you want raw power (and value for money) get a gf4 ti. (It even outperforms a FX5600 and can be on par with the ultra version.) If you want power and good quality (AA, AF) and value for money get a FX5900XT.

5200 is really not worth the money - except you are in need of a hardware mpeg2 decoder and really want "directx9" hardware. That is something the gf4 can't give you. (The gf4 mx has a mpeg2 hw decoder, but sucks performance wise, as every mx version does. The 5200 basically is a "gf5 mx".)

I have a gf4 ti 4200 8x (which I can clock to a 4600) and ut2004 runs just nice in native LCD resolution, ie 1280x1024. But as soon as I turn AF on it gets more and more like a slide show...

@seppe

If you want to put Linux onto your laptop, now matter how slow the nvidia card is in hardware, as long as ATI won't make better drivers, Nvidia's 5200 will be faster than high end ATI cards (in Linux!). Doom3 will currently run only on Nvidia cards (in Linux)... So waiting for ATI making a better driver wouldn't be an option for me...

----------

## UTgamer

Some help from a hardcore UTgamer. I do use a Geforce FX5900XT, and I can play UT2004 with all possible maximal settings . The price is around 200.

No more money needed, search between lower prices and performance tables.

The maximum settings are done with this HW:

- Athlon 2400

- GeforceFX 5900XTV

- DDR266RAM

- Soundblaster Audigy with special hardware support for alsa, this hardware support was helpfull. It increases the speed of the game enormous.

----------

## PrakashP

@UTGamer

Just out of curiosity: Which AF and AA settings are you using?

----------

## UTgamer

Sorry forgot the resolution  :Smile: 

I do play by 1280*1024 in 32bit and I do not need AA or AF, in a fast game you do seldom see there a difference  :Wink: 

[Edit]

The Soundblaster Live and Audigy HW supported drivers can be downloaded here:

http://www.lost.org.uk/openal.html

----------

## HydroSan

I'd recommend a GOOD 5200FX (e.g: Nothing from ASUS!) or an XFX 5600/5700 256MB Edition. I own both the former and the later (the former being a 3DForce 5200FX 128MB - which runs UT2003/2004 pretty damn well considering), and have had no Graphics-related crashes at all with my XFX both under Linux and Windows.

The cards are cheaper now because of the 6800/Ultra, so be sure to pick one up.

----------

## PrakashP

@utgamer

Not true! I find the Change from 1x AF to 2x AF very striking (much sharper textures, esp on a LCD). Even setting AA to 2x gives a better impression, because of less edge jagginess. Even in a fast game...

----------

## UTgamer

Do you know about CRT monitor masks with pixel sizes from 26,27,28. I had a look for a fine monitor with a small pixelsize. On my monitor I do not see a big difference.

But it looks like slow digital pannels (LCD) do need that feature, and I believe but not for shure, plasma screens do need that too. 

Do you have refreshrates higher than 85Hz up to 300? Than I believe your picture is to smear.

----------

## UTgamer

My personal conclusion:

Buy new technology screen will follow to buy new technology graphic card.  :Confused: 

The industrie likes you.  :Laughing: 

----------

## PrakashP

Yeah, of course, my pic is not as smooth as on a crt, but I can live with it. I am not hardcore gamer.  :Wink:  I am rather a worker, so I need a good display. As a LCD delivers very sharp picture, so the difference of texture filtering becomes very apparent.

On my CRT I also had a hard time seeing the difference...

----------

## GenKreton

CRT's are still the best for gaming.

But as the owner of both an ati mobile and an nvidia ti4200 I HIGHLY recommend you go for the nvidia. My experiences have always been better with nvidia. On my ti4200 with some tunning I am playing at 1600x1200 (on a 21" viewable crt) all textures medium and it looks great with amazing refresh rates all things considered.

----------

