I'm looking to buy a new system and want to get a good deal on a good video card. I want a video card that will do a decent job of playing 3D hardware acceleration intensive games like Call of Duty 3 but will not cost much in the pocket book. (Yes, I'll be needing to setup a dual boot system that will run Windows 2K for the purposes of playing games). I want a best deal on a video card that will work really really well under Linux (I like Slackware). I want 3D hardware acceleration under Linux.

Also, up til recently I always thought that AMD had the best leading edge processors (dual core) for playing games and run under Linux. Has this changed recently?

One more thing, what kind of motherboard should I be keeping an eye out for? I want something that won't bottleneck either my video card or processor capabilities.

In all this, I want a good deal! I don't want to have to pay top dollar for hardware that will be 1/2 or 1/4 price this time next year. I'd rather have last year's best hardware at 1/2 price or better?

Think carefully, if you had your time back what kind of hardware would you be looking for and would you have the time to make any recommendations to me?

Thanks very much!

- Perry

Linux games uses OpenGL that needs a video card that has good raw performance. In Windows, you can choose either OpenGL and DirectX. A lot people favor DirectX in Windows. I suggest a nVidia based graphics card from either BFG or XFX. Buy video card that has the fastest core, fastest memory, and the widest memory bus. Be careful buying video cards that have overclocked memory and the largest memory capacity. Usually video cards with a larger video memory does have slower memory, so do your homework.

Gigabyte and Abit are the motherboards brands that have the least amount of trouble installing Linux. For nForce chipsets, I suggest looking for passive cooling versions that uses heat pipe because they provide more reliability and are quiet. Do not invest in a motherboard that uses active cooling.

Right now Intel Core 2 Duo has the highest performance, but they are costly if you want high performance graphics too. Soon AMD's K8L will be out. IMHO, this year is not a good time to buy a complete computer because of AMD's newer processor. The K8L has better technology than Intel's Core 2 Duo and Intel is trying to beef up their FSB, add Netburst, and Hyperthreading, but Intel knows that the K8L will beat their processors.

Everybody has the same issues when buying computers. You have to bite your lip and buy the damn thing. Always computer technology will be obsolete.

Cedega probably can run Call of Duty III.

How I long for the day when I can power up my Linux based PC (with decent hardware) and do what I want to do from the comfort of my own home. There are so many things that I have put off for far to long. I'm tired of being to feel like it's my job to solve everybody elses problem. I want my own place and I want my own computer and I don't want to spend any more of my time running around the country like a chicken with my head cut off (while jack asses live in the comforts of life that I ought to be living).

I'm a decent guy, you couldn't pay me enough to hurt anybody. I'm too damned sensitive for my own good and I'm tired of being victimized by the arseholes of my past. I don't do drugs, I don't drink (excessively, and I certainly don't drink and drive). All this and yet, I find my greatest enemy are other peoples opinions of me.

I hate church (and all other religions where people spend their time trying to tell you how you should live your life).

Just had to get that off my chest, I needed someone to vent to, thanks for your time.

Now back to the subject of computers.

Thanks for the info on which motherboard to look out for and the heads up on the K8L processor. I was most surprised to hear that Intel had the best processor today as that was not the norm for as many a year. Thanks also for pointing out that (with a good video card) that I should be able to play Call of Duty III under Linux. That would be really really nice!

Might have to bite the bullet and just get something reasonably priced and look at the K8L processor next year when the price comes down a bit.

Thanks again for your time and for allowing me to vent a bit of my life's frustrations. All I ever wanted was a place to call my own, a steady source of income (i'll do carpentry or tutoring for now till I do some "plan b" stuff like setting up a couple of websites) and something to come home to in the evening. For now, as lame as it might seem, at least I can depend on it. A computer, however simple, at least it can provide me with something interesting to do and a way to connect with like minded people. Whether or not that will eventually transform into a pretty lady (Jo-Anne Elizabeth is really nice, check out perfect10.com) who knows. For now, I'll be content with the aforementioned plus a really nice computer running Slackware 11.

Thanks (very very very much) again!

- Perry

ATI is like having a burning sensation every time you take a piss.

By ATI I mean their drivers for linux, of course.

LOL..
I do agree, from both what I have read on the net, AND from personal experience here at home (my roomie's computer has an ATI card), that of the two I would pick nVidia in a flash. ATI seems.. Er, well, I don't know what it seems, but it sure doesn't seem very good!
Incidentally, I run an Intel P4 unit, while she has an AMD Duron machine, and while they aren't directly comparable to start with in terms of capability and performance, I again am very glad I have mine and not hers.
My nVidia card is not new, but it is very nice, so I'll bet the newer ones are WAAAY nicer And nVidia supports Linux very well IMO, while ATI, I honestly can't comment on-- I just don't know.
My short answer: nVidia over ATI, and Intel over AMD.

For the recent generations of hardware, I tend to prefer Nvidia and AMD hardware. My spec is an AMD Athlon XP 3200+, BFG 6800GTOC, and Nvidia chipset on the M/B. Though I don't have a 64-bit system, I prefer AMD memory architecture even though Intel has more ponies in each individual core at the current time. Nvidia just plain and simple has better Linux driver's than ATI so you get more out of your hardware. And correct me if I'm wrong, but when I was compiling the ATI driver for my Radeon, I could have sworn that the AGP component of the driver source code was actually written by Nvidia, which may partially explain ATI now has proprietary drivers, when they originally did not. Although, if you turn back the clock to the days when ATI had fully open source drivers and Nvidia did not, I actually favored ATI at that time. ATI just worked with minimal headache on the setup and configuration end of things. My how things have changed.

P.S.: I have to add one last thing. I think it is quite ironic (and humorous) that when I hit the spell check button on a Linux forum talking about computer hardware that words like Athlon, Nvidia, Radeon, and chipset are not in the spell checker's lexicon.

i am favouring greatly AMD and nVidia even though I'm told that the latest Intel processors have the edge these days and my former AMD system had a 9800 ATI card. I'm thinking I'm much better off with the AMD 4600+ series of processors with a much quieter motherboard than I had last year. looking forward to a good quality nVidia card.

however, does anyone know if the latest nVidia cards for laptops are well supported under linux. the 6150 series claims to have 3D support for games, does anyone know if Linux easily supports this card at the moment and at the 3d hardware acceleration level?

thanks very much and have a really great day

- perry

As of this posting, the most recent Nvidia *nix drivers do support the 6150 series.

http://www.nvidia.com/object/unix.html

the reference to the nVidia drivers was most valuable. i must say, the technical docs for nVidia is quite extensive and very informative, i can see why so many linux users lavish praise on nVidia.

- perry