GPU wars...
 

Ok, I have been out of the whole GPU debate for some time and after seven years of hard core nvidia usage I have decided it's time to move on and up.

so lets put you in my position, here is the scenario:

You have more money than brains, you want a QUAD DVI solution as you have three displays and a forth monitoring screen (HDTV LCD basically), and you can have ANY VIDEO CARD/MOTHERBOARD YOU WANT!

catches: you can have two video cards if necessary but most decent motherboards only have two PCIe x16 slots and you need ONE slot for a PCIe x8 areca raid controller. You want desktop effects to work cleanly. You want to play your favoritest MMO/FPS/solitare on any of the 4 displays at any time without back-end manipulation.

In the simplest terms, what would you do? how? and why?

GO!!!

I already thought about this. The only way to do this is with on-board video unless you find a motherboard with four PCIe X16 slots.

FYI, LCD provides fake HD. A monitor using either DLP or LCoS does provide true HD, but desktop graphic cards can only display 24-bit. HD requires 30-bit of color which workstation cards can handle. Linux could handle 30-bit of color, but I am not sure.

BTW, I do not like your gaming tone.

I am looking at the NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 X2, but for two fears...
First and foremost; How well would it handle GAMING... (which kinda relates to your "gaming tone" comment) I AM a linux gamer! THAT'S RIGHT! THEY DO EXIST! so I need to know if this card will do gaming rendering... I know the card is intended for cad and thus has the nuts to handle 3D rendering... but I never really understood if these cards were capable of GAMING rendering (IE: rendering multiple 3D frames rapidly) vs still rendering...
Next, I really, REALLY want desktop effects... I know they are just a little thing that most people see and say "hey, that's like vista" but after I finish strangling them with their own intestines I explain calmly that Linux had it first, therefore Vista Aero is just another Micro$oft rip off of Open source ingenuity. Additionally... I just LIKE the little wobbly effects and glassy look... Its fun! It's pretty! It's full of STARS.

Those are really my only concerns... I've never really sat in front of a system with a "workstation video card" and tried to do the things I LIKE to do... when I sit at work I'm more about business and less about play... but I want my work FUNCTIONALITY at home complete with the "fun stuff"... well... you get the picture.

I know ATI has a "gaming card" with quad DVI output... but In the past I have heard nightmarish stories about ATI drivers in Linux...

So I guess my question's is more like this: Which is better for my needs, the NVIDIA Quadro FX 4500 X2? or the Ati Radeon HD 4850 X2? Keeping in mind any potential driver/software conflicts I may have with EITHER card.

OH! and cost is NOT a concern, so don't pay attention to the prices.

As for the whole LCD vs DLP vs Plasma... yeah... I am WELL aware of HD spec/HD scaling, and I know what I have is not "true HD"... but that's a debate for another thread.

I think the main issue for gaming is the display type. The LCDs have a delay, which means you've already fallen off the cliff before you even think about pushing the jump button. Plasmas are not well suited for computer use because having a static image burns them in, and there's some ghosting with movement. CRTs are still king for gaming and color reproduction, but I'm not aware of any decent HD versions of a CRT. I suppose that if you can get past that, then you can worry about the GPU option(s).

How much of delay? Because this is the only "LCD problem" problem I haven't encountered after switching from CRT to LCD. There are problems with colors, with lack of "truly black" color, and so on, but I haven't noticed any delay that would prevent me from playing anything with lots of fast motion.

IcoNyx, workstation video cards can handle gaming. Games in Linux uses OpenGL which workstation video cards specialize and they do it very well. These cards care more about the accuracy of graphic content. This means you will not see any artifacts or distortions. The performance will not be as good as consumer grade video cards, but software support for the card and graphic quality is several times better. I suggest the following video cards and you will need two cards for your desire goal with out compromising performance.

nVidia Quadro FX5800
nVidia GTX 285

FYI, desktop effects are not stable enough to be use for daily use. You will run in problems all the time. For speed or performance, use a light weight desktop/window manager. When playing games, it helps to use a light weight desktop/window manager.

I suggest use Gentoo for the highest performance.

The game tone, I was explaining about is it sounds like a game host from "Price is Right." I will let you decide if that is a good thing or a bad thing. I did not say anything bad about gamers.


LCD do not have that much delay. If you have delay that bad and you are playing game through the network, then your network is causing the problem.

LCD also have ghosting too. What a lot people do not know is LCD are not designed for fast moving objects. They are primary used where portability and low power consumption is needed while quality does not matter. The response times of LCD can be as worst as 30 milliseconds even on the fastest LCD screens.

Yep, I agree that CRT monitors are still the best. There are some CRT monitors that handles HD resolutions. What makes HD is the ability to handle 1920 by 1080. CRT can easily handle billions of colors at a low cost. CRT are big for a small viewable area. Unfortunately, CRT are very hard to find no thanks to people wanting LCD.