ViewSonic VA2012wb

[Craig White]

On Fri, 2006-08-25 at 12:13 -0700, Eric "Shubes" wrote:
> Kurt Granroth wrote:
> > Eric "Shubes" wrote:
> >> Ok, I've narrowed it down to eVGA 256-A8-N341-L2 Geforce 6200 256MB
> >> 64-bit DDR AGP 4X/8X Video Card. Newegg has it for $45.99 after $10 rebate.
> >>
> >> Two questions:
> >> 1) Any gotchas?
> >> 2) Will this card be a noticeable improvement? I'm assuming that my
> >> onboard will do 1680x1050 wide format.
> > 
> > It all depends on what you are doing.  If you are just trying to make
> > sure that the video can output to your new viewsonic, then the onboard
> > will be more than adequate.  If all you are doing is surfing the web,
> > doing email, playing older or non-3d games, then the onboard is more
> > than up to the task.
> > 
> > If, however, you want to play the latest Quake or Half Life or what have
> > you, then your onboard will almost surely not suffice.  Likewise, if you
> > want to try out the new Xgl OpenGL-enabled X server with compositing,
> > then you will likely need a new dedicated 3d card.
> > 
> > Kurt
> > 
> Just wanted to follow up on this for posterity.
> 
> I ended up with the eVGA GeForce 6200 with subject monitor.
> 
> First problem was that my power supply (300w, stated miniumum) didn't have 
> enough amps on the 12v rail (15a, needed 18a). EVGA technician was extremely 
> helpful diagnosing this, and I give high marks to everyone on their support 
> staff that I talked with. I bought a UltraXFinity 500W PS from Fry's ($70 w/ 
> $50 MIR), and they work fine together.
> 
> Next hurdle was the configuring X. Thanks to Carl's xorg.conf settings, this 
> was a breeze. Until I discovered that I couldn't adjust the resolution to my 
> liking. It seemed like it just wouldn't take the specified resolutions. Then
> I realized that the specified driver was (the generic) 'vesa'. After 
> googling a bit, I found that the nvidia driver is named 'nv'. When I changed 
> that, voila. Everything was worked well.
> 
> This was on FC5. The bottom bar was a little beyond the bottom of the 
> display, so I selected the "Auto Image Adjust" function on the monitor menu, 
> and it straightened right up. Cool.
> 
> Then I tried Ubuntu 5.10. Same X config settings I used in FC5. Two problems:
> 1) the bottom bar was off the screen, and I couldn't make it right. AIA 
> monitor function didn't fix it, and there's no manual vertical size 
> adjustment, only vertical position. This left me at a loss.
> 2) the fonts on Ubuntu were very fuzzy. I noticed that Ubunto's X 
> configuration specifies various font files, while Fedora uses a font server. 
> Don't know if this changed in Ubuntu 6.06 or not, but I found Ubuntu's fonts 
> basically unusable at 1680x1050 (the monitor's recommended resolution).
> 
> Then I tried CentOS4.3. No nv driver on this distro. I didn't try to bring 
> it over from FC5. I was having other thoughts by now.
> 
> I'm wondering at this point, why do I have 3 distros on my desktop machine? 
> Granted, it's kinda nice to be able to check out other distros' config files 
> on occasion, but is it worth it? I'm thinking, what's the point? I have 
> CentOS on my server, so I really don't need it on my desktop any more. I 
> have Ubuntu on my notebook (as well as CentOS and that other one), so do I 
> really need it on my desktop machine?
> 
> I've concluded that it's not worth the effort, and that it's just not 
> productive. I'll leave the free space on my HD, and will probably use it to 
> try other distros as I get the itch. Otherwise, I'm settling on FC5 for the 
> time being.
> 
> That's my story, and I'm sticking to it! ;)
----
CentOS for servers
Fedora Core for desktops/laptops

simple enough

Craig