The Tighter NVIDIA GeForce vs. AMD Radeon Linux Gaming Battle With 396.54 + Mesa 18.3-dev Drivers

[duby229]

Even modern/recent AMD cards are power hogs, though. How can you advocate them if they consume more power than cards that are beating them in performance or even barely beating (if they are eclipsing at all)? Nvidia might only offer significant drivers with proprietary ones but at least, the performance is somewhat efficient.

I'm not so sure you really want to be saying that. The real truth is that nVidia achieves their FPS by compromising on both visual quality and on stable hardware configuration. It is well known that nVidia cards do not render the same image quality as AMD cards do on exact same settings. Additionally it is also well known that nVidia's high end gamer cards have driver configurations that fry them dead. If you choose nVidia you are not getting open sources, those drivers are likely to fry your card and they definitely won't give you the same graphics quality. But nVidia cards will render at higher FPS if that actually means anything.

[perpetually high]

average gamer has no idea that amdgpu-pro even exists. he boots linux and it just works, like always

This is true. I plugged in my RX 480 again just now (typing on it as we speak) cause I have to put back the original bios before I sell it, and it just.. works. For Vulkan support, I installed mesa-vulkan-drivers, and that was it. For OpenCL, I grabbed the 18.20-606296 drivers (still works with Ubuntu 18.10 unlike latest from AMD's new site) and installed the libopencl1-amdgpu-pro and opencl-orca-amdgpu-pro-icd packages, and boom, OpenCL support. Literally took less than 5 minutes to OpenGL, OpenCL, and Vulkan going.

AND, I'd like to mention that I ran ethminer and zero lag while I used the computer, unlike the NVIDIA GTX 1080. Seriously consider returning this GTX 1080 and getting my money back. Played some of my games just now and wasn't sacrificing thaat many FPS. Not sure what I'll end up doing, but one thing is for sure the RX 480 is a great card and I hope AMD's nextgen 7nm gpus (once they hit consumer markets) absolutely destroy everything in its path.

[Girolamo_Cavazzoni]

Even modern/recent AMD cards are power hogs, though. How can you advocate them if they consume more power than cards that are beating them in performance or even barely beating (if they are eclipsing at all)? Nvidia might only offer significant drivers with proprietary ones but at least, the performance is somewhat efficient.

Please excuse my question, but in what country do you live? I presume you live in an industry nation and

• your perishable food is stored in a refrigerator
• you cook you meals and roast your bread with some kinds of electric devices
• your home is lighted with filament or LED lamps
• all the other gadgets that make your life a pleasure are electrically powered, too. Not to forget that
• electricity is abundant.
• Big electricity consuming corporations even get paid to consume excess electricity.

So please, stop this hypocrisy. Regarding energy consumption it doesn't matter a crap which graphics card is in any PC. There are different things to consider when buying a graphics card than energy consumption. (For example if it's worth buying from an asshole company like Nvidia.)

[Brisse]

AND, I'd like to mention that I ran ethminer and zero lag while I used the computer, unlike the NVIDIA GTX 1080.

Can confirm. Ethminer has basically zero impact on desktop performance when running on my R9 Fury's. I know some folks with Nvidia and they all say there's a significant performance impact.

[perpetually high]

tl;dr long unnecessary post, read at your own will.

Okay, one final update from me: The GeForce GTX 1080 is back in the box and being returned to Amazon!

Total estimated refund: $492.74

Yeah, you read that right. A dumb impulse buy for a GTX1070 at $296 (then getting scammed) turned into shelling that much for a 1080 mini w/ tax over a perfectly working RX480. What's even dumber about my purchase was I have a ViewSonic 144Hz FreeSync monitor, which the GTX wouldn't be able to utilize. So once FreeSync support finally gets upstreamed, that's another thing I'll look forward to. (I know I can run a custom kernel and/or a supported distro for current FreeSync support)

So with everything else on my system but the video card remaining the same so I was able to get a good feel for the system since both are still fresh in my mind now that I've been back on the AMD card for a couple hours.

The RX480 makes my Linux box feel faster than the GTX1080. Call it placebo, I don't care. Not to mention, I was able to continue ethereum mining with absolutely no slow down of general usage/web browsing. Same with mining + playing an old game (like Quake 2 multiplayer). It was as if nothing was running in the background.

I realized with NVIDIA (as one poster pointed out), is that their GPU scheduler is dog shit. (with all due respect). I say that because I ran a Vulkan sample program, and that exhibited the same lag the ethereum CUDA/OpenCL mining did. To me, that is pretty subpar and I'd expect better from NVIDIA on that. If anyone wants to shed more light on that, please be my guest.

I can also say it's personally nice to be back on the Mesa/amdgpu ecosystem. NVIDIA driver updates are boring. I get it, some people don't like fiddling with that stuff, but I do.

Doom 2016 was getting 125fps on the RX 480 instead of 144fps locked on the GTX1080. Bioshock Infinite same thing. Nbd, I'll live. Rocket League still pegged 144 on both with max settings. I don't play the craziest AAA titles anyways. Hashtag patientgamer.

The moral of the story is I didn't need an upgrade to a GTX 1080 over an RX 480 with the games I play. Your mileage may vary. My post is also more related to the Linux experience between AMD and Linux (not so much RX480 vs GTX1080), and I'm glad I was able to try both video cards as I now can speak first-hand on the pros and cons of using both with latest gens.

I'm going to look into properly overclocking the RX480 on Linux again. One other plus is I'm no longer fighting GNOME's night light with the AMD card. NVIDIA kept messing with it (especially when opening the System Settings), causing unnecessary headaches.

If my AMD family will take me back, I'd appreciate it. It's good to be home. In bridgman we trust!

EDIT: At this point I'm being flat out annoying, but I just can't say this enough.. DAMN it feels good to be back on the AMD card. I've got the GPU downclocked @ 1077MHz, 98W power, mining at 27Mh/s, browsing the web, coding in Sublime Text, zero slow down whatsoever. Sublime Text was inoperable before, literally couldn't scroll.

Bridgman, please send my best to whoever coded up the GPU scheduler on these AMD cards. I feel like I got my computer back. (oh, and $500)

[cybertraveler]

perpetually high: Great post! Thanks for the enthusiastic write up. I found it an interesting read. I think it's exactly the type of real-world, GNU/Linux user experience that we need to hear about. Raw NVIDIA vs AMD fps numbers are absolutely wonderful & necessary to see, but they don't tell the whole story.

[perpetually high]

perpetually high: Great post! Thanks for the enthusiastic write up. I found it an interesting read. I think it's exactly the type of real-world, GNU/Linux user experience that we need to hear about. Raw NVIDIA vs AMD fps numbers are absolutely wonderful & necessary to see, but they don't tell the whole story.

Very welcome, thanks for the kind reply. It was the response I was hoping for when I was typing it up.

At the moment, I'm compiling the kernel with all 4 cores maxed out, mining ethereum at full 27Mh/s, in Sublime Text, clicking around on the desktop, multiple tabs in the Web browser, and zero slow down. I really took this for granted before.

That was another reason I wanted to type up my experience, for the NVIDIA user who's never seen the other side, and thought "Well, that's just the way it is."

Michael have you noticed this at all yourself? Just in general with the work you do in your day-to-day activities, not so much gaming. I'm surprised this isn't talked about more. To me, it's a very noticeable difference experience between the two brands on Linux. I still give NVIDIA the nod (for now) in certain aspects like the Settings panel, the nvidia-smi program, and overclocking options. But I think that's where it stops. So once AMD gets those going, and you can argue that the savvy user can already do those things, then it makes an already-very compelling case for AMD on Linux (open-source drivers and all) even more compelling. If money was no object, I'd pick up a Vega 64 knowing what I know now.

For Windows of course, NVIDIA just makes much more sense. I'll never argue that. I'm talking strictly Linux here. Hopefully AMD has an answer for ray tracing as well, then there will be no reason not to use AMD on Linux.

[nanonyme]

Was it so that Disney now owns the trademark Tie Fighter?

[duby229]

Very welcome, thanks for the kind reply. It was the response I was hoping for when I was typing it up.

At the moment, I'm compiling the kernel with all 4 cores maxed out, mining ethereum at full 27Mh/s, in Sublime Text, clicking around on the desktop, multiple tabs in the Web browser, and zero slow down. I really took this for granted before.

That was another reason I wanted to type up my experience, for the NVIDIA user who's never seen the other side, and thought "Well, that's just the way it is."

Michael have you noticed this at all yourself? Just in general with the work you do in your day-to-day activities, not so much gaming. I'm surprised this isn't talked about more. To me, it's a very noticeable difference experience between the two brands on Linux. I still give NVIDIA the nod (for now) in certain aspects like the Settings panel, the nvidia-smi program, and overclocking options. But I think that's where it stops. So once AMD gets those going, and you can argue that the savvy user can already do those things, then it makes an already-very compelling case for AMD on Linux (open-source drivers and all) even more compelling. If money was no object, I'd pick up a Vega 64 knowing what I know now.

For Windows of course, NVIDIA just makes much more sense. I'll never argue that. I'm talking strictly Linux here. Hopefully AMD has an answer for ray tracing as well, then there will be no reason not to use AMD on Linux.

Well, just speaking from my own experience here, it's -not- nvidia's 3d engine or graphics scheduler that hurts desktop performance. Nvidia's desktop performance is -all- about xrender, it's super bad. Seriously run some benchmarks, it's retarded. Whatever they are doing must put some serious congestion on xrender cause that's where the desktop lag and slow user interface is coming from. And I should mention nVidia's drivers have been like this since at least 2006 when I first noticed it so it's not gonna get fixed.

[Panix]

I'm not so sure you really want to be saying that. The real truth is that nVidia achieves their FPS by compromising on both visual quality and on stable hardware configuration. It is well known that nVidia cards do not render the same image quality as AMD cards do on exact same settings. Additionally it is also well known that nVidia's high end gamer cards have driver configurations that fry them dead. If you choose nVidia you are not getting open sources, those drivers are likely to fry your card and they definitely won't give you the same graphics quality. But nVidia cards will render at higher FPS if that actually means anything.

Bull. Prove it. I'm not a fan of Nvidia by any means - they are just as bad as Intel for jacking up prices and expecting people to pay for it. But, the fact of the matter is, their video cards, overall or generally, are more power efficient than similar /'equivalent' AMD graphics cards. AMD graphics cards are power hogs. If it wasn't for that, I'd be choosing one over Nvidia even if the performance was a bit less. But, it requires excessive power to be competitive. That tells me it's not very efficient.