Graphic card that works?

Adam K Kirchhoff akirchhoff135014 at
Thu Jun 30 09:36:58 UTC 2011

The OP has already established that nvidia is not an option, and explained why 
he feels this way.  So why is this still being discussed?  Your happiness with 
nvidia is completely irrelevent to this particular discussion.


On Thursday 30 June 2011 00:54:06 Allen wrote:
> There's so much to reply to... I snipped a bit of it so it would be
> readable at least. If you have no sense of humor, and from the off list
> email I received a week or two ago, I know someone here does, please
> delete this. I really don't need another email in my inbox saying "I
> have an attitude problem" from someone who apparently is learning what
> Sarcasm is at the same rate Sheldon Cooper is.
> On 6/29/2011 5:03 AM, Luca Pizzamiglio wrote:
> > My 2 cents to this discussion...
> > 
> > I currently use NVidia 450 GTS. It works fine, video and KDE with
> > compositing runs pretty well.
> > Yes, sometimes NVidia closed source FreeBSD driver has some bugs and you
> > could not fix it.
> > Yes, Nvidia closed source FreeBSD driver can turn on a lot of HW
> > acceleration that open source driver can't.
> This is basically why I fly the Nvidia Flag. I have ONE ATI card, ONE,
> and it's in this machine, running Windows 7, and Slackware. I only have
> this video card, because it was a Gift. My Mom had me configure a
> computer for Her, and said "Configure this thing like you would if it
> was for you" and then on Christmas Day two years ago, She had wrapped it
> up and said "It was actually for you" so I kinda screwed up on the video
> section.... My Mom doesn't play games or anything so I didn't do much on
> Video. It's a 256 MB card, and the other option was 512, and I said to
> my Mom "Well, I'd personally get the upgrade but for YOU, You don't play
> games or do anything like that so this is fine" and She didn't stop me
> there to say get the upgrade. I made sure it had RAM and CPU power over
> everything else.
> So yea, I have one ATI card. I really would have loved Nvidia though.
> Every other machine I have, if it has a real video card and not on board
> crap, it's Nvidia.
> > Graphic chips are too complex and too hidden to have high quality open
> > sourced driver. Company should provide them... AMD helps open source
> > community developing its driver, but it doesn't provide a really high
> > quality driver. They works, but they don't enable a lot of acceleration.
> I personally will say exactly how I feel about this; I don't care even a
> little about Open Source drivers. I'm not a Programmer, so I'm not going
> to try and work on it, and I'm not Stallman, so I don't think it makes
> me a bad person either. I'll take a closed source working driver over
> Open Source "Good luck with that" drivers any day of the week. Security
> problems and all. (Don't know which ones, I just saw the other guy who
> think Nvidia was apparently founded by ex SS members say it had security
> issues. Again, don't care, I take care of security from a hardware and
> software point of view. If someone is going to break through 2 hardware
> firewalls and a switch + software and all that I have in place
> protecting each machine, which all of them then have their own software
> firewalls and other protective measures, just to steal my porn, let 'em).
> >>>>> So you agree with that Nvidia drivers are not stable.
> >>>> 
> >>>> No, I don't agree. Software has bugs. What a shocker. More news at
> >>>> eleven.
> Yea, who'd have thought something as complex as a DRIVER for hardware
> MIGHT contain some bugs? Lol. Wow... If people have to fix bugs in
> something like a text editor, or something else, then it's probably safe
> to say something that makes hardware work, just might have a few bugs
> too. Just a thought of course lol.
> >>>>> I agree with it
> >>>>> because my roommate has 2 boxes running Nvidia cards and their
> >>>>> official binary drivers. He suffered from the unstable video and the
> >>>>> incomplete Xcomposite supports a lot.
> Your room mate is a poo poo head.
> >>>> Or, as a workaround, you can turn off the (almost close to pointless)
> >>>> compositor until that specific issue gets solved. I did the latter and
> >>>> never lost my sleep because of it.
> Yea, again, I haven't had even one issue. I had the Official Nvidia
> driver running on my Laptop too, which had Linux on it, and not once did
> I have any problems. And that wasn't even a GOOD card. It's an Nvidia GE
> Force FX GO 5200. That's like Cheap AND shoddy in this world. Even THAT
> worked well.
> >>> So this time, you not just agree with that Nvidia drivers are not
> >>> stable, you agree with that you can do nothing with the driver,
> >>> because you have no source code. You can only cut of your compositer,
> >>> and wait Nvidia's mercy updates. They may fix this in next version, or
> >>> may not. You already surrendered.
> Yea...Question; If you had sources and this would fix everything, why is
> the "Open Source helped by the company" ATI driver so bad? I mean if
> what you're saying is true and not trolling or just plain obnoxious
> wouldn't EVERYONE buy ATI? I mean if that was true I'D be the bad guy
> because I don't like ATI or their crappy Open Source driver... So that
> only leaves...Well either you're an ATI employee, or Delusional.
> >>>>>> There is only one graphics card manufacturer that actually PRODUCES
> >>>>>> drivers for FreeBSD. That is Nvidia.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Yes, and no. Nvidia provides closed source drivers only, and never
> >>>>> helps open source drivers.
> And this matters how? I'd much rather my driver be written by the guys
> who made the hardware than someone who is guessing because they don't
> work there....
> >>>> Guess what. All my Nvidia hardware works, so far. And that "so far"
> >>>> stands for like "the last decade".
> Same here!
> >>>>> or even their drivers introduce security
> >>>>> problems, you can do nothing. You have no choice but be at their
> >>>>> mercy.
> Security problems? And being at their Mercy... Wow.
> >>>>> But AMD/ATI supports the development of the open source drivers.
> So then use those and maybe find that room mate and show him how much
> better it is so he can stop whining too.
> >>>>> And also, when we meet problems, we can check ATI documents and
> >>>>> modify the source code.
> Then why does it suck so bad? The only thing I ever used ATI for was on
> another Laptop, it had 3D FX with Compiz and lagged a lot. Yea, that was
> so much better than the Nvidia card which had about half the memory of
> the ATI card and worked much better....
> >> *Someone* here's being overly dramatic. "Mercy updates"? "Surrendered"?
> Yea apparently we lost the war on "Bad quality" by buying Nvidia.
> >> I'm not going to pretend that I know the first thing about ATI open
> >> source drivers (or open-source drivers generally), but the general
> >> knowledge is that they just don't cut it for newer hardware. That might
> >> not be an issue with your card, since the X1600 is also several
> >> generations old. The official binary drivers don't have this drawback.
> I'd love to see someone like this use brand new hardware with those open
> drivers and do something other than read core dumps. Don't need 3D
> acceleration for that!
> >> Open source is fine, when it works. But if I have to choose between
> >> working closed-source and sorta-working open-source drivers, guess what.
> >> These are my results and your mileage will naturally vary.
> That's more or less how I feel too.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-x11 at mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-x11-unsubscribe at"

More information about the freebsd-x11 mailing list