Ubuntu vs. Arch Linux On The ASUS ROG Strix G15 / Ryzen 9 5900HX

[Nille_kungen]

Why not patch the 5.13 kernel? with linux one usually update or patch the kernel for newer support.
Temp patch:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux...13a07260eb696d
Fix broken suspend:
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/co...ef9fab967a1684

[chuckula]

I'm a very long time Arch user and it's a great distribution for lots of customization, but unless you are compiling a lot of your own packages with optimizations the distro does *NOT* have sophisticated build flags, profile guided optimizations, etc. It generally has good performance and can be tuned to remove bloat, which helps with performance, but it isn't Clear Linux, a crazy Gentoo flag fest, or anything like that.

[bug77]

Well, I suggested Arch because I knew the kernel would be more recent. Don't really care about performance. I just don't see any point running old "LTS" distros with bleeding edge hardware. Unfortunately even 1yo AMD hardware has bad support due to the driver situation. Even if there was a more recent PPA kernel available, setting up the PPA and first boot will be major pain in the ass thanks to all those missing drivers. It's just much easier to use a distro which has up to date packages right from the start.

The joke's on you then, because in addition to Mesa, Michael also felt like upgrading the kernel.
Kinda strange, considering he's usually very adamant on testing just defaults.

[jrch2k8]

Just leaving this here in case michael wanna check it out or any other Archlinux homie want to test it out

https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/software/linux-gaming/1266934-archlinux-x86-64-v3-and-gaming-kernels-michael

[Linuxxx]

What most Arch Linux fans fail to realize is that most PC users do NOT want to babysit their OS all day long; they want to setup once and then be good to go!

That is the reason why the Ubuntu LTS base is so popular in the Linux world (including all derivatives like Linux Mint):
You get to enjoy an enterprise-grade foundation that is properly tested across a very wide userbase.
And if it works on your current hardware, then it will keep doing so without random updates breaking it every so often like it always inevitably will on Arch Linux! (Been there, done that...)

[jrch2k8]

What most Arch Linux fans fail to realize is that most PC users do NOT want to babysit their OS all day long; they want to setup once and then be good to go!

That is the reason why the Ubuntu LTS base is so popular in the Linux world (including all derivatives like Linux Mint):
You get to enjoy an enterprise-grade foundation that is properly tested across a very wide userbase.
And if it works on your current hardware, then it will keep doing so without random updates breaking it every so often like it always inevitably will on Arch Linux! (Been there, done that...)

Well, that depends because i've been using the same ArchLinux installation since 2012 and the only breaks i had came from llvm-git (this is to be expected regardless the OS) and i think once when ArchLinux migrated to systemd because i missed a step and had to use a pendrive to fix it and make it bootable again and maybe the first time i decided to ditch GRUB for systemd-boot(i rushed without reading this properly and went full retard).

This installation history as

2012 Phenom II X6 and EXT4 with 500gb HDD
2015 AMD FX 6100 and XFS with 64 GB SSD
2018 AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and ZFS dual 256GB SSD
Current Xeon E5 2678v3(i needed the extra threads badly and was dirty cheap) XFS NVME 256gb.

Note i have never reinstalled ArchLinux in this period, i have only migrated by copying / to the new drive(s) and remaking initramfs, restart and enjoy

I also have servers on client (bunch of HP proliant G8 and DELL ivy bridge era) running ArchLinux to this day and again never reinstalled once(OS boot from hot swapabble ZFS raids).

I will admit this tho, if you enable [Testing] repo because you wanna be bleeding edge and you are not really really technically gifted, ArchLinux will break any other day. This repo is meant for experts and Arch staff to test before release.

If you stick to [core/extra/community] ArchLinux is almost LTS solid, at least on my experience and manjaro is even tougher as long as you don't touch testing repos

[jrch2k8]

What most Arch Linux fans fail to realize is that most PC users do NOT want to babysit their OS all day long; they want to setup once and then be good to go!

That is the reason why the Ubuntu LTS base is so popular in the Linux world (including all derivatives like Linux Mint):
You get to enjoy an enterprise-grade foundation that is properly tested across a very wide userbase.
And if it works on your current hardware, then it will keep doing so without random updates breaking it every so often like it always inevitably will on Arch Linux! (Been there, done that...)

Well, that depends because i've been using the same ArchLinux installation since 2012 and the only breaks i had came from llvm-git (this is to be expected regardless the OS) and i think once when ArchLinux migrated to systemd because i missed a step and had to use a pendrive to fix it and make it bootable again and maybe the first time i decided to ditch GRUB for systemd-boot(i rushed without reading this properly and went full retard).

This installation history as

2012 Phenom II X6 and EXT4 with 500gb HDD
2015 AMD FX 6100 and XFS with 64 GB SSD
2018 AMD Ryzen 5 2600 and ZFS dual 256GB SSD
Current Xeon E5 2678v3(i needed the extra threads badly and was dirty cheap) XFS NVME 256gb.

Note i have never reinstalled ArchLinux in this period, i have only migrated by copying / to the new drive(s) and remaking initramfs, restart and enjoy

I also have servers on client (bunch of HP proliant G8 and DELL ivy bridge era) running ArchLinux to this day and again never reinstalled once(OS boot from hot swapabble ZFS raids).

I will admit this tho, if you enable [Testing] repo because you wanna be bleeding edge and you are not really really technically gifted, ArchLinux will break any other day. This repo is meant for experts and Arch staff to test before release.

If you stick to [core/extra/community] ArchLinux is almost LTS solid, at least on my experience and manjaro is even tougher as long as you don't touch testing repos

[caligula]

What most Arch Linux fans fail to realize is that most PC users do NOT want to babysit their OS all day long; they want to setup once and then be good to go!

That is the reason why the Ubuntu LTS base is so popular in the Linux world (including all derivatives like Linux Mint):
You get to enjoy an enterprise-grade foundation that is properly tested across a very wide userbase.
And if it works on your current hardware, then it will keep doing so without random updates breaking it every so often like it always inevitably will on Arch Linux! (Been there, done that...)

I'm currently running few systems with FreeNAS, OpenWRT, Debian Stable, Ubuntu LTS, Void, and Arch. Of course, YMMV, but I find Arch easiest to maintain, even though I have tons of more experience with .deb based distros. I'm probably doing something wrong here, but the largest piece of work is manually maintaining the pacnew files (I use "meld" to merge the changes). I also use "git" for storing the revision history of /etc. I've never managed to break it, yet. I've even automated the downloading of packages, so updating the whole system takes like 5 mins a week since all packages have been preloaded (don't worry, I only download the once a week and use "zenity" to notify the work is done so I can run the update with no delays). I think it's a perfect fit for this system - I got the Ryzen 5800 last December. I wanted to install some modern distro which requires only minimal amount of tuning. Basically Steam and everything worked out of the box with zero configuration.

[old_skull]

_snip_

5 minutes every week AFTER spending god knows how much setting up the whole thing is not babysitting? So how do I teach my wife doing all this, or do I have to spend 5 minutes every weekend on every PC in my house?

What an incredible take. Do you really not get it?

[MadCatX]

What most Arch Linux fans fail to realize is that most PC users do NOT want to babysit their OS all day long; they want to setup once and then be good to go!

I'm quite sure that most Arch Linux uses DO realize that Arch has a somewhat steeper entry barrier and occasionally requires some manual intervention. On the other hand, if Arch had a graphical installer and package manager, it'd make a splendid desktop distro for a lot of average users. The fact that Arch always ships the recent software makes a lot easier to install on recent hardware and even when there is a problem, you can usually rely on it getting fixed in a future update. Versioned distros are much more problematic in this regard. If an average user got this ASUS ROG laptop and tried to put Ubuntu on it, they'd walk away with the impression that this Linux is a real pile of garbage. Arch, on the other hand, would work fine and it'd provide recent Mesa for the best 3D performance as a bonus.

Could this be a case of arch linux having PREEMPT_RT switched on by default?

Arch does not have PREEMPT_RT enabled by default. I'd bet that most of the benchmark differences could be chalked up to GCC 10 on Ubuntu vs. GCC 11 on Arch.