Mueen Nawaz wrote:

> 	If you ever want 3D functionality in Linux, then be *very* careful
> about your video card selections.

Not worried about Linux at all. :)

Poor OpenGL support may be a minor concern, but seeing as the games I 
primarily play are all DirectX, I'm not too worried. I don't use modeler 
software very frequently, so OpenGL isn't that big of a deal.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

Mueen Nawaz wrote:

>> In the meantime, I found a nice AGP card that will probably boost gaming
>> performance nicely using the Radeon 3850 chipset.
> 
> 	If you ever want 3D functionality in Linux, then be *very* careful
> about your video card selections.
> 

I really want the quad-core, but I can't afford that right now. (at 
least to get the PCIe bus width I'd need.)

But, eventually I'll upgrade.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message

> I haven't used an NVIDIA card personally, but have read good reviews 
> regarding their Linux and OpenGL support.  What about their Windows 
> drivers?  Are they as bloated as the ATI drivers?
>

I have used nVidia cards exclusively since 3Dfx died.  I don't know how to 
determine the "bloatness" of my video driver.  I occasionally install the 
latest update if a game/program requires it, but apart from that I don't 
even notice it on my system (I wouldn't even know where half the files it 
installs are put!).  It gives you a "nVidia control panel" thingy where you 
can change all the options, but that's pretty slick and does exactly what it 
says.

Post a reply to this message

"Kyle" <hob### [at] gatenet> wrote in message 
news:5gf4e4prf7o7bqol9psmnvvplq6tef22vf@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 10:41:42 -0400, Kyle <hob### [at] gatenet> wrote:
>
>>  I'm up to about $1300 without an OS.  :(
>
> Speaking of which, anyone running the 64-bit version of Vista?  I'm 
> concerned about any compatibility nightmares with 32-bit apps.
>

Yes. 32 and 64 apps running fine. That's games, graphics stuff, dev stuff. 
I've had no problems with apps at all.

Just watch for the drivers. Other place you may have problems is with a 
firewall. I haven't yet found one that I trust for 64-bit Vista

Post a reply to this message

Mike Raiford wrote:
>>     If you ever want 3D functionality in Linux, then be *very* careful
>> about your video card selections.
> 
> Not worried about Linux at all. :)
> 
> Poor OpenGL support may be a minor concern, but seeing as the games I
> primarily play are all DirectX, I'm not too worried. I don't use modeler
> software very frequently, so OpenGL isn't that big of a deal.

	It's not just for games. If you want to run stuff like Compiz, you need
3-D support.

	And frankly, I *do* play 3D games in Linux. Either using Wine, or just
plain Linux games. Not as famous as the Windows ones, but many require 3D.

-- 
... "All we are saying,"    "Is give pizza chants."


                    /\  /\               /\  /
                   /  \/  \ u e e n     /  \/  a w a z
                       >>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
                                   anl

Post a reply to this message

Gail wrote:
> Yes. 32 and 64 apps running fine. That's games, graphics stuff, dev 
> stuff. I've had no problems with apps at all.

Good to know.  I was just thinking about how I'm going to upgrade my 
aging machine.

Has anyone used an XBox as a media center extender on Vista? I've still 
got an N64 and a 15-year-old TV downstairs. Time to upgrade that too maybe.

-- 
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)

Post a reply to this message

Kyle <hob### [at] gatenet> wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Sep 2008 09:08:47 -0500, Mike Raiford <"m[raiford]!at"@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm doing something similar, but piecing it together instead.  We get a discount
from Dell too, but I couldn't find a
ny Dell machine that I thought was a good starting point.  I keep adding nicer and
> nicer parts though.  I'm up to about $1300 without an OS.  :(
>
> + Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550
> + Asus P5Q-E motherboard
> + 4GB PC8500 DDR2 memory
> + GeForce 9800 GT video card
> + Antec 300 case
> + 2x 500GB hard drives
> + 22" Samsung LCD
> + ...

I'm looking at a Samsung 22" SyncMaster 2243wm. What I love is the 1680x1050
resolution. I'm a LaTeX freak and for the first time I can see two 800x1000
portrait windows that show me the source and a full page that don't overlap.

The screen real estate at 1680x1050 just seems a huge improvement over 1280x1024

Jim.

Post a reply to this message

On Thu,  2 Oct 2008 06:01:24 EDT, "JimT" <nomail@nomail> wrote:

>I'm looking at a Samsung 22" SyncMaster 2243wm. What I love is the 1680x1050
>resolution. I'm a LaTeX freak and for the first time I can see two 800x1000
>portrait windows that show me the source and a full page that don't overlap.
>
>The screen real estate at 1680x1050 just seems a huge improvement over 1280x1024

That looks like a nice LCD.  I was originally looking at the Samsung T220, but based
on reviews at CNET, I'm now considering something different.  Perhaps the Dell
SP2208WFP, which they rank quite
high.

Post a reply to this message

> I'm looking at a Samsung 22" SyncMaster 2243wm. What I love is the 
> 1680x1050
> resolution. I'm a LaTeX freak and for the first time I can see two 
> 800x1000
> portrait windows that show me the source and a full page that don't 
> overlap.

Check that you can return the monitor if you have dead/bright pixels (or at 
least check it before you hand over the cash).  I got two Samsungs recently 
and they both had bright pixels quite near the center of the screen.

Post a reply to this message

JimT wrote:
> 
> I'm looking at a Samsung 22" SyncMaster 2243wm. What I love is the 1680x1050
> resolution. I'm a LaTeX freak and for the first time I can see two 800x1000
> portrait windows that show me the source and a full page that don't overlap.
> 
> The screen real estate at 1680x1050 just seems a huge improvement over 1280x1024
> 
> Jim.
> 

I have a similar Samsung 224bw, I think... very nice monitor. What I'm 
loving is the workstation I'm on now: 2 Dell 22" side-by-side. Lovely 
amount of screen real-estate.

-- 
~Mike

Post a reply to this message