> On Nov 08 20:43:21, Kevin Chadwick wrote: > > which causes some graphic defects under aperture=1. > > What "graphic defects"? And what makes you think it's due to the radeon, > and what makes you think it's du to the aperture=1? >
It didn't detect the right resolution so I made an xorg.conf at aperture=2 and then set it back to 1. I then noticed at 1 (more obvious at higher resolution and doesn't appear at =2) that the picture was kind of folded with strange shimmering/corruption about 4 inches from the right. I did a search on aperture in the archives and one mail asks if anyone knows of xorg.conf options that might fix corruption on r128. "http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg82600.html"; > > It > > looks to me that aperture=2 would be quite a bit more 'evil' than > > aperture=1 which most machines run fine under > > I have allowaperture=2 on all machines where X is installed. > What is 'evil' about that? > It allows access to the first megabyte of memory. How much worse it is than 1 +exploit, I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty bad to me. > > and so I'm going to switch for an nvidia card I have to hand > > nvidia? why? > Simply a choice between that another nvidia which last time I tried blew up an agp port and some old 16meg cards. > > (only reasonable spec one available). > > what do you mean? > Ditto > > I assume the performance will drop. > > What "performance"? Why? > Nvidia driver as oppose to ati.
