Graphics cards and ethernet ports

[Guest Vertigo]

I have two questions. One has to do with the ethernet port check at boot, and the other is a linux irrelevant graphics card question that I wanted to slip in with a linux question so that I'm not too off topic.

 

When I boot up, Mandrake frequently tells me that the eth0 check failed. It's not a big problem, because most of the time, I find the connection still sound once I get in, but it is kind of irritating to happily watch the OKs only to be slapped in the face by a failure. Sometimes the connection does not work once I get in, and the check is always ok once I reboot. Is there any apparent reason this is happening? And is there a way to fix it?

 

Also, I am going to be building a computer soon and I haven't been very adventurous in the past, just dealing with whatever graphics card came on board. I'd like to get a quality one, and I'd like to look up the information on my own, but I don't really know where to look. I'd like to not just get a link to google, because although google and I are like this ( ), I can't get reliable information on a wide range of products. I want to stick with Intel motherboards, and money is an object, but I would like to see and read everything that I can. Any sort of link or point in the direction of where to look would be appreciated. Thank you very much

[devries]

The eth0 [failed] problem: open the MCC, network & internet, manage connections, tab options and uncheck hotnetwork plugging.

 

The videocard: unfortunately there isn't much to choose: always pick a nvidia card if you use Linux. :)

[SoulSe]

The videocard: unfortunately there isn't much to choose: always pick a nvidia card if you use Linux. :)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is not entirely true - while nvidia's proprietary drivers are undoubtedly better than ATIs, ATI isn't a dead loss. In fact, you'll find some people on this board who prefer ATI in Linux...

 

Me, I'm an nvidia fan and they are generally easier to get going

[Guest Vertigo]

Thank you both for the responses. I tend to do a dual boot with windows, so does that impact my choice at all? I have seen on the boards people advocating nvidia, but is there anything that would be better for both?

 

Also, picking a brand is good, but I was hoping for some way to be able to compare one card to another. It would be great if I could compare between all brands, but even if it's just between the cards from the same brand, that would be good. Please let me know if you can. Thank you again

[devries]

Well if you want to use Linux and are not a hardcore gamer you should really pick a mid range nvidia card. Buy something like this: http://www.nvidia.com/page/geforce_6600.html

[SoulSe]

It's usually a good idea to buy the best graphics card you can afford... I guess that goes for any hardware IMO. It'll last you longer...

 

I have a nvidia FX5700 that I bought last year and it's awesome. Nvidia also works really well with Windows, to answer your dual-booting question.

 

The card devries recommended is a good choice.

[adamw]

There's very little difference between the vendors' versions of each nvidia / ati chipset. A 6600GT card from any manufacturer will work the same as one from any other. Same goes for ATI chips. Comparing between nvidia and ATI in Windows is very close, at some levels one is better than the other; I think the ATI x800 is generally considered better than nvidia's 6800s, but at the middle end nvidia's 6600gt is extremely well regarded, and so on. In Linux, though, nvidia always wins; even if you can get ATI's proprietary driver working, it's just not as *good* as nvidia's, so you don't get the same results as on Windows - the ATI cards are always slower. There's just very little reason to put an ATI card into a machine that will be running Linux more than a little bit. The proprietary drivers are good for people who are stuck with ATI cards, or for people who mostly use Windows and just want a little bit of Linux support, but otherwise...you really should go with nvidia.

[Steve Scrimpshire]

I agree completely with adamw, except for the 'all vendors are the same' part. I had a BFG GeForce4 MX440-SE 64 MB DDR 4x agp card that i loved loved looooooved. It was pretty cheap compared to most cards of the same type from different vendors and I had friends that had the same type card from different manufacturers that didn't perform as well. Maybe I got lucky, who knows, but if I have a choice, I go with BFG.

[Guest Vertigo]

One last question about it. Is 256mb really necessary? The BFG GeForce 6600GT 128MB card looks pretty good, and it's $200 less than the similar looking 256 version. Is 256 necessary or just flashy?

[Steve Scrimpshire]

I play NWN and UT with my 64MB DDR card with only slight problems, so in my humble opinion, 128 MB should be good.

[JonEberger]

so first off, i would actually recommend a dfi motherboard or an msi. they're cheaper (from what i've seen) and work so well. i've had tremendous service from both. if you can save by still buying a quality product and allocate money elsewhere, go for it.

 

as far as video cards go, i agree with the idea that you should buy the best you can afford. three years ago i bought a ti4400 geforce 4. on SOME things it still outperforms alot of the newer cards just because of memory and memory bandwidth. regardless, it's still a really well performing card that is very well supported under linux. with just a little kernel-source that matches my kernel i can play ut2004 very well on my comp (and the processor is 3 years old now) after getting the nvidia "driver".

 

for good information what cards to purchase you should check out

 

tomshardware.com.

 

good luck. keep us posted.

[adamw]

No, absolutely no need for 256MB. A 6600GT / 128MB will be a fine choice. Just make sure to get one that'll fit your motherboard (i.e., don't buy a PCI-E one if you've only got an AGP slot).

[SoulSe]

256 might not be necessary now, but in a year from now... like I said, buy the best you can and it lasts longer. If you're not going to play games though, then it doesn't matter... very little of this thread does actually :P but if you are...

 

Oh, and Steve is right - vendors are all very different. I had an AOpen MX440 that sucked the big time, a friend of mine had the same card but made by Gigabyte that benched three times what the AOpen did (in the same machine)!

[adamw]

soulse: by the time a game is sufficiently complex that it requires more than 128MB of memory on the video card, it's going to be too much for a 6600GT to handle _anyway_. To take the venerable car comparison, at a certain point putting a bigger engine into the same body just stops having an advantage and starts being a useless expense. Now, if I were buying a 6800GT today, 256MB of memory might be useful, as when games actually come out that can really use it, the card might have a chance in hell of still being able to play 'em reasonably. But on a 6600? Nah.

[DragonMage]

I think 128 MB should be enough to last a couple of years. I still have my 64 MB GeForce4 Ti4200 I bought three years ago and it still can play most games quite well.

 

In my experience, if you are thinking too much to the future, you will either not buy the item at all or spend too much money. By the time games require 256 MB GPUs, you will probably need to add a PPU (Physics Processing Unit, read the article at anandtech) anyway. :)