Hey this maybe a stupid question. I am considering on buying a GPU. I am in conflict between nvidia and AMD. I know AMD works better on linux in general but I am curious to follow the NVIDIA advancements as they go with the new open source kernel modules and stuff… I don’t know if it is worth it to pick team green over team red. Also typically performance will be better with NVIDIA on compute and stuff like that.

P.S.

Yes, this is related to the previous post I made here.

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    6·
    4 months ago

    Depends on what you want to do. If you need CUDA for certain applications in example, its better to use Nvidia. Do you have a G-Sync monitor? Nvidia. Currently Nvidia does not work well with Wayland, if you want to game. Nvidia is also better at Raytracing, if that is something important to you. The Open Source Kernel modules for Nvidia doesn’t matter at all, because the driver is still closed source and basically nothing changes. I believe HDMI is better supported for Nvidia, because of the closed source driver. HDMI does not like Open Source and therefore its a bit limited on AMD. I would recommend using DisplayPort anyway, but that might not be an option for every monitor.

    Also in my experience it was a pain to use Nvidia, not only because of problems here and there (under X11 back then), but also because drivers were downloaded multiple versions in Flatpak. Because each program was depending on a certain version of the Nvidia driver. Each of the drivers were over 300 MB downloads, so it adds up after 6 versions and updating over and over again.

    I don’t know what the current state of Nvidia is to be honest, because i switched to AMD. So it comes down to what card is available to you at what price, and what you want do. If you don’t know and have to ask, I would say AMD is a safe bet. Buy into Nvidia only after research and if you really need certain stuff.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nlEnglish
      1·
      4 months ago

      Do you have a G-Sync monitor? Nvidia.

      This is really only relevant for older/lower-power GPUs, right? I think if you can easily game at high frame rates on modern games, you don’t need G-Sync.

      • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
        1·
        4 months ago

        This has nothing to do with older or lower power GPU. G-Sync is the best possible way to play games, if you can. Higher framerates is not a replacement for VRR technology.

        • Telorand@reddthat.com
          2·
          4 months ago

          Thanks for the rec. I’m still on Windows on my main rig, but I’m transitioning to Linux very soon, once I have all my ducks in a row.

          I have a G-sync 240Hz monitor, and it’s far superior to using V-sync. Good to know I’ll still get the most out of it with the card I have.

          • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
            2·
            4 months ago

            If you already have a working graphics card, then you can try to use it first. My last Nvidia card was 1070 and I just switched to AMD last year. And because my monitor is a little old, it has only G-Sync and no FreeSync; meaning I lost the ability of VRR. If you already have a monitor and gpu, then my recommendation is just to use that again and see how things are going before buying into new and expensive hardware. As a sidenote, I’m a huge emulation fan. And old consoles and arcades have weird sync-rates, in which case VRR like G-Sync is optimal. But thats just a sidenote.

            You can also dual boot Windows and Linux, meaning you choose what operating system to run at boot time. Then you have a little backup on one side and can jump back if needed and the new experiment on the other side. I assume you will do something wrong and it might even require to reinstall Linux again, maybe not, but you should always be prepared for the worst case scenario.

            • Telorand@reddthat.com
              2·
              4 months ago

              I’ve been doing trial installs in VMs before I make the full switch, so I know what to expect when I do the bare metal install. It’s not exactly a 1:1 analog, but it’s given me some good expectations and allowed me to iron out some requirements (like a dumb VPN client my work requires).

              I plan to go full Linux and just have vfio pass the graphics card to a Windows VM for the few times I need it. Most of my programs have a Linux counterpart or equivalent, and the remaining few I don’t need.

    • monobot@lemmy.ml
      1·
      4 months ago

      If you need CUDA for certain applications in example, its better to use Nvidia.

      Depends on budget. PyTorch works nicely on ROCm and, for me, bigger constraint is available VRAM than GPU speed and looks like AMD has cheaper RAM, comparing their cheapest 16GB cards AMD is 33% cheaper than Nvidia where I live, and there was some card 45% cheaper few months ago. Huge savings if on limited budget.