[arch-general] New 64 bit computer

Dwight Schauer dschauer at gmail.com
Tue Jun 16 11:09:22 EDT 2009

I have to agree, ATI is big no no if you want a decent workstation
setup. I've tried a whole lot to use ATI instead of Nvidia but it just
never pans out. I've wasted a lot of money and a whole lot of time on
ATI cards and just end up ripping the card out and putting in an
Nvidia one. I don't even use my computers for gaming, that is not the
issue at all with the video card. I just want something stable that
just works. I've researched what to buy as far as what is well
supported, tried both the free radeon and radeonhd drivers, and tried
the proprietery fglrx ones many times and really tried to come up with
working solutions. If you don't need X, than an ATI card will be fine.
Going Nvidia might not be the most "idealistic" route, but it is by
far the least amount of hassle in my opinion.

On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Ricardo Hernandez<ricardoh26 at gmail.com> wrote:
> ATI noooooo!!! hehe. As commented above i'm almost 100% sure you'll have
> troubles. At least in my case, ATI 4850, i cannot use X at all. ATI has no
> support for kernel 2.6.29 yet and arch have a patch for that but it does not
> work for some card, for example my card. Xorg didn't recognize mi card even
> with the fglrx driver.
> Sooo...my recomendation, again as above, buy nvidia. I read you don't like
> nvidia but is a more serious company at least in support and driver updates.
> I sell mi ati card and buy a XFX 9800 GT. Is a little less power but it
> works a lot better and have no problem.
> However if you don't mind 3d acceleration for the moment, the radeonhd
> drivers is a good alternative, and it seems that in kernel 2.6.31 i'll have
> KMS support.
> --
> Ricardo Hernández ( richerVE )

More information about the arch-general mailing list