AMD vs Nvidia
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
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.
-
-
-
It was the opposite experience for me last time I tried an AMD card. But that was like 8 years ago.
-
NVIDIA is more problematic than AMD on Linux. So AMD.
-
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 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.
-
-
I had a better desktop experience with the FOSS driver than the proprietary driver when testing a 2060 on Fedora 41.
-
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.
