Go Back   nV News Forums > Linux Support Forums > NVIDIA Linux

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-04-08, 05:17 AM   #1
noxis2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11
Default KDE4 Desktop usage, 6600 vs. 9600GT vs. XXX

Hi,

I want to improve my desktop experience with KDE4. Currently I am using GF 6600. I have disabled all effects, no composite, no compiz... just a poor desktop. But performance is really bad (scrolling mail in KMail, moving/resizing windows, etc..). I have tried all performance tips, drivers, IPP, xorg settings, but with no luck.

Now I want to buy a new card - GF 9600GT. I don't care about 3D performance. I just want to have fast and smooth desktop. Is this a good choice? Or maybe I should buy a different card?
noxis2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-08, 07:45 AM   #2
cellstije
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 43
Default Re: KDE4 Desktop usage, 6600 vs. 9600GT vs. XXX

Quote:
Originally Posted by noxis2 View Post
Hi,

I want to improve my desktop experience with KDE4. Currently I am using GF 6600. I have disabled all effects, no composite, no compiz... just a poor desktop. But performance is really bad (scrolling mail in KMail, moving/resizing windows, etc..). I have tried all performance tips, drivers, IPP, xorg settings, but with no luck.

Now I want to buy a new card - GF 9600GT. I don't care about 3D performance. I just want to have fast and smooth desktop. Is this a good choice? Or maybe I should buy a different card?
If you want a good desktop experience out of the box forget nvidia cards.

My advice would be to get an intel chip, but they do not come in discrete cards afaik, so
you may need a new mobo. Otherways settle for an ati radeon such as the x1400, which has good support out of the box and should get kernel modesetting (in kernel driver) pretty soon.

Check on phoronix.com the reviews and on their forums, anyhow stay away from nvidia, if u interested in good out of the box support without messing with weird xorg settings, beta drivers and headhache evrerytime you change kernel.

My 2c.

C.

Last edited by cellstije; 10-04-08 at 07:50 AM. Reason: Misspellings
cellstije is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-08, 07:52 AM   #3
Linuxhippy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 585
Default Re: KDE4 Desktop usage, 6600 vs. 9600GT vs. XXX

If 3D performance doesn't matter, you can also buy a GeForce-8400, the 9xxx series are really just re-branded 8xxx.
However there seem to be still some performance problems and bugs left in the new driver, so I would wait until those problems are fixed before buying a new one

Clemens
Linuxhippy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-08, 08:50 AM   #4
cellstije
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 43
Default Re: KDE4 Desktop usage, 6600 vs. 9600GT vs. XXX

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linuxhippy View Post
If 3D performance doesn't matter, you can also buy a GeForce-8400, the 9xxx series are really just re-branded 8xxx.
However there seem to be still some performance problems and bugs left in the new driver, so I would wait until those problems are fixed before buying a new one

Clemens
I think that suggesting to buy a gf 8xxx card - or 9xxx - is misleading.
We all know that 8xxx and up have serious performance problems, some being addressed only recently, after more than a year that the cards are out.

If he is interested in a good experience out of the box, he should just stay away from nvidia products. Intel are shourely the best atvthe moment, followed very closely by ati/amd.

No flame intended, my honest opinion on the matter.
cellstije is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-04-08, 08:59 AM   #5
Linuxhippy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 585
Default Re: KDE4 Desktop usage, 6600 vs. 9600GT vs. XXX

Quote:
Originally Posted by cellstije View Post
We all know that 8xxx and up have serious performance problems, some being addressed only recently, after more than a year that the cards are out.
My suggestion was to wait until (and if) the drivers are stable and fast, not to buy one now.
After all, the latest drivers show impressive improvements when it comes to XRender accaleration - they accalerate almost everything now.
My guess is that once heuristics, accalerated trap rendering and the few bottlenecks will be removed, the NVidia driver will the best driver when it comes to XRender accaleration.

Quote:
If he is interested in a good experience out of the box, he should just stay away from nvidia products. Intel are shourely the best atvthe moment, followed very closely by ati/amd.
Intel is UMA, so that can't be compared at all. A fallback in an intel gpu is pretty cheap, whereas its horrible on on NUMA architectures.
Only older AMD chips have good Render accaleration through the open drivers, R500/600/700 don't even have support for it except in the git versions. The binary drivers don't provide good 2D accaleration too, you'll find a lot of performance-suggestions where options are used which force pixmap in system-ram, pretty much what IPP=0 does.

NVidia drivers have been really bad for some render operations, but lately they are doiung quite well. I would wait a bit before you make your descision, and if you choose nvidia grab a higher low-end card, like a 8400 or something like that.

lg Clemens
Linuxhippy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3DNA 3d desktop prydah General Software 2 08-01-02 10:59 AM

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.