Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Is nvidia the best card for linux ?

Last response: in Linux/Free BSD
Share
March 5, 2013 2:03:11 AM

Hello,
is nvidia the best card for linux ubuntu 12.10

say the gtx 650 or gt 640

More about : nvidia card linux

a b Î Nvidia
March 5, 2013 7:44:22 AM

Yep. You can see some benchmarks on Phoronix. nVidia drivers actually manage to keep up with Windows performance, while AMD's effort is miles behind their Windows drivers.
March 6, 2013 1:47:59 AM

Actually, second best. Linux works best with Intel graphics (but who actually uses those anyway?). Also, most of AMD's stuff is now moving towards Linux optimization, but their graphics drivers, on generally all platforms, suck. Just a side note, be wary of Nvidia's latest Linux driver, it poses a security threat due to integer shift.
Related resources
a b Î Nvidia
March 6, 2013 7:16:39 AM

Yeah obviously no need to buy a card at all if you won't be gaming (and the fact you're running Linux suggests you're not too bothered about gaming, unless it's gonna be dual boot?) or doing anything else graphically-intensive.

If you're like me, Ubuntu will be like a 'gateway Linux' that leads to trying everything else (out of curiosity) and eventually Unix systems like FreeBSD. At that point, I didn't get on too well with FreeBSD due to AMD's absolutely horrible driver situation limiting me to 2D unaccelerated 1280x720 on a 1920x1080 display. If I'd been using nVidia hardware there, the open source Nouveau drivers would have let me run BSD fine.

Though my initial point wasn't so much about BSD (you may not be curious to try it) but just that nVidia's Linux drivers can deliver near identical performance on a given card (say the GTX650) as that same card would deliver in Windows. Catalyst on the other hand will have your hardware performing far below the same Radeon would perform in Windows, so performance wasted.

And by the way, after everything else I tried, I ended up going back to Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu and sticking with it - nothing else I tried could beat it for general desktop use. So good choice there.
March 6, 2013 8:04:07 AM

It's already been said, but I'll chime in. Nvidia is good with Ubuntu. For the most part. My only issue personally was a fresh install of Ubuntu 12.04.1 and a GTX 500 series card. You had to add a few lines to the grub options, nothing horrific. For the un-itiated is could have been a deal breaker, but about 10 minutes of looking around and the courage to try something new, and you reap a lot of rewards.

So yes. Nvidia + Ubuntu = good times.

PS: I've been led to believe that this was fixed with the maintenance update, 12.04.2 that just came out. I haven't tried re-imaging or building a new box, but if it hasn't, it's an easy work around.
March 6, 2013 8:26:19 PM

sam_p_lay said:
Yeah obviously no need to buy a card at all if you won't be gaming (and the fact you're running Linux suggests you're not too bothered about gaming, unless it's gonna be dual boot?) or doing anything else graphically-intensive.

If you're like me, Ubuntu will be like a 'gateway Linux' that leads to trying everything else (out of curiosity) and eventually Unix systems like FreeBSD. At that point, I didn't get on too well with FreeBSD due to AMD's absolutely horrible driver situation limiting me to 2D unaccelerated 1280x720 on a 1920x1080 display. If I'd been using nVidia hardware there, the open source Nouveau drivers would have let me run BSD fine.

Though my initial point wasn't so much about BSD (you may not be curious to try it) but just that nVidia's Linux drivers can deliver near identical performance on a given card (say the GTX650) as that same card would deliver in Windows. Catalyst on the other hand will have your hardware performing far below the same Radeon would perform in Windows, so performance wasted.

And by the way, after everything else I tried, I ended up going back to Ubuntu/Kubuntu/Xubuntu and sticking with it - nothing else I tried could beat it for general desktop use. So good choice there.


In my opinion, Unix makes olde systems too slow. If you really want Unix, go with Solaris, its better than Free BSD.
a b Î Nvidia
March 6, 2013 8:48:54 PM

neodymium said:
In my opinion, Unix makes olde systems too slow. If you really want Unix, go with Solaris, its better than Free BSD.


Better how? My system isn't old anyway so that's not an issue.
March 6, 2013 10:01:47 PM

sam_p_lay said:
Better how? My system isn't old anyway so that's not an issue.


Well, its just the user interface that is different and the capability is also different. Solaris is built on Unix and is better for workstations where you do a lot of cpu-intensive programming. FreeBSD is technically Unix but cannot be legally advertised as Unix. It is based off of the same BSD kernel that Mac OSX uses. It is aimed more for servers, but can be used as a workstation with a separate GUI you have to install through its original terminal interface. Just to keep in mind, Solaris and FreeBSD have about as many security holes as windows, if not more, but is not usually infected with viruses because not many people write viruses for these operating systems. Also, most of the security holes can only be exploited if you install binaries, so if that is uncommon for you to download, there isn't much to worry about.
a b 5 Linux
March 7, 2013 5:18:30 AM

Mac OS X is not based on the same kernel as OS X. Let's not spread disinformation.

Your point about systems being more insecure if you install binaries is a good one. That is why I would go for FreeBSD rather than Solaris every time. Unlike Solaris, you can build every component of a FreeBSD system from scratch.

From what you post I doubt that you have any experience of FreeBSD (and probably none of Solaris either).
March 8, 2013 1:38:33 AM

Ijack said:
Mac OS X is not based on the same kernel as OS X. Let's not spread disinformation.

Your point about systems being more insecure if you install binaries is a good one. That is why I would go for FreeBSD rather than Solaris every time. Unlike Solaris, you can build every component of a FreeBSD system from scratch.

From what you post I doubt that you have any experience of FreeBSD (and probably none of Solaris either).


I really don't have much experience in FreeBSD, though I have more experience in Solaris. Actually, to tell you the truth, I only used FreeBSD only two or three times, then switched to Solaris. :sweat: 
!