Yet another hardware question for a Linux rig

Famouswolfe

Reputable
May 16, 2014
2
0
4,510
Hello Toms Hardware, first post long time lurker. Down to business, I'm wanting to upgrade my CPU. I'm currently running an FX-6300 with an R9 290X and Windows 10. I want to go Intel this time, however my problem is that my copy of Windows is an OEM copy that's tied to my current mobo so the moment I get a new mobo/CPU I'll have to get another copy of Windows which I'm loathe to do. So I've said screw it, I'll go Linux! 90% of the games I play are already Linux native and the few that aren't can be run with Wine. My question is, which CPU is better for Linux gaming? I've read that there isn't much difference between an i3 and an i5. Also, should I consider getting an Nvidia GPU? I've heard that AMD's Linux drivers are worse than Nvidia's. My budget is around $350 USD, I can push it to $400 if need be. Please no Linux-naysayers, I've made up my mind and also,if I feel the need to return to Windows I can shell out the $120 in the future. I would love to hear from any Linux gamers, especially those of you that have an AMD GPU. Thanks everyone!
 
Solution
Nvidia is currently an absolute must when it comes to gaming on linux. Amd will no doubt get their act together soon, but currently their drivers just can't compete. Definitely make sure you use the nvidia closed source driver as well.

When you pay extra for Intel, you are really paying for more power savings at a significant increase in upfront cost which you will eventually gain back over the lifetime of the processor. I3's only have two cores, which means you will occasionally be CPU bound - or maybe more than just occasionally, especially if you use one of the big desktop environments like KDE or Gnome. I have an AMD Phenom II x6. Intel chips are way more expensive - an i5 quad core costs $100 more than my 6 core AMD processor -...

JMW22

Reputable
Dec 21, 2015
74
0
4,710
Nvidia is currently an absolute must when it comes to gaming on linux. Amd will no doubt get their act together soon, but currently their drivers just can't compete. Definitely make sure you use the nvidia closed source driver as well.

When you pay extra for Intel, you are really paying for more power savings at a significant increase in upfront cost which you will eventually gain back over the lifetime of the processor. I3's only have two cores, which means you will occasionally be CPU bound - or maybe more than just occasionally, especially if you use one of the big desktop environments like KDE or Gnome. I have an AMD Phenom II x6. Intel chips are way more expensive - an i5 quad core costs $100 more than my 6 core AMD processor - but I know I'm paying extra over the long haul. There's one thing I haven't tried yet, but I will likely try soon - underclocking my Phenom II and seeing if I can get significant power savings. I haven't even researched this yet at all, but I have a feeling it could be a winning strategy. If you really need the power savings you get from intel though, and aren't willing to underclock (or undervolt), I would at least pick a processor that you will remain satisfied with later - and that sounds like an i5 or later, at least to me. On the other hand, if this is just for gaming, and you can minimize resource usage for everything on the system *but* gaming, you might get away with an i3.
 
Solution