linux. Which chipset to choose, AMD or nvidia?

Question

linux

You need to choose a motherboard with built-in video, the computer will work under Linux.

I used to always buy nvidia, because there is an opinion that drivers, both proprietary and open, are less problematic for nvidia.

Interested in how relevant this is now, especially for embedded video.

UPD. A computer is needed for work - the workplace of a web developer.

Answer 1

for "everyday" tasks all the same.
similar for indie toys.
for other tasks, you need to look depending on their diversity.
until you decide to climb into CUDA, these subtleties will not affect you much.
I am currently an Ubuntu user on an A52Jr with an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5470
driver installed as usual.

Answer 2

Still nvidia.
Although with Catalyst 11.2 I have already become much better with vertical synchronization (external HD 5770), but there are still a lot of small problems (with two monitors, for example).
With nostalgia, I remember the convenient effects of fast compiz and playing OpenArena and Doom3 on the Geforce6600 of a cheap laptop for 11k from MSI.

Answer 3

If you do not need 3D games, then take intel hd. Generally no problems. Out of the box, hd1080 is spinning with a CPU load of 10-15%. And if the solutions are "more powerful" - then still Nvidia. Even though they are bad now.

Answer 4

I have a laptop with AMD/ATI. I do not recommend. The video heats up like a stove even during normal operation, while heating all the insides of the laptop, incl. increasing the temperature of the processor and hard drive. Especially when using open drivers (shamanization in order to enable energy saving led to severe glitches, but did not lower the temperature one degree).
With Catalyst a little better, but they are also very buggy. Firstly, the laptop still heats up above normal almost all the time, especially while watching movies. Secondly, artifacts in the form of twitching and horizontal stripes are periodically visible in films (something is wrong with vertical synchronization, this problem is not in open drivers, and is not treated by any settings in Catalyst). Thirdly, the stupid Catalyst refuses to understand the InputDevice section in xorg.conf for my trackball (it just sets up additional buttons, no esotericism) and crashes. Fourthly, suspend and hybernate stop working with Catalyst (more precisely, they work, but after one or two hangs occur, and it’s the same as they don’t work).
In general, I bitterly regret that I took a laptop from ATI and send rays of hatred to the crooked AMD programmers.

Answer 5

In principle, there is not much difference. Before, when there were fashionable mx440s, when laptops were still very expensive and not widespread, there were big problems with ATI cards under the line. Now, developers of both NVIDIA and ATI write software for all platforms and there should not be any problems with drivers.
I read the threads above. As for CUDA, there are similar projects for ATI.
As for the fact that ATI heats up more than Nvidia - a very doubtful fact, since it also depends on the type of video card. Here, I think, the technical organization of the cooling efficiency in the laptop is more influenced.
Personally, I give my preference to ATI, because on my conscience they proved to be the most fault-tolerant.

Answer 6

There are fewer problems with nvidia, no matter what anyone says. But Intel has even fewer of them.

Answer 7

What processor will be used?

Answer 8

Check out AMD's chipset here . I think there is such a page for Nvidia.

Answer 9

If you don’t think about playing, go to the AMD+ATI, Intel+IntelHD garden. I had terrible problems with video under Linux on the desktop, and on laptops. And twice Intel is why: the video does not heat up, it pulls up to 1080p without any difficulties, it works fine out of the box under any OS, ++ does not eat the battery as noticeably as heavyweights.

Answer 10

A laptop with an unpretentious ati x2300 vidyahoy - in catalyst'e they removed it from support, the drivers that the curves stuck in ubuntu. Simple flash toys still work normally, but what is more complicated (the same flash) slows down, even CS can’t be chopped :(
When I took the laptop, somehow I didn’t think about video, next time I’ll google it :)

Answer 11

I will say one thing, I do not advise taking ATI, there are still no normal drivers for Linux, I sat on catalyst for 3 years (I bought Nvidia yesterday), gnome3 started up with artifacts (video acceleration is needed there, and catalyst has problems with it), ATI also does not take load from the flash, when nvidia loads gpu, not cpu, and other problems.

Answer 12

There were both ATI and NVidia. NVidia works anytime, anywhere. There were problems with ATI. At what, for example, ATI worked fine for itself on ubuntu, updated ubuntu - it stopped working, or rather, it stopped working adequately. So half a year and sat with a buggy video until the next release.

Answer 13

There were 6870 and 6970, both turned out to be inconvenient under Linux. They didn't seem to be buggy, but I had to get very hemorrhoids when hdmi from ati suddenly completely threw out of the SB X-Fi system. It took a very, very long time to configure alsa for normal operation. Never had any problems with nVidia.