given nvidia having a better performance to cost ratio
I actually agree. The 6700 XT, for example, was supposed to compete with the 3070, but instead, it barely surpassed the 3060ti in real world tests.
But I agree with your main point, and I’d trade that slight drop in performance per dollar for a better experience on Linux. I’m planning my exit strategy from Windows, and I’m still working on accepting that my Nvidia card just won’t feel as nice (until NVK is more mature).
An Nvidia 3070 costs 420 and benchmarks at 22,403 (benchmark point per dollar 53.34) An AMD 6800 costs 360 and benchmarks at 22,309 (benchmark point per dollar 61.97)
So you get a 0.4% drop in performance for a 14.3% drop in price. That is significantly more performance per dollar.
Or if you go with a 3070ti ($500 23,661 -> 47.32) vs a 7800 XT ($500 23,998 -> 47.97) you get a 1.4% performance increase for free (not really that significant I know, but still it’s free performance)
My numbers were taken from a comparison of real world performance via gameplay (FPS comparisons), not artificial benchmark scores, but those prices are still really good.
6800 is better than a 3070 in both artificial benchmarks and real-world ones, and the fact that it’s cheaper means it’s certainly the better option for performance per dollar (somewhere between a 3070ti and a 3080).
They really should care, because that market is growing, and Steam Deck uses Linux. Not sure which GPU decks use but… It would be cool they cared just a little bit.
It’s a relatively small niche. NVIDIA won’t beat AMD at the embedded space because they just don’t have a CPU, so they can’t make something like the Deck has.
If we do see NVIDIA in the handheld space, it’ll be either a full SOC that only goes GeForce now, or they’ll team up with Intel for a prosumer device, which will probably run Windows.
The Linux market is growing, but it’s also quite small. NVIDIA mostly cares about AI these days, so they’re far more interested in the data center and probably won’t dedicate many resources to anything else, other than Windows gaming, which is a biggest.
It would be nice, but Linux gamers still have options. AMD is tried and true, and Intel has a good track record for Linux support, so either of those would be good options. Unfortunately, this means you’re better off in the bottom too middle of the market, as top of market is still dominated by NVIDIA.
I’m just saying there aren’t that many Linux users and Linux handhelds (e.g. Steam Deck) use AMD APUs, so NVIDIA probably doesn’t care all that much. That’s really it.
If we want NVIDIA to care more, Linux needs more people using it. A lot more. And they need to be using it on desktop or laptop hardware.
Sure, but that hardware is incapable of running PC games because it runs ARM, not x86. So if it’s going into a handheld, it will either be a locked down console like Nintendo, or run something with a compat layer like Windows (unlikely because it’ll leave a lot of performance on the table until games port).
So the Switch existing has no impact on Nvidia courting Linux users.
The difference between Mass Effect Legendary edition working better than it did on my windows machine and hanging on the launcher forever is literally whether or not I have a controller turned on & connected. I don’t know if I would have ever figured it out if it wasn’t for a random poster on ProtonDB
They don’t need to RE it; they have access to the full spec and everything for their Windows drivers anyways. They’d open themselves up for litigation if they implemented this behind the forum’s back though and that’s something AMD (understandably) simply won’t do.
No, they can’t. AMD is a member of the HDMI forum, which means they’re contractually obligated to follow the forum’s rules. In exchange, they get voting rights on decisions like this one, the right to propose changes to the HDMI standards, technical details that are protected by NDAs, etc. They wouldn’t throw that all away and open themselves up to a lawsuit just for their OSS drivers.
Is there a specific contractual obligation stating that they can’t hire teams whom have no access to NDA protected specs to RE HDMI products through the usual legal means? If not, then they should be well within their legal rights, tho it’d be worth consulting a lawyer first. Now, would it damage their relationship with the HDMI people? maybe, likely.
Their contacts are most likely protected by NDAs, but they’re also written by lawyers who know how to close loopholes. There’s no way a SIG like the HDMI forum would allow members to release compatible products without following the rules.
Even if it isn’t covered by the contract, the other members could hold a vote to remove AMD from the forum.
Not at all, I don’t think anyone has ever gotten banned for using alternate launchers on Linux. I’ve been using Heroic for ~2 years now with no issues.
The only time you can get banned is if you try playing a multiplayer game that has anti-cheat that doesn’t support Linux. Just make sure when playing a multiplayer game that Linux is supported.
It doesn’t really matter what distro you go with, just don’t go with something like Debian Stable because of how old their packages are. You don’t need a rolling release system, but you also don’t want something too old because of performance reasons.
Have you ever tested Debian stable vs Debian sid? You’ll notice a clear performance difference. Why? Because Debian Stable has older packages that don’t include performance related patches found in the newer ones. This is basic knowledge.
Newer = more feature & performance related patches at the cost of stability.
Older = Stability & downstreamed security patches. This is how releases cycles work.
Just look at it in terms of kernel version.
Debian Stable by default is at what? Kernel 6.1.0 now?
Arch is at kernel 6.6.3.
If you follow the Linux Kernel news you’d know that there’s pretty huge optimizations between these, some of which directly impact gaming on wine & proton.
Then there’s Mesa :
Debian Stable, Mesa 22.3.6
Arch Linux, Mesa 23.2.1
Huge performance patches between these.
Yes, I have, as well as developed and packaged software for both. And not just a little. Your comment about how release cycles work is patronizing, and your diatribe is misleading.
Arch is at kernel 6.6.3.
Debian Stable currently has kernel 6.5 for those who choose to install it. Not that it matters, because a higher kernel version number doesn’t magically grant better performance. Specific changes may help in specific cases, but most kernel revisions don’t offer any significant difference to games. The more common reason to want a new rev is to support specific hardware.
Unless you have a very new GPU (released less than a year ago), your games are not likely to get any benefit at all from the latest kernel.
And unless your games require the very latest Vulkan features and you run them without Steam, Flatpak, or any other platform that provides its own Mesa, you’re not likely to get any benefit from a distro providing the latest version of it.
Practically everything else that games need is comparable across all the major distros, including Debian. (Arch might have hundreds of other packages that happen to be newer, but those won’t make games run faster.)
OP, choose a distro that makes you happy, not one that some random person claims is best for gaming. If what Debian offers is appealing to you, rest assured that it is generally excellent for gaming.
Bruv. I’ve packaged software for all 3 and beyond.
Which btw is completely irrelevant here so get off your high horse.
There’s clear performance differences between 6.1 and 6.6.3 Why? Because there’s several performance related patches & bug fixes that effect various APIs both Wine & Proton take advantage of.
Ofc, you can install newer kernels, you could install kernel 6.6.0 if you wanted, but you’d be going outside of the stable repo to do it which kinda defeats the entire purpose of Debian Stable. Not to mention that mixing and matching packages can lead to problems in the future. Like accidently using the wrong dkms driver version on the wrong kernel version, and other general compatibility issues.
I take it that you’re not active in the kernel development space, which is fine. However I personally am. Hell, there’s going to be even more of a noticable difference in kernel 6.7 thanks to FUTEX2 improvements.
There’s clear performance differences between 6.1 and 6.6.3
As already stated, kernel 6.5 is available on Debian Stable.
Ofc, you can install newer kernels, you could install kernel 6.6.0 if you wanted, but you’d be going outside of the stable repo to do it which kinda defeats the entire purpose of Debian Stable.
No, it does not. Stable Backports exist for exactly this reason.
Not to mention that mixing and matching packages can lead to problems in the future. Like accidently using the wrong dkms driver version on the wrong kernel version.
I don’t know how you might have managed to do those things, but no, installing the Stable Backports kernel would not cause either of them.
“Stable Backports” what a joke, Backports can and have destabilized user systems.
Let me just take the thing that’s not ready, configure it a bit differently and by some magic it’s “stable”, make it make sense.
At that point you have a semi-stable system, so… Ubuntu, PopOS, LMDE.
Even the Debian devs tell you to use the Backports with care.
Ignore reality, I don’t care. Go do it on someone else’s time.
Changing the subject away from Debian’s gaming performance is a strange tactic, but since you’ve shifted to mocking the name of the distribution, Debian Stable’s name comes from this sense of the word:
stable 3 of 3 adjective
1b : not changing or fluctuating : unvarying
I would expect someone so familiar with “all 3 and beyond” of the Debian distros to know that.
To indulge your sophistry, though, practically all operating systems have released broken packages at some point. Debian Stable has a well-earned reputation for doing it less than others. Even with kernel Backports. Trying to scare people away from it is a disservice to the community.
A question here: plan to upgrade to 7800xt sometime in the near future. The card is quite new, so i have doubts after your reply above. I am mainly gaming and do basic office stuff (Libre office is enough). Also, though I can install Ubuntu - press X to win type install works for me - I am new to linux, so not big on fiddling with obscure packages. Just want games to run well - so, in this specific usecase, what distros would you recommend to try?
That GPU is indeed new, and I don’t have one, but I think the amdgpu driver has supported it since kernel 6.4 or 6.5. Any distro offering that and recent AMD firmware will probably work. (You could also manually install the firmware files if you change your mind about fiddling and want a specific distro that hasn’t caught up yet.)
I don’t generally recommend specific distros, since people’s needs and preferences vary so widely. However, I would probably try Linux Mint (and the KDE Plasma desktop because I dislike Gtk) if I were in your position. Mint gets a lot of praise for being an easy distro based on the good parts of Ubuntu. It also maintains a Debian edition (LMDE), which I think is a good insurance policy in case Ubuntu ever goes off the rails and becomes unsuitable as a base for Mint.
If you find yourself struggling to choose, remember that you’re not married to whatever distro you try first. If you run into a problem that’s not easily solved, you can always switch.
The fiddling bit is not that i am particularly against, it just requires learning things that have no other use for me outside of playing a random game in my free time (so spending that valuable time on learning about OS internals instead of things i actually care about).You can call me a perfect user for windows - i just am tired of them trying to track me, changing their shit constantly and pushing their services within the product i paid for with my own money. Hence linux.
So what i am looking for is an out of the box experience that will not turn my eyes red.
For what it’s worth I have an RX 7900XT and it works great with the Free software driver. The other reply is right that amdgpu is supported. I use Endeavor and was a bit confused about setting it up at first, but the nice guys at the GamingOnLinux discord helped me out and now it’s extremely painless to use and upgrade.
It’s just what it sounds like: the driver is Free software. This is in contrast to the situation with Nvidia where there’s a Free software driver that doesn’t perform well and a proprietary driver from Nvidia that performs better, but is kind of a pain in the ass for users and distro maintainers to maintain. You’re reliant on Nvidia for support so you’re forced to use certain versions of kernels and libraries (I think). The AMD driver is free, open source, performs well and is more flexible.
I’d recommend Beyond All Reason. It’s open-source and utilizes a realistic scifi theme. You essentially manage metal and energy to produce more units, to fight against other player’s units. It’s very easy to learn, and looks nice graphically. The only caveat I can think of is that it is not on Steam. Game Link: www.beyondallreason.info
Honestly anything with a non LTS release schedule will be fine. So long as you keep a relatively recent kernel and GPU drivers it pretty much doesn't matter. You can go for a rolling release like Arch or OpenSUSE Tumbleweed or a staged release like Fedora. Even Ubuntu or it's derivatives are fine so long as you stick to the yearly versions and don't have a particularly bleeding-edge hardware.
My only advice is stick to the popular stuff. This applies to both distros and desktop environments. Much easier to troubleshoot things and find help and they have more people using them, which usually means the experience is more polished and bugs get fixed faster.
Great to hear, but I’d recommend against manjaro. While it appears to just be arch with an installer and some more preset, it has its own repos that are behind the arch repos. This causes a huge amount of issues that normal arch doesn’t have.
While I haven’t tried garuda yet and installed arch on my own, it seems like it actually does what people think manjaro does: Make arch easy and keep the benefits.
People often claim that Manjaro holds packages for a couple of weeks for “stability” but I’ve never seen the benefit. They tend to just update packages after Arch does and it doesn’t seem like they do any particular stability testing that the Arch community hasn’t done already.
They also tend to break the AUR occasionally for funsies, so that sucks.
EndeavourOS, Garuda, and any of the other Arch derivatives that use the Arch repos and drop some of their own tooling/customization on top should be a better experience for most.
Garuda appears to have some security issues unfortunately, see here.
To quote:
Garuda: They use Chaotic-AUR which automatically and blindly compiles packages from the AUR. There is no verification process to make sure that the AUR packages don’t suffer from supply chain attacks.
Their complaint about chaotic is the exact same that is mentioned 4 paragraphs before as coming from AUR in general, and they also mention the same thing can happen with other distros / package managers… It all loops back around to not blindly trusting everything in the repos. Which loops around to not blindly trusting anything on the internet in general.
Also I’m pretty sure you can use Garuda and avoid chaotic and use standard AUR instead, if you for some reason trust AUR fully but don’t trust chaotic at all. I’d have to double check that about system level packages, but it’s definitely possible with anything you seek out to install after the initial install of the OS.
linux_gaming
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.