Ralf Mardorf <ralf.mardorf-ZCLZIpdjs0kJGwgDXS7ZQA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, 13 Dec 2017 21:27:37 +0000, Will Godfrey wrote: >>On (say) an asus motherboard with on-board radeon graphics. I'm not >>really fussed about the graphics, but these seem to have better Linux >>support than Nvidea ones (especially for RT kernels). > > Hi, > > AFAIK this even isn't true for the proprietary drivers [1], let alone > the FLOSS drivers. However, I migrated to Intel. At least with the kind of laptops I work with (these days, mostly Thinkpads), the troublefree graphics were onboard Intel. No problem either suspending or hibernating, no "not-yet-serviced" or "no-longer-serviced" problems, no binary blobs, no crashes, no black screen of graphics death (Nvidia on Thinkpad T61), no gradual deterioration until death (AMD on mainboard I think), no loss of support (AMD on external card I think), no crashes for accelerated desktop. Probably no useful gaming performance either, but then I wouldn't know. I don't know whether Intel still deals in onboard graphics and particularly not in relation to desktop computers. But at least with laptops and over about a decade of experience, they have by far been the least problematic with Linux for me. If you don't need the kind of rendering performance graphics cards specialize in, don't pay the price in stability and non-support the market leaders exact. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
