Quoting: LinuxwarperAlso I would not be surprised if Google had a clause in their agreement with developers that prohibits or restricts native release on Linux. Why on world would you as a company be for desktop Linux, which competes with ChromeOS, and also encourage a local release that goes against your streaming service?

This doesn't makes sense. If ChromeOS sees a Linux distro as competence then I don't want to know how they see Windows 10 (or MacOS for the matter of same products type). The value of a Streaming platform is all the infrastructure you build in order to make it possible, not to mention that users like the idea of Stadia because they don't need to have the latest hardware in order to play games.

If CDPR would care about Linux we would already have the Linux port of CP2077. I fail to understand why this is so difficult to see and some people prefer to think on artificial/corporation limitations that are limiting them to do the release.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: YoRHa-2BThe Stadia port was done by QLOC fwiw, not by CDPR themselves.

Well, that is probably a dead end for the future "Vulkan renderer" that many are expecting.

From a gaming experience or "Linux support", buying this game or RDR2 is more or less the same at this point.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: massatt212what some of y'all don't understand, is if u don't show any support they wont waste their time, native or not toy should show support so they can see linux users are serious, but if some of y'all are like, im not buying a game cause its not native linux game, if i was a dev and i see that practice ill never make a game for linux and let y'all fight to make it work on proton without any support, but CD PR gave valve the game access to get the linux proton version run good at launch.

Just take a look on the number of people that are asking for CP2077 or Galaxy for Linux in GOG and you will see that they cannot have any doubt that a lot of Linux users shows their support but they don't give a fuck. "Keep buying so they notice us" just doesn't makes sense.

I really appreciate the work done by Steam but I cannot buy this game on release price by the simple fact that CDPR just doesn't care about Linux. Hopefully by the time I decide to buy it on Steam (with the best offer I can find) it'll work flawlessly on Linux. For now, I'll probably buy something else in order to congratulate Valve for their work.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PJBut I've given you the reason why some people (like me) say that Nvidia is easier to maintain for average Joe.
But at least we've agreeded that for some users AMDGPU-PRO are a must (to get a pro app support , opencl etc).
And here's the deal - while you have repos for Nvidia which make installing drivers a breeze you don't have something along those lines for AMDGPU-PRO.
So steps are really not the same.
Yes, I can do a manual driver installation via command line. Yes, I can do driver uninstall and reinstall after a kernel update. But should I as a desktop user? I don't think so. And I haven't had to mess with it while using Nvindia for years.

And mind I'm not talking for a fanboy perspective. I don't care whether my system has a team red or green gpu. I care about about performance and how hassle free it is. And at this point if you're a creative that does not want to mess with system Nvidia IMO wins. No matter how much I cheers for AMD and for adoption of Wayland.

The discussion is moving more to how "average" is Joe at this point. By experience I can say that an average Joe that requires some specific components (a.k.a. OpenCL) will probably be very used to dealing with the command line as many times he will have to move away from the default package that your distro ships.

Either way, as I have been saying many times already: how easy is one or another to install will completely depend on your distro. And for most of the users and distros, driver management for Nvidia or AMD is pretty much the same. IMO, the easiness of driver installation for one or another GPU doesn't have any weight on the GPU selection with the present driver status.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedjeThing is, and my point being, yku should NOT HAVE to go bleeding edge just to get a graphics card to work. With nvidia you do not, as most distributions package the drivers themselves.

Installing the latest driver for Nvidia is not going bleeding edge? As I said, having to update your kernel to the latest stable version is not isolated to AMD hardware.

Quoting: slaapliedjeWith AMD you will always be chasing the latest mesa libs or kernel, because distrubutions don't chase AMD. The proprietary drivers for AMD have been a mess for a long time and so distributions gave up on packaging them. The open source ones tsnd to not perform as well, as noted earlier in this thread. So being forced to use the proprietary driver for either 'team' to get the full benefits out of your hardware makes me think both of them only give us as much as they think we deserve.

Once you have a kernel that supports your hardware there is no need to keep updating it (unless there are some driver level bugs that requires fixing, of course). And "chasing" the latest Stable Mesa drivers is fairly trivial in any distro but, once you have support of your hardware you only have to do that if you want to get the new fixes or features of Mesa.

Who told you that "The proprietary drivers for AMD have been a mess for a long time and so distributions gave up on packaging them"? Did you ever take a look on how AMDGPU-PRO is packaged? And I can ask the same regarding the driver performance you mention. I think that you have a big bias regarding many things of the open source drivers.

Quoting: slaapliedjeSo let's all admit, both have their advantages and disadvantages. Neither is 'evil' they both compete for different audiences for the most part. Truth is, for any of the things like DLSS and Raytracing, nvidia still is going to trounce AMD this time around. They got a jump on the tech. AMD was trying so hard to catch up, this is their first gen on ray tracing, so performs similar to the the 2080 from what I have seen, where the rest of stuff is about at 3080 speeds.

How many games I can play with DLSS or RT on Linux? Truth is that we are on Linux and those are pointless features for now. IMO, right now this technologies have the same weight as Physx had in the past.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedjeThey BACKPORT kernels from testing to stable. https://packages.debian.org/buster-backports/linux-image-5.9.0-0.bpo.2-rt-amd64-unsigned [External Link] Also backports for nvidia drivers are also enabled.

What I was saying is that installing them ARE supported You just don't WANT to have to install newer kernels unless you really need something in the new kernel, that was my point. The whole 'meh, let's swap out the kernel' should be more of a 'holy shit, you're forced to get a new kernel because you want a new GPU?' It should be like any other platform, you update the driver for newer card support, you shouldn't have to update your whole kernel. Not everyone can just do that, like if they have a workstation where they are tied to a specific kernel for business case (like nessus won't accept anything but the kernel version string to certify it's not vulnerable).
Not sure why people don't take such things into account when they say 'just update the kernel'.

We are running in circles here. I previously mentioned that if you have a the requirement of stable kernels or workstations, you must stick to the officially supported distros (i.e. RHel/Centos or Ubuntu LTS) so you can use the dynamic module (and this appliers for both Nvidia and AMD). But lets be real, this discussion is about people that mostly use their GPUs for gaming so getting the latest kernel for the latest hardware is an standard requirement for a Linux user as GPU driver is just one of the many drivers you may need.

Quoting: slaapliedjeThat's what we're talking about here, if you are going to get the latest hardware, you basically have to upgrade kernel / mesa instead of just letting your distro packages handle it. Debian Sid apparently already has the minimum (kernel 5.9.x and Mesa 20.2+ (may have been 20.1+ that is needed). But that IS a rolling release. Yes they have backports, but you'd have to 'prep' for stable and install that stuff before you pull out your old card and put in the new.

Having to get the latest kernel or an specific library version is completely related to the fact that you bought the latest hardware. If you go bleeding edge with the hardware you will have to go bleeding edge with Linux, that's the way it works in our system.

And regarding of having to install your drivers before putting the new one, that's exactly what you have to do no matter if you have AMD or Nvidia (this is probably not 100% true with AMD GPUs, though).

Quoting: slaapliedjeBut the way nvidia and AMD do it with their proprietary driver is more supportable, as you don't have to muck with new kernels, and they package their own OpenGL/Vulkan libraries. DKMS is the correct way to go here. If your distribution breaks DKMS, that means they didn't test kernel+dkms+driver integration, and that's ON THE DISTRIBUTION, not nvidia or AMD's fault, right?

DKMS is a handy option but it's far from being the ideal solution for Linux as many things can go wrong during the build of the module (dealing with those errors will be quite hard for most users), not to mention that you force the user to install a building tools. IMO, from a distro maintainer POV it's probably far better to have everything in the kernel as this helps to avoid the maintenance of the dynamic module (one less package, one less headache).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedjeHow is it unsupported if I install nvidia drivers from the debian repo? Unlike Ubuntu and their Universe / Multi-verse repositories, Debian supports ALL of theirs... one of the reasons Debian is superior.

So, installing a new kernel from Debian testing is unsupported but installing Nvidia drivers from testing is supported?

Quoting: slaapliedjeI'm not, what I'm implying is that distros don't support AMDGPU Pro drivers within their distribution. Whether that is because they're too hard or because AMD doesn't let them, I haven't looked into. But nvidia clearly does allow distributions to put their drivers in repositories. Simple as that. Have you seen any distribution contain repositories with the proprietary AMD driver? If so, I'd like to know about them, as I haven't seen any. I mean let's hold both companies to the same standard, do they both allow repackaging of their drivers? Or are we stuck with the three distros they support (RHEL, CentOS, Ubuntu)? Even the open source drivers require firmware blobs, so the ones who are happy about that can't be 100% happy.

This just brings up the problem I stated in my last post, neither solution is 100% great. Nvidia just happens to have better distribution support as of right now. Unless you're using a rolling release (as you said, latest kernel) then you're shit out of luck for AMD.

If you don't want to imply that then you should probably start saying that Nvidia is better supported in your distro and that's it. And you don't need to have a rolling release. You just have to get the latest kernel and Mesa version if and only if you have the latest hardware, something you can do without a rolling release.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: 3zekielYes, my statement is really on the end user usability, what Nvidia themselves provides also suck. I said in message before, but for me Nvidia is not a wonderland either, and company wise I'm not a very huge fan. For AMD, I am not more of a fan, as I don't consider them open (they just code drop ...), although they at least give doc. They also lock firmwares who have full dma access, so advanages are not a lot ... The rest is really observation from end user usability. I have view on centos/Fedora and ubuntu where overall Nvidia gave less problems (did not say "no problem") on my experience, either personal or when supporting colleagues. It might be thanks to distro, but I don't really care, I just care for end result.

I can understand an statement that reads "In my distro XXX, Nvidia have drivers that are easier to update/install" (which is probably debatable, but whatever). My problem is that most of the time the statement just reads like "Nvidia have drivers that are easier to update/install", giving credit to Nvidia for something that don't deserve and blaming AMD for something they are not responsible of. My point here is that AMD provides the exact same driver support as Nvidia does (with the advantage of having a driver inside the Linux kernel, of course).

Quoting: 3zekielThere is always the wayland arguments, but having no special use for wayland, that does not really concern me. I mean, I did make it work too, just did not have much point. I run wayland mostly for xrun setup with Nvidia, so that Intel card does not clash with Nvidia's xorg + openbox env. It does require multi cable, so it is not ideal either ... Once again, never said is perfect. But it does work, and setup is easy to find / use.
For AMD, can't say the same. I had issues on issues, work & home. And from what I read here and there, can't say I'm alone.

IMO, Wayland argument is the same as CUDA argument. These are feature that each user will give more or less value. BTW, your solution is completely if and only if you have a second GPU in your system. Unfortunately, not all CPUs includes a GPU so it's far from being perfect in the end (and, from a end user pov, definitely is not a easy as having one GPU for everything).

Quoting: 3zekielAnd it is easier to get latest Nvidia than AMD on my distros. It's most likely not thx to Nvidia, but it's what happens. As for failures after new kernel, well, since it's tested by distro maintainers I guess (is their own packages), that's why it never breaks for me.

As for dkms on debian, it is indeed a special case of where it should tend to work, since you have a fully stabilized kernel, albeit I doubt you'd run anything where you need latest driver (there's no official support for autodesk/tensorflow and co there, and using a distro with very old packages is sub obtimal for gaming). I did use on centos before for a ML guy, was a case where it did not break also, stable kernel and all that. On Ubuntu, using website dkms was painful, very painful (with hw enablement stack).

Once again, I agree, neither are actually a walk in the parc in all occasions. AMD requires to go and pull git stuff, Nvidia you have to go back to old gcc for their nvcc stuff, but you have scl to help you. Which is really the point on usability, whether Nvidia does smthg themselves or not, since they are the main vendor, people adapt ... And there are a lot of stuff to workaround their stuff, often out of the box or easily ... That's just the way it is.

As I said, both provides similar solutions. How easy is to get one or another in your system depends of your distro and your experience.

Quoting: 3zekielOn pure Gaming, as long as you don't want the very latest proton, it should be fine. But my fear is you still get hangs, APUs that do not even let you boot ... all this kind of fun stuff. Stuff, that basically never happened to me with Nvidia. Worst you have there is nvcc yelling on you to give him an older compiler, which since you can still boot in normal env is not so hard. Overall, this has been the issues I faced and my work experience, and not just on my machines. I also agree my use is not casual, and I might push into more issues than standard gamer obviously, but the APU not booting as an example ...

TBF, Nvidia can also have similar problems: https://www.reddit.com/r/linux_gaming/comments/k4r48t/have_you_been_experiencing_unrecoverable_hard/ [External Link]

I never used an APU though, so I cannot give any opinion about them.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedjeReally? Swapping kernels out for something you compiled yourself or fetched from some third party seems great to you??

There really isn't such a thing as 'latest' stable kernel, when you're running a stable distribution such as RH/CentOS, Debian Stable, Ubuntu LTS, etc. Sometimes you just don't want to be running unsupported configurations, which running the 'latest stable' kernel wouldn't be.

I never said to compile or use a third party. In your distro (Debian), I'm sure that you can download the latest kernel from unstable or experimental repos, just like you do in order to install the latest Nvidia drivers.

And when I mention "stable", I'm not talking about of what your distro considers stable. Also, in the moment you install the latest Nvidia driver you will also be running an "unsupported" configuration. Getting the latest version of a software implies getting into something not well tested in the distro and this "issue" applies for AMD and Nvidia.

Quoting: slaapliedjeYeah, they're just different, and as you said, sometimes it's just a matter of which distribution you use, on which is supported better. Unless you end up with some sort of AMD Linux distribution where they keep it up to date for future cards and prepares them for their users, then there is no 'perfect' solution at this point. Now maybe if Intel does something amazing with their dedicated GPUs, and makes the drivers compatible, then there'll be a better experience. But even then you'd still be tied to newer Mesa drivers, which is usually the sore point to the AMD ones.

Why do you imply that AMD must keep up to date their drivers in a distro? You ask for something that not even Nvidia does. If you want to be fair with the proprietary driver status, then you should ask your distro why the don't provide those packages in the repo. And regarding Mesa, the requirement to get the latest version are the same as for Nvidia.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedjeHa, I love the argument that it is simpler to swap out a kernel instead of using dkms to automatically compile the driver when there is an automatic kernel update...

What is the difficulty of swapping kernels?

Quoting: slaapliedjeIf you are currently up to date on Debian Sid, then the AMD should work out of the box, but of course won't have any features that are in the AMDGPU PRO driver. Whereas with Nvidia cards, you will have to enable non-free repo and install 'nvidia-driver' package. But once you do that, it just works and they keep it well up to date. They don't always get the latest Mesa and sometimes (especially after a stable release) don't have the latest kernel.

That your distro doesn't provides the latest stable kernel or Mesa packages is problem with your distro. We are talking about of what Nvidia and AMD provides.

Quoting: slaapliedjeThere are plenty of advantages and disadvantages to each method. Neither is entirely better than the other.

In a perfect world, they would just work. Like maybe some sort of auto detection that could hit kernel.org or other once network pops up and looks to see if there is a minimal driver combination to be needed to get Xorg / Wayland running... but I guess we have things like fbdev for that.

Neither is better than the other, but somehow many users says that Nvidia still provides a better driver support.

View this comment - View article - View full comments