GPU for someone way behind on games & uses Linux (below $200)

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

Sparktown

Honorable
Jan 28, 2015
129
1
10,695
Short version: Need recommendation for Linux compatible GPU to play mostly older (2-5 years) titles.

Details: Planning a Skylake i5-6500/i5-6600 build mostly for web & graphic design/digital illustration, but I would also like to do some gaming. I mostly want to catch up on the last 5 years of gaming I missed, because my current computer couldn't handle it. Examples include: Skyrim, Bioshock 2-3, Witcher 1-2, Deus Ex 3, Fallout 3, Borderlands 1-2, Street Fighter IV, and Dark Souls 1-2.

I'm pretty clueless about graphics cards, so I would appreciate any advice. I want to be able to play older games high spec, but I also want the option to play newer games (wouldn't be horrible if I played at medium spec). Something new might catch my eye (ARK looks cool), but (for the most part) I'll probably spend 1-2 years just catching up on old games.

I would be playing everything on a 1080p monitor or a 720p/1080p HD TV. I switch between Windows & Linux - so I strongly prefer something Linux compatible. Ideally, any software utilities should also be able to run in Linux (at least Debian distros like Ubuntu/Linux Mint). Definitely under $200, prefer to keep it around $150 or lower if possible.

For some more context, here are some of the cards I've been looking at:
Nvidia GeForce GTX 950
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960
AMD Radeon R9 370
AMD Radeon R9 380

These aren't the only cards I would consider, just the only one's I've researched so far. I've heard mixed things about the AMD Radeon R9 270 - 290s, but don't really know how they compare to other cards.

Currently I'm leaning toward this MSI GTX 950 or maybe splurging on the XFX Radeon R9 380 (hear better than Nvida 960) if needed/recommended. I also don't really know anything about differences between brand manufacturers (MSI, Gigabyte, Sapphire, etc). Again, I'm pretty clueless about graphics cards, so please let me know if there is a better card for me. I would love any advice on this. Thanks!
 
Solution
B
Sort by date Sort by votes
B

bradley4jacks

Honorable
Jan 26, 2014
30
0
10,540
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
S

Sparktown

Honorable
Jan 28, 2015
129
1
10,695


As I mentioned, my budget is under $200. However, if possible I would prefer something around $150. I mention this because I figure I might not actually need that much graphics card to play mostly older games.

Short answer is I like Linux :) I will probably end up doing some kind of windows/linux dual boot set-up, but I generally prefer to stay in Linux as much as possible.

I should have mentioned that I'm in the U.S.A.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
B

bradley4jacks

Honorable
Jan 26, 2014
30
0
10,540


Sorry, I meant what was your budget for the whole build and what other components are you looking at?, and if you are set on linux I'd go with nvidia, due to the better driver support. So I would have a look for a 2gb gtx 960 as these seem to be pretty cheap right now ( http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814487091&cm_re=gtx_960-_-14-487-091-_-Product ). I think a gtx 960 is looking like your best bet as it will play any game you throw at it and if you choose to you will be able to play newer games, as although I know its not your intention right now you've always got that option there if and when you want it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Sparktown

Honorable
Jan 28, 2015
129
1
10,695
CPU: i5-6500/i5-6600
HD: 250gb Samsung Evo 850
RAM: 8 GB
Mobo: Asrock H170 Pro4/H170 Fatality
I'm pretty set on Asrock because their support will email me firmware updates that allow ATA passwords which is necessary for the Evo's full drive encryption. Not a lot of Mobo manufacturers allow ATA passwords on their boards.

Don't really have a hard budget. Just trying not to pay more than I need. Maybe around $600-700ish?

Are the drivers for Nvidia really that much better in Linux? Prices look about the same now, but everything I have read seems to indicate the AMD R9 380 is generally a better card.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
renz496

renz496

Champion
Jun 16, 2009
14,249
210
53,090
'Better' probably an understatment. You know there ie something very wrong when AMD fastest card having hard time to keep up with GTX960 in linux when in Windows based game that card can easily keep up with nvidia fastest. When it comes to linux AMD betting more on open source drivers. That effort in itself is not a bad decision because that is what linux in the first place but AMD probably think it is not worth their time to offer both good binary and open source drivers at the same time. Anyway this benchmark is for you:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=steamos-22-gpus&num=1
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Sparktown

Honorable
Jan 28, 2015
129
1
10,695

Thanks for the link. Wow! Nvidia's performance advantage on Linux is crazy. From looking through PCpartpicker.com, I currently have my eye on:

EVGA GeForce GTX 950 2GB FTW $129.99
(seems like a really good verison of 950)
OR
Asus GeForce GTX 960 4GB $179.99
Gigabyte GeForce GTX 960 4GB 179.99

Thoughts? Like I said, this is kind of a re-entry card for me. I could see myself getting through most (or even half) of my significant back catalogue of older games and then hanging up my gaming hat. Basically, if I don't really need the GTX 960 now, I feel like might be better served saving the money for when (or if) I get another GPU in a 2-4 years. Again, would be interested to hear thoughts on this. The sooner the better, since I don't know how long these sales will last.

Thanks.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Sparktown

Honorable
Jan 28, 2015
129
1
10,695

Thanks for the link. It looks like only 8% difference in 1080p, which amounts to 3-5 fps in many games. Although, they only tested a GTX 960 2 GB. Would a 4 GB be any different? I've heard that 4 GB doesn't help for 1080p gaming. Is this right?

Currently, I'm leaning toward the EVA GTX 950, although there is also an MSI GTX 950 for the same price (EVGA seems better?). There doesn't seem to be a significant practical advantage to the GTX 960 in 1080p. A game that runs at 30 fps on the EVGA GTX 950 isn't going to run at 60 fps on the GTX 960. If I needed to turn down game graphics for the EVGA GTX 950, I would also need to turn down settings for GTX 960. Example, your link said EVGA GTX 950 gets 30.6 FPS in Witcher III @ Max settings, compared to 33.3 FPS with GTX 960 2 GB.

I know it sounds like I'm answering my own question, but (like I said) I'm kind of clueless about GPUs. Am I missing something? I did find this review of the EVGA 950 GTX. Is the EVGA 950 GTX the better choice for me?

Please let me know your thoughts.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mlga91

mlga91

Admirable
Jul 8, 2014
2,545
0
7,960


I knew that amd drivers on linux were bad, but not THAT bad.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
S

Sparktown

Honorable
Jan 28, 2015
129
1
10,695
Thanks everybody. Listed bradely4jacks as best answer but renz496 helped just as much, especially with those great links. I really dodged a bullet by avoiding AMD on a Linux machine.

Ended up getting EVGA GTX 950 FTW Edition. It seems like one of the better 950s and got a good deal on it. GTX 960 is better, but I read a couple of reviews that suggested the performance increase wasn't worth the extra cost. Since I have a large back-log of older games and don't know how long my interest in gaming will last, I think this card will be a good fit for me.



 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom