Compare NVIDIA and AMD technologies.
Compare NVIDIA and AMD technologies.
Hello, With GPU prices dropping slightly, I'm searching for an upgrade for my 2013 AMD R9 270. I'm targeting a budget of 400-500€ and need something capable of running three monitors at 1080p, preferably with smooth gameplay. I previously used NVIDIA hardware but faced issues on Linux. My last two GPUs performed well, even with the latest updates. My card still supports the newest Vulkan features despite being nine years old. I'm aiming for performance similar to the RTX3060, though I won't be playing the newest AAA titles just yet. AMD's options seem limited compared to NVIDIA, which offers better hardware support for video encoding/decoding and dedicated ray tracing capabilities—something I'm interested in for game development. On the other hand, NVIDIA appears to have stronger driver support overall. Would anyone know about recent NVIDIA experiences on Linux? Also, is Vulkan support still decent for NVIDIA models?
Sincerely,
Thalhammer
P.S.: This is my first time joining the forum, so please accept any mistakes.
NVIDIA offers better graphics, especially with ray tracing. Recent driver issues have affected both companies, but NVIDIA has consistently struggled with driver problems. Whether it’s worth it depends on your needs.
I've been using NVIDIA since 2015 and haven't noticed much difference in drivers between Linux and Windows. Both function well without extra steps. In fact, the Linux driver offers features Windows lacks, like adjusting FPS display per app or setting up dual screens—a setup that's straightforward on Linux but often complicated on Windows. From 2006 to 2014 I used AMD graphics cards, which generally worked fine. However, the R# and RX series caused many issues—frequent crashes, visual glitches, and even overheating. My room would hit 65°C when idle and over 90°C during gaming, with temperatures reaching 270°C for R9 models. After that, RX 370 followed suit, eventually failing. I had to pay extra for a replacement in 2015, but it worked perfectly afterward. Now I keep mine as a backup, since it's still functional despite the age.
Comparing this to my AMD experience over the past decade, I changed graphics cards 11 times (AMD) from 2015 to 2022, only once for an upgrade to NVIDIA. Doing the math shows that NVIDIA is superior.
I don't think your situation is incorrect. My experience has been quite different. I owned one NVIDIA card that caused a lot of trouble under Linux (difficult to get stable, lots of issues, broken drivers every couple updates) and it eventually failed. After that, I switched to two AMD HD6770 and an R9 270, which are both functioning well and easy to configure. Just needed to enable Vulkan support when necessary and now I'm running Vulkan 1.2 on a very old GPU. Also, AMD doesn't seem to block hardware in virtual machines. From a software standpoint, AMD appears to have the advantage, but NVIDIA offers better value at my budget level. It feels odd since AMD used to be seen as the cheaper choice, yet their drivers can sometimes lag behind. I'm not sure if the hardware's ray tracing capabilities justify the extra effort, especially since both AMD and NVIDIA cards seem capable of handling it without issues.
AMD is the way to go imo with one exception. Having the drivers included in the kernel is a double edged sword. If you just got a brand new recently-released card and your distro of choice doesn't have a kernel that supports it yet... you're gonna have a bad time. If the card has been out for at least one or two distro release cycles you're probably going to have a great experience. Many people will say "oh just update the kernel manually", yeah sometimes that works fine, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes there are other packages that you need to run the card well/take advantage of that new kernel that are held behind on your distro waiting for the next release. So just keep that in mind. ~7 month old AMD card > Nvidia card > Brand new AMD card
Between 2006 and 2014 few custom PCs lasted more than two years. Most distributions offered backported kernels. Even Ubuntu 18.04 could run a modern kernel, as I think version 5.15 exists in backports. There are also PPA options for older versions like 16.04 if you really want to stick with the past. Generally, people focus on kernel updates rather than distro updates. GPU support for upcoming generations is often added to mainline kernels well before release—like having Radeon 6xxx series in version 5.6—though drivers might still be incomplete. Just because you bought a GPU yesterday doesn’t mean you need Archlinux or similar to run it. What matters most is doing your own research (just search online for the right support info).