Best hardware for Arch

ninjaprawn · 2010-02-11 20:48:12

Hi, I am going to be building a new box soon for arch to live in, and wondering what hardware people find best/worst, mainly with open source drivers.
e.g. On my current box, I have a Geforce graphics card, but there are no 3D accelerated open source drivers yet. I want my new box to have a graphics card that has 3D acceleration with good performance and has os drivers.

Also, any processors, mobo's, HDD's, sound cards, etc...... that work brilliantly or really dont work at all.

thanks

thestinger · 2010-02-11 21:54:09

any x86-64 CPU should be fine (AMD for budget, intel i5 or i7 if you have more money to burn)

ATI has open source drivers (with KMS) - but they are terrible

nvidia has better drivers overall but they aren't open source

you should avoid intel integrated graphics like the plague... but maybe there are other choices? (VIA?)

any HDD should be fine but avoid the new "green" drives with extra power saving features because lots of people have had problems with them in linux - also SSDs might not be a good choice yet until there is more support in the kernel

for the motherboard you'll need to worry about sound drivers among other things - stick with asus or evga for the motherboard though if possible (possibly gigabyte too? but I'm not sure about their support/build quality because I've never had one or set up a computer for someone with one)

skottish · 2010-02-12 01:09:21

Graphics is a touchy subject. The fact is that nVidia has now, has had, and probably will have the best, most complete, and stable drivers for Linux for a time to come. I have two machines with Intel GPUs that are a tragedy. One of them is an older Intel card that has been nothing but problems since the 'legacy' driver went away. The other one has the POS Poulsbo. Fortunately uvesafb is good enough for that machine.

Infin1ty · 2010-02-12 08:26:07

I really think almost every hardware will fit, i can't find a reason to ask "best hardware for arch", since arch is linux, every hardware that runs well on other distros will run beter on arch .
i will though try to avoid anything that relates to ATI in regarding their graphic cards atleast.
I do have good epxerience with intel though, i use arch on my netbook as well (mini hp compaq) and it runs hdtv movies better than windows and from my T400 laptop with ATI Radeon HD 3400.
if i had the choice to change my graphic card on my laptop i would take nvidia without hesitating.
also, notice that the broadcom drivers for wireless are bit buggy right now (the open source one atleast, the closed one is good).
i think atleast those are the two tips i have from my experience regarding other distros and arch.

ninjaprawn · 2010-02-12 09:09:14

brilliant, thanks for all the advice. really helping. Think ill end up with another nvidia card then. I am still on 32bit (x86) but will have to visit the world of 64bit i think.

lol at infin1ty, not approving of my question, then justifying it with

i will though try to avoid anything that relates to ATI in regarding their graphic cards atleast

brianhanna · 2010-02-12 13:03:42

I have to disagree on the need to avoid Intel graphics. I have several machines with Intel integrated GPUs that work great and there's no need for proprietary drivers. I even have a newer x4500 that I'm using in a MythTV box with a 1080p HDTV and it works great. I even get the audio over an HDMI cable with it. I agreee the GMA500 sounds like one to avoid though.

NVIDIA may be the best choice for high performance graphics but for fairly mainstream, non-gaming use I think Intel is a good option.

skottish · 2010-02-13 17:36:59

I'm bumping cuz' something magical happened and maybe what brainhanna said is right on the mark.

One of my two machines that I mentioned above so far seems to have been cured with the most recent xf86-video-intel and libdrm releases. I can't understate the importance of this. This machine has never had proper drivers in the years that it's been in my possession. I've run it for hours now and haven't had any crashes. I know that hours can hardly be a benchmark, but it wouldn't stay up for five minutes three days ago. I'd also like to add that the performance is stellar. Maybe Intel is finally starting to get it right.

axel668 · 2010-02-13 18:48:50

thestinger wrote:

you should avoid intel integrated graphics like the plague... but maybe there are other choices? (VIA?)

Intel drivers were crap all over 2009, but since the start of 2010 I'm beginning to see the light at the end of the tunnel - and no, it's NOT the oncoming train Seriously, Intel drivers are very stable and increasingly faster on my GMA 4500 onboard chipset, and I really hope it stays that way (I mean come on, KDE had a hard time, too, and look at them now ...)

ninjaprawn · 2010-02-13 19:33:40

cool, thanks, might consider intel then has anyone run via cards (s3)? just i have nvidia card now, n they wer brilliant drivers, but had a few wobbly moments with em recently, so looking to try sumin else.
also, thanks, @thestinger, I was gonna give a solid state HD ago, but will stick with my IDE drives, just move em to the new box.

What about wireless keyboards & mice??

thestinger · 2010-02-13 23:26:38

I have a wireless mouse (Microsoft Sidewinder X8) and it works beautifully - there was no setup required (all the buttons work), and I didn't even need to reboot or anything to get it detected. I was quite surprised, Windows needed a reboot to detect the mouse and then another to install the driver.

Other logitech/microsoft mice are well supported too.

You'll be fine with pretty much any wireless keyboards - they need to work in BIOS so they should work in linux.

If you want to know why you should wait on the SSD see this. I'm sure it will be fully implemented in the kernel soon though. If you did get one, you also wouldn't want to run a journalling file system like ext4 (lots of writes to the same area) and there are some other tweaks that would be required.

Instead of an SSD you might just want to consider loading everything into RAM - all my arch packages are only 2.5GB in total, and RAM is cheap.

Last edited by thestinger (2010-02-13 23:27:10)

brianhanna · 2010-02-14 01:19:27

skottish wrote:

I'm bumping cuz' something magical happened and maybe what brainhanna said is right on the mark.
One of my two machines that I mentioned above so far seems to have been cured with the most recent xf86-video-intel and libdrm releases. I can't understate the importance of this. This machine has never had proper drivers in the years that it's been in my possession. I've run it for hours now and haven't had any crashes. I know that hours can hardly be a benchmark, but it wouldn't stay up for five minutes three days ago. I'd also like to add that the performance is stellar. Maybe Intel is finally starting to get it right.

I've been noticing over the past few months that the performance of the intel driver has been going up steadily on my stuff. I know glxgears isn't a benchmark but I was getting about 400 fps with it a few months ago. Now I'm around 650 fps with a 3 yr old 945GM machine.

ninjaprawn · 2010-02-14 14:11:34

well, based on all this, I am thinking nvidia again for the new box, as my ~3 year old geforce 6200 is kicking out around 1500 fps in glxgears!! the rest of my machine is close to 10 years old!

ssd's are definately off the menu for now, thanks @thestinger, I am aiming for atleast 4meg of ram anyway!

so far, i think my new machine is gonna be;
Processor = Intel Pentium Dual Core E6500 2.93GHz 1066Mhz Socket LGA775 OEM CPU 2MB Cache
Mobo = Gigabyte Skt775, mATX, G41M-ES2L, FSB1333/DDR2 800/SATA/SATA II, S, G, GL
Graphics = Inno3D NVidia GeForce G210, 512MB DDR2, HDMI with HDCP, GRAPHICS PLUS with CUDA
HDD = My old 250gig & 40 gig

any one using any similar or same products?

falconindy · 2010-02-14 20:58:47

skottish wrote:

I'm bumping cuz' something magical happened and maybe what brainhanna said is right on the mark.
One of my two machines that I mentioned above so far seems to have been cured with the most recent xf86-video-intel and libdrm releases. I can't understate the importance of this. This machine has never had proper drivers in the years that it's been in my possession. I've run it for hours now and haven't had any crashes. I know that hours can hardly be a benchmark, but it wouldn't stay up for five minutes three days ago. I'd also like to add that the performance is stellar. Maybe Intel is finally starting to get it right.

You raised my hopes and then dashed them quite expertly, sir. Bravo.

My poor little laptop still can't do 2.6.32, even with the latest libdrm and xf86-video-intel.

edit: for quote correctness.

Last edited by falconindy (2010-02-14 20:59:55)

Ronin-Sage · 2010-02-14 21:57:15

The issue with Intel drivers is, if you stay even somewhat up-to-date, expect unexpected...issues--mainly performance degradation. At least, that's been my experience(945GM).

Let's just put it this way--a generated line graph of my Linux 3D performance from Q2 2008-present would be very, very interesting to look at.

harryNID · 2010-02-15 00:35:36

Just got a Logitec Anywhere MX mouse and it works better than my old Logitec mouse. All the buttons are recognized. The scroll wheel button takes some getting used to as it is external (button behind the wheel). On this mouse when you click the scroll wheel it shifts from a smooth scroll to a fast scroll. Overall I like it though. I had my wife pick it up so I didn't realize it was really designed for a laptop. I usually prefer a larger mouse as I have big hands but this one is still nice. It also works on any surface including (at least 4mm thick) glass.

clanger · 2010-02-15 11:59:44

Just want to say that NVIDIAs lack of support for RANDR is a major pain if want multiple monitors in a non-standard configuration. I had much better luck with ATI for this.

anonymous_user · 2010-02-15 16:01:12

ninjaprawn wrote:

well, based on all this, I am thinking nvidia again for the new box, as my ~3 year old geforce 6200 is kicking out around 1500 fps in glxgears!! the rest of my machine is close to 10 years old!
ssd's are definately off the menu for now, thanks @thestinger, I am aiming for atleast 4meg of ram anyway!
so far, i think my new machine is gonna be;
Processor = Intel Pentium Dual Core E6500 2.93GHz 1066Mhz Socket LGA775 OEM CPU 2MB Cache
Mobo = Gigabyte Skt775, mATX, G41M-ES2L, FSB1333/DDR2 800/SATA/SATA II, S, G, GL
Graphics = Inno3D NVidia GeForce G210, 512MB DDR2, HDMI with HDCP, GRAPHICS PLUS with CUDA
HDD = My old 250gig & 40 gig
any one using any similar or same products?

Any particular reason you're gonna for the aging socket 775?

For that budget level, I would instead consider the Athlon II X4 620 or Phenom II X2 550.

Last edited by anonymous_user (2010-02-15 19:03:26)

ninjaprawn · 2010-02-15 19:00:50

@anonymous_user
just my inability to experiment! lol, never used amd chips before, i will definately look into it though. thanks

@clanger
how do you mean? I have never even needed to use randr with my nvidia drivers. they are so easy to set up anything i have looked at. from dual monitors running the same resolution side by side, to 2 seperate x servers with a low res tv running something like 7XX x 5XX and a monitor running 1280 x 1024 side by side.

thestinger · 2010-02-16 02:26:38

yeah, if you aren't spending ~200+ US dollars on the CPU, AMD is the way to go - less power usage and better price:performance ratio (also socket 775 is "dead", nothing new to come for it so you lose a bit of upgrade potential)

lustikus · 2010-02-16 08:01:29

As far as I know the SSD TRIM feature is fully supported in the 2.6.33 kernel which is only weeks away.

ninjaprawn · 2010-02-16 16:54:03

ASRock M3A785GMH/128M AMD 785 (Socket AM3) DDR3 Micro-ATX Motherboard
AMD Athlon II X2 Dual Core 250 3.00GHz (Socket AM3) Processor

Really liking the cost of AMD stuff!! any thoughts on the above processor & mobo?? thanks

ninjaprawn · 2010-02-16 17:07:15

a quick side note, if i get a socket AM3 mobo, and stick an X2 in it initially, then swap it 4 an X4 in 12 months, will arch need much playing with to get it to work?

Perry3D · 2010-02-16 18:13:21

thestinger wrote:

ATI has open source drivers (with KMS) - but they are terrible

Can you give me an explanation why they are terrible? The OS driver works great for my card (HD4850): good video experience without tearing, DRI2 / KMS, gallium3d in the future.
Ok, at the moment there is only rudimentary for the evergreen chip (HD5xxx).

Arch Linux

#1 2010-02-11 20:48:12

Best hardware for Arch

#2 2010-02-11 21:54:09

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#3 2010-02-12 01:09:21

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#4 2010-02-12 08:26:07

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#5 2010-02-12 09:09:14

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#6 2010-02-12 13:03:42

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#7 2010-02-13 17:36:59

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#8 2010-02-13 18:48:50

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#9 2010-02-13 19:33:40

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#10 2010-02-13 23:26:38

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#11 2010-02-14 01:19:27

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#12 2010-02-14 14:11:34

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#13 2010-02-14 20:58:47

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#14 2010-02-14 21:57:15

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#15 2010-02-15 00:35:36

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#16 2010-02-15 11:59:44

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#17 2010-02-15 16:01:12

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#18 2010-02-15 19:00:50

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#19 2010-02-16 02:26:38

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#20 2010-02-16 08:01:29

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#21 2010-02-16 16:54:03

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#22 2010-02-16 17:07:15

Re: Best hardware for Arch

#23 2010-02-16 18:13:21

Re: Best hardware for Arch

Board footer