AMD vs Nvidia
-
Cuda and optix are anecdotally three times faster at rendering than any amd solution.
That doesn’t mean amd doesn’t perform well though, its personal preference on how much that time saving is worth it.
AMD-HIP works just great for me.
-
AMD-HIP works just great for me.
"Works great" and "Could work 3x faster" matter to a lot of people.
-
"Works great" and "Could work 3x faster" matter to a lot of people.
Well then you're just nagging about hardware, which isn't the issue being spouted on here. Blender works with AMD hardware just great, which OP was saying is not the case.
-
I am going to buy a new graphics card and can't choose between Nvidia and AMD. I know that Nvidia has bad reputation in Linux community but how really it works? And I heard recently their drivers got better. What can you recommend?
P. S. I don't want any proprietary drivers (so I am talking about Nouvea or any other FOSS Nvidua driver if it exists)
Everyone's gonna suggest AMD here because of your requirement of no-proprietary drivers; but unless you're some sort of high-value target to a foreign government, I honestly choose the more pragmatic route of just using the proprietary NVidia driver and going NVidia. Especially if I'm not budget constrained on card.
The fact of the matter is, AMD has just simply fallen behind. NVidia cards are (and have been for like 3 generations now) more performant. There is good reason why they dominate the market right now; they're just simply better.
It really depends on how far you want to take your zealotry on open source; there are parts of the CPU microcode that can see everything you do. Those are proprietary. Your bios is proprietary. You're probably running 100 different proprietary blobs even IF you choose not to use the drivers that NVidia supplies; so why hobble yourself with a slower card that doesn't have CUDA instructions? (often also very good for AI work if you are interested in that at all)
I certainly understand wanting to push that direction for the sake of pushing that direction but - is performance and stability less important than using a proprietary driver?
-
Well then you're just nagging about hardware, which isn't the issue being spouted on here. Blender works with AMD hardware just great, which OP was saying is not the case.
Blender works with AMD hardware just great
No it doesn't. That's our point. It works 25% as fast as its competition. That's not "working just great"...it's working slowly and like shit.
-
if( you need CUDA ){
Use Nvidia (note that OSs officially supported by CUDA often use "old" versions of linux, like Debian 12 (6.1) or Fedora 39 (6.8), I personally use Arch);
} else { Use AMD, you will have less problems and it'll probably be easier to setup; }Also do some research over whether you actually do need cuda if you need cuda. It's synonymous with a lot of AI stuff, but in my experience it all works with rocm anyway.
-
I don't want any proprietary drivers
So then you don't want any NVIDIA.
there is no proprietary AMD Linux driver
I mean, there is. It just isn't recommended for most users.
-
Everyone's gonna suggest AMD here because of your requirement of no-proprietary drivers; but unless you're some sort of high-value target to a foreign government, I honestly choose the more pragmatic route of just using the proprietary NVidia driver and going NVidia. Especially if I'm not budget constrained on card.
The fact of the matter is, AMD has just simply fallen behind. NVidia cards are (and have been for like 3 generations now) more performant. There is good reason why they dominate the market right now; they're just simply better.
It really depends on how far you want to take your zealotry on open source; there are parts of the CPU microcode that can see everything you do. Those are proprietary. Your bios is proprietary. You're probably running 100 different proprietary blobs even IF you choose not to use the drivers that NVidia supplies; so why hobble yourself with a slower card that doesn't have CUDA instructions? (often also very good for AI work if you are interested in that at all)
I certainly understand wanting to push that direction for the sake of pushing that direction but - is performance and stability less important than using a proprietary driver?
I often hear how prprietary drivers breaks and have a lot of issues. But AMD card usally work very stable
-
I often hear how prprietary drivers breaks and have a lot of issues. But AMD card usally work very stable
It was the opposite experience for me last time I tried an AMD card. But that was like 8 years ago.
-
I am going to buy a new graphics card and can't choose between Nvidia and AMD. I know that Nvidia has bad reputation in Linux community but how really it works? And I heard recently their drivers got better. What can you recommend?
P. S. I don't want any proprietary drivers (so I am talking about Nouvea or any other FOSS Nvidua driver if it exists)
NVIDIA is more problematic than AMD on Linux. So AMD.
-
I often hear how prprietary drivers breaks and have a lot of issues. But AMD card usally work very stable
I wouldn't say the proprietary nvidia drivers are any worse than the open-source AMD drivers in terms of stability and performance (nouveau is far inferior to either). Their main issue is that they tend to be desupported long before the hardware breaks, leaving you with the choice of either nouveau or keeping an old kernel (and X version if using X—not sure how things work with Wayland) for compatibility with the old proprietary drivers.
-
Blender works with AMD hardware just great
No it doesn't. That's our point. It works 25% as fast as its competition. That's not "working just great"...it's working slowly and like shit.
You're bitching about hardware capabilities. Read OP's comment and stop showing up just to comment if you can't provide anything constructive except whining pedantry.
-
You're bitching about hardware capabilities. Read OP's comment and stop showing up just to comment if you can't provide anything constructive except whining pedantry.
Nobody is bitching. Rage less. My constructive point is that NVidia is a better option.
-
I am going to buy a new graphics card and can't choose between Nvidia and AMD. I know that Nvidia has bad reputation in Linux community but how really it works? And I heard recently their drivers got better. What can you recommend?
P. S. I don't want any proprietary drivers (so I am talking about Nouvea or any other FOSS Nvidua driver if it exists)
Do you play a lot of games with ray tracing, or do you care about that stuff? If you don't then AMD, it's better bang for the buck for rasterization and works better on Linux.
-
I am going to buy a new graphics card and can't choose between Nvidia and AMD. I know that Nvidia has bad reputation in Linux community but how really it works? And I heard recently their drivers got better. What can you recommend?
P. S. I don't want any proprietary drivers (so I am talking about Nouvea or any other FOSS Nvidua driver if it exists)
As someone who started using Linux while on Nvidia and stuck with it for over a year before going full AMD.
Just go AMD, so many little things I had to find workarounds for just because of Nvidias shitty drivers.
Even after Nvidia claimed to support wayland I could never get it to run on my install, then having to manually configure my xorg just to get my 170hz monitor working which then introduced graphical issues I just couldn't fix...NONE of that was an issue the moment I swapped to a RX 7800 XT, didn't even have to install any drivers they're just standard in the kernal.
-
I am AMD and use Blender just fine. What do you mean?
Blender supports cuda for much of its gpu work. It will work with amd. And there are projects allowing gpu rendering via amd. But they are (and have been for a while) a long way behind the cuda stuff.
For major rendering projects nvidia is still the fastest set up to use.
-
Do you play a lot of games with ray tracing, or do you care about that stuff? If you don't then AMD, it's better bang for the buck for rasterization and works better on Linux.
Does nouveau support RTX?
-
100% AMD, for sure. AMD won't make much problems and works ootb.
Nvidia on the other hand... if you already have a Nvidia GPU, then the proprietary drivers work pretty well, but even those won't work flawlessly and still cause problems for many people.
And the FOSS drivers are still in the early stages and won't cut it. So why spend lots of money for a piece of hardware that won't give you the performance you paid for?Also, Nvidia clearly doesn't care about PCs or its' users, so why support such a shitty company with your money?
I had a better desktop experience with the FOSS driver than the proprietary driver when testing a 2060 on Fedora 41.
-
Does nouveau support RTX?
I haven't been on NVIDIA for a while so i couldn't tell for sure. I know that nvidia raytracing works on linux, but I'm not sure how it goes with the open drivers. If the noveau performance and stability is still somewhat lacking in general, then if both open drivers and raytracing are important to you then AMD is still the better bet.
-
Nobody is bitching. Rage less. My constructive point is that NVidia is a better option.
Is your information applicable to the nouveau drivers? I’d understood they’re many years behind in performance and capability but blender has never been in my use case.
