zlacker

DLSS was windows only for some time.

linux’s amdgpu is far better than the nvidia-driver.

>>foxhil+(OP)
ATI drivers were a horror show for the longest time on windows never mind linux. What Nvidia did was have have basically the same driver code for all operating systems with a compatibility shim. If you were using any sort of professioinal 3d software over the previous 2 decades Nvidia were the only viable solution.

Source: Was burned by ATI, Matrox, 3dlabs before finallly coughing up the cash for Nvidia.

>>foxhil+(OP)
amdgpu is better now. But was terrible for years, probably 2000-2015. That’s what gp is saying.

>>foxhil+(OP)
Except it doesn't do GPU compute stuff, so it's no use for anything except games.

>>alanfr+d2
Huh ? Compared to open source nvidia driver which could do nothing ?

I had a Riva TNT 2 card. The only "accelerated" thing it could do in X was DGA (direct graphics access). Switched to Ati and never looked back. Of course you could use the proprietary driver. If you had enough time to solve instalation problems and didn't mind frequent crashes.

>>alanfr+d2
amdgpu is new. you may be thinking about fglrx: a true hell.

>>Gordon+f3
it doesn’t do CUDA, but it does do opencl, and vulkan compute

>>rabf+L
yes, i am very familiar with that pain. fglrx was hell compared to nvidia.

nvidia being the only viable solution for 3d on linux is a bit of an exaggeration imo (source: i did it for 5 years), but that was a long time ago: we have amdgpu, which is far superior to nvidia’s closed source driver.

>>hulitu+L6
> Compared to open source nvidia driver which could do nothing ?

Compared to the official Nvidia driver.

> If you had enough time to solve instalation problems and didn't mind frequent crashes

I used Nvidia GPUs from ~2001 to ~2018 on various machines with various GPUs and i never had any such issues on Linux. I always used the official driver installer and it worked perfectly fine.

>>foxhil+Q7
Maybe, but nothing really uses that, at least for video.

>>hulitu+L6
Did people not try the nvidia driver back then? Even as a casual user at the time it was miles ahead - but it wasn’t open source

>>hulitu+L6
DGA and later XV.

>>rabf+L
I was a big Matrox fan, mostly because I knew someone there, and was able to upgrade their products at a significant discount. This was important for me as a teenager whose only source of income was power washing eighteen-wheelers and their associated semi-trailers. It was a dirty and somewhat dangerous job, but I fondly remember my first job. Anyway, I digress, so let's get back to the topic of Matrox cards.

The MGA Millennium had unprecedented image quality, and its RAMDAC was in a league of its own. The G200 had the best 3D image quality when it was released, but it was really slow and somewhat buggy outside of Direct3D where it shined. However, even with my significant discount and my fanboyism, when the G400 was released, I defected to NVIDIA since its relative performance was abysmal.

>>nick__+2V
One usecase Matrox kept doing well was X11 multimonitor desktops. The G400 era was about the time I was drifting away from games and moving to full time Linux, so they suited me at least.

>>foxhil+L7
No, I was thinking about amdgpu. amdgpu, the open source driver, since 4-5 years is better than nvidia closed source driver (excluding the cuda vs opencl/rocm debacle ofc).

fglrx has always been a terrible experience indeed, so AMD was no match for nvidia closed source driver.

So, once upon a time (I'd say 2000-2015) the best Linux driver for discrete GPUs was nVidia closed source one. Nowadays it's the amd open source one. Intel has always been good, but doesn't provide the right amount of power.