[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On 29/10/18 16:59, mr meowski wrote: > On 29/10/2018 16:11, M. J. Everitt wrote: > >> Yup, if you're "in the know" .. nvidia drivers, firmware, software etc is >> really troublesome, and quite frequently inconsistent and needing binary >> blobs. Whilst there is a lot of "development" in the area, its mostly >> patching over crap "releases". >> >> AMD (former ATI) stuff is relatively stable, and by virtue of being less >> complicated, is generally better supported. >> >> Intel built-in can be just as patchy as nVidia .. as most of it is >> reverse-engineered, and newer hardware is often simply mis-identified by >> the kernel, leading to further driver issues. >> >> TL;DR - if you want Windows features, buy Windows hardware. >> >> The usual maxim for Linux still holds .. support for the "latest, greatest" >> will always lag sales and marketing. Catch the hardware -just- before it >> goes obsolete (And is cheaper anyway) and watch all the salient hardware >> mailing lists for support issues. >> >> For wifi cards especially - check driver support *before* you buy ... > I'd like to qualify this a bit further - graphics are largely a solved > issue on Linux now meaning that generally speaking, they will Just > Work(tm) _for the average end user_. > > Corner cases definitely exist for newer models of graphics and Nvidia > are arses to be fair - their releases of the required (signed, > proprietary) firmware blob lag more and more behind. Many PC vendors > ship crappy EFI systems that expect Windows and don't behave properly > when booting Linux. Hybrid systems (aka: Optimus) are an extra pain in > the arse. AMD are genuinely trying these days - they've basically open > sourced most of their graphic drivers now - but are still pretty behind > and none of the advanced stuff works with their open source stack. > > I appreciate this sounds like the complete opposite of what I said in > the first line but most of this stuff effects people with advanced needs > or bleeding edge hardware/software AND the requirements to use it at > full capacity. Most problems faced by your normal enduser are the > occasional one off fight like Ian has just had as you figure out how to > boot and install the damn thing in the first place and afterwards > they'll settle in for years of normal operation. > > If - like most end users - you don't need fully hardware accelerated > X/Wayland and the ability to do massive GPU number crunching then you > probably just won't have a problem other than the occasional setup > glitch. Trust me, Windows is no better in this regard and Mac is > considerably worse. > > So absolutely the best bet - if you're not playing games and number > crunching - is Intel, hands down. This is where I really disagree with > MJE (sorry chief!). Sure they are very low firepower compared with > discrete cards but they're also way more efficient, use less power and > are extremely well supported by Intel with always up to date open > sourced graphics drivers. Intel shame everyone else in this regard. More > recent Intel integrated GPUs will happily push 4K@60fps by the way, some > to more than one simultaneous display. All distros ship with proper > Intel drivers. You seriously can't go wrong. Well, I say this despite the fact I roll my own kernels (Yes, from source!). I've been bitten by X not recognising the appropriate chipset, although this may well be a poor xorg support once-upon-a-time thing. And I compile that from source too .. (normally) .. but perhaps not bleeding edge enough .. I hear continuous complaints about nvidia, but the FOSS radeon/radeonsi drivers seem to be OK for me with their respective firmware blobs. Beyond that .. can't add much .. MJE > Stay away from AMD unless you're a tinkerer. Their proprietary Linux > drivers are the work of the devil. However, thanks to being very open > source friendly these days generic Linux support on the non proprietary > AMD graphics stack is really, really coming along. It's borderline > unusable on anything modern and high end but if you do your homework > first and make sure to buy the correct older AMD graphics card it'll be > supported well by third party repos. Think 'Nouveau' but for AMD. > > And finally Nvidia. With all of their problems it's still the only thing > I'll spend my own money on when I need graphical firepower for Linux. Do > they suck and do I hate them? Yes. Does their horrid proprietary driver > for accelerated X massively outperform any other option? Yes. That's > basically the summary I'm afraid. > > In Ubuntu land you'll almost definitely be better served by examining > the following three repos (Ubuntu don't ship the latest and greatest > graphics subsystems for any of the three hardware providers): > > https://launchpad.net/~oibaf/+archive/ubuntu/graphics-drivers > https://launchpad.net/~graphics-drivers/+archive/ubuntu/ppa > https://launchpad.net/~paulo-miguel-dias/+archive/ubuntu/pkppa > > You know what, I think I've actually argued myself out of my intial > point after all that and MJE is probably right after all: graphics on > Linux are actually still pretty sucky :| > > Cheers
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG https://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/listfaq