Hello everyone. Black Friday is approaching, and I’d like to upgrade my GPU.
I currently have an GTX 1070, running it on Arch Linux, but I’ve never run into an issue of any kind. Graphics are what I expect. Frame rates dont show any noticeable drop or stutter. Still, whenever I see GPUs being discussed, I always see people say AMD GPUs are better on Linux because their drivers are open source as opposed to Nvidia’s, which are proprietary.
The only other area I can see your specific GPU being an issue is with video editing, which I do occasionally do. I dont remember the exact issue, but with the free version of DaVinci Resolve, apparently some video codex are suppored depending on your GPU? (Someone correct me on that because I’m pretty sure I got something wrong there.)
I don’t have a specific GPU in mind, but if there’s a general consensus that AMD GPUs are better on Linux, I would definitely pay a little more for better compatibility on my system.
Any input is appreciated. Thank you in advance!!!
Bearing in mind that should you be running an LTS release, you’ll still have to add a PPA to run the very latest variant of Mesa. Running rolling release distro’s, running the very latest kernel releases, can also involve an increased risk of kernel regressions.
Why? Thats the most arbitrary claim ever. Gaming machines be it Windows or Linux will NEVER be as stable as production machines and thy aren’t expected to be as it is a known fact you should be updating to keep up with gaming benefits patches provide.
Not to mention even bleeding edge distros like Arch are still significantly more stable than Windows.\
If you are gaming you don’t need an LTS kernel and if you NEED and LTS kernel you aren’t gaming on that machine, you are simply trying to fabricate a nonresistant con.
I run Nvidia hardware/drivers, therefore all OGL/Vulkan libraries are included as part of Nvidia’s driver package, therefore there really isn’t any pressing need to run the very latest kernel. Furthermore, LTS releases are the only desktop Linux operating systems officially supported by Steam:
https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/1114-3F74-0B8A-B784
Furthermore, this PC is also my work PC, I perform the daily running of my business from this PC. Stability is important, and I have absolutely no problems gaming on this device - In fact: While Arch users were complaining recently that Valve native titles were failing to launch via Steam under Arch based distro’s, I was happily playing Valve native titles just fine.
There is if you need newer kernels to support newer features is is regularly the case.
Yeah… I’m not really sure what you think this means.
Valve does this to simply have a standard to build against. Thats it.
Steam doesn’t magically stop working when not on Ubuntu LTS nor has Valve EVER turned anyone away from support for running a non Ubuntu/LTS distro.
Cool, so by your logic I’d only have to wait 1 year for my 4TB NVME to work instead of using it right now like I am.
Yeah, which Linux already provides. Hell Arch is more stable than Windows is by a long shot and its the “fast an loose” distro. Adding more stability on top doesn’t require an LTS kernel.
That and you claiming you need more stability is meaningless at best and you trying to project you’re self on to others at worst.
And you’ll also not have any newer benefits either.
Fun fact, running an arch distro right now and also never had that issue so not as magical and universal like you are suggesting but also people solved it with a launch option. Even for the people it happened too it seems like a decent trade so they can play games that run poorly otherwise.
Again, it makes it really clear that its not much of an issue when you are forced to create an alternate reality where it is one.
Well everything’s running swimmingly well here. Whatever ‘features’ I’m missing out on, I can assure you I’m certainly not getting the feeling I’m missing out anything overly important.
Which is precisely the point. Officially, Steam is only built for Ubuntu LTS, that’s your ‘standard’. Should you choose to run Steam under any other distro, don’t look to valve for support as you may not get the support you’re after.
Which leads us to your next point:
Lets take a look at the ArchWiki under the heading of Steam, what’s the opening paragraph?
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/steam
I’ll quote it for you, bearing in mind this is from the Arch devs themselves:
Glad that’s settled. Moving on:
And yet, the irony is that this is a possibility that is by no means limited to LTS kernels (nor have I personally ever experienced it, my 4TB NVME drive ran fine out the box. As with everything under such a flexible OS, YMMV):
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=287649
Undoubtedly, running the very latest kernels must be more stable than an LTS kernel. Because the very latest kernels never suffer from regressions that don’t show up in build testing. [Sarcasm off].
I’ve run a number of Arch based distro’s, and to say I never encountered an issue as a result of an update would be an outright lie. These days, I’m not prepared to ‘wing it and hope for the best’ based on a logical fallacy regarding LTS vs the very latest kernels. If you like Arch and it suits your particular use case, good for you - The beauty of Linux is freedom of choice, you use what works for yourself, and I’ll use what works for myself.
Coming from the person trying to project their own experiences onto myself, this argument is circular at best.
Glad we confirmed that it did happen. Stating that it was a decent trade for everyone running Arch based distro’s would come back to that projection you were talking about earlier.
See what I did there?
Yeah, this makes no sense. Essentially you’ve led discussion down the path of a strawman argument. To quote my original point, which still holds true, it’s evident just how much discussion has deviated as the result of one quite factual statement:
There’s really nothing more to say.
Essentially, what’s happening here is what is psychologically known as a ‘backfire effect’. Essentially a situation whereby people often become counterintuitively more entrenched in their position when presented with data that conflicts with their beliefs based on firsthand experience, resulting in unnecessary rage as part of internet discussion.
So to avoid a situation whereby discussion continues to degrade, while neither person is willing to abandon their beliefs based on their own first hand experiences, I’m not interested in discussing this any further.
Other than Mint (which ships with Mesa 23.0.4, even with the “Edge” ISO release which has kernel 6.2), is there any other distro whose current version is using a 6.x kernel that isn’t running the required Mesa version?
The problem regarding LTS releases is the fact that unless you add something like the kisak PPA, you’re going to be lagging somewhat in relation to Mesa releases compared to rolling release distro’s; making the argument that gaming bug fixes are resolved faster running AMD hardware under Linux somewhat moot.
Generally, under LTS releases, Mesa updates are made available every point release. Should an updated version of Mesa containing gaming bugfixes be released right ‘after’ a point release, There’s every chance you won’t see that updated version of Mesa until the next point release - Which would be around 6 months later than the updated version of Mesa was released.
It’s for this reason that Nvidia’s proprietary blob is actually well suited to LTS releases. Furthermore, LTS releases are the only Linux desktop operating systems ‘officially’ supported by Steam.
Once again, I’m just waiting for the downvotes because I didn’t join the AMD echo chamber.
No the downvotes are because of you creating a fictitious reality in order to make a point. If you need an unrealistic requirement to be portrayed as a fact of Linux in order for your argument to even exist then its a bad faith argument.
To quote my post above:
There’s no bad faith argument there.