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!!!
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.