Is AMD really that much better?

It's more of "NVIDIA bad" than "AMD good". AMD does what is expected in the Linux world, to make open source drivers that are part of the Mesa project. That shouldn't be an amazing feat of awesomeness, that should just be standard procedure. However, when the competition is so horrifically bad at drivers on Linux, following the standard makes AMD look amazing. For what it's worth, I have an Intel Arc A770 on my Linux setup and it works great. Intel also follows the standard procedure of making their drivers open and part of the Mesa project. However, AMD has been in the graphics card (and driver) game for much longer and their drivers have a lot more optimization, plus Valve has put work into making AMD's drivers better for gaming workloads over the past several years (especially given the Steam Deck runs an AMD GPU). Hopefully Intel gets more performance parity with AMD in the Linux driver world as time goes on. It's definitely gotten much better since launch already.

As for NVIDIA, maybe NVK can make them even sort of useful without the nasty proprietary drivers but reverse engineered drivers are always going to take longer to get anywhere near the same performance of ones written based on actual official documentation.

You can't really use Wayland with Nvidia. Whether it'll ever be possible will be up to Nvidia...if they release open source drivers, then it will. Otherwise, no chance. I have a 3080 and use Manjaro XFCE. Gaming is nearly flawless. But it's not Wayland.

Couldn't judge sunshine etc. as I don't stream.

Generally, I'd say you'll do much better with AMD on Linux, if you don't rely on Nvidia specific features.

I had lots of issues with Nvidia and none whatsoever with amd. I had to troubleshoot sleep, set environment variables and all kinds of crap to even get Nvidia working but it was never glitch free.

Get a amd card.

Nvidia drivers have (slightly) more timely support for the latest cards, and more mature support for non-3D uses of the GPU, especially scientific computing. To a large extent they are the same code as the Windows drivers, and that has positives in terms of breadth and maturity of support.

For everything else, the AMD drivers are better. Because they are a separate codebase from the Windows drivers, and are part of the de-facto Linux GPU driver stack Mesa, they integrate much better into the overall Linux experience, especially around support for Wayland. Unless you have an absolutely bleeding-edge card, they "just work" more often than the Nvidia drivers. If you like doing serious tinkering on your Linux system, then the AMD drivers being fully integrated and having the source available is a major win. Also, it used to be that the Nvidia drivers did a much better job of squeezing performance out of the hardware, but today there's very little in it, and the AMD drivers might even be a little more efficient.

I've got both AMD and Nvidia GPUs currently in different machines, and I much prefer the Linux experience with AMD. I don't think I'll be buying another Nvidia GPU unless the driver situation changes significantly.

FWIW I don't stream so I can't comment on the exact situation, but I have used the video encode hardware on AMD cards via VAAPI and it was competent and much faster than x264/x265 on the CPU. I think OBS has a plugin to use VAAPI (which is the "standard" Linux video decode/encode acceleration interface that everyone but Nvidia supports).

From a FOSS standpoint, AMD is clearly better since Nvidia doesn't provide an open source driver and actively prevents one from being developed (that is feature complete) by anyone else.

From a gaming standpoint, I don't think it makes much difference either way. Both companies make cards and have drivers that work very well for Linux gaming. Nvidia are usually a bit faster at supporting new cards on Linux, but that only matters if you are buying a card right at launch.

The main sticking point is Wayland vs Xorg. While you CAN use an Nvidia card for Wayland at this point, you are likely to run into some issues and it won't be as nice of an experience as AMD. Nvidia will probably fully support Wayland eventually, but there is no guarantee.

Finally, if you need CUDA you just go with Nvidia.

It really comes down to your exact needs and how much you care about open source software as a principle.

I haven't read anything you wrote other than the title, but yes AMD is so much better, everything just works, nothing breaks with updates, no weird quirks,... It's just so much QoL you get by using AMD

When i had Nvidia, i had to install the latest driver always manually, booting RL3 in console and install the new driver "by hand". Under the bottom, i was happy with my Nvidia card, but i switched to AMD not even a year ago. Since then, "it just works" :)

I'm using AMD and I don't remember having any issues. I'm using GNOME with Wayland and it works perfectly fine (I also have 2 monitors with different refresh rates btw). I also have sunshine set up as well and the latency is unnoticable. Last time I tried (a week or so ago) it suddenly stopped working tho because all encoders are failing. Before that it was using vaapi and worked just fine.

Edit: I just tested it and vaapi is working with mpv, so it's probably an issue with sunshine

Been using AMD and arch for like a decade, and I don’t remember of any major issues of note.

The only exception is with some issues related to my old 1700x which caused Bluetooth issues and OS freezes sometimes. Zero issues since switching to a 3700

After using arch with my 1070 Ti for 3 weeks, Nvidia driver updates have caused major issues twice already and from what I read around the Internet, I think it's pretty safe to say that all nvidia cards become progressively worse experiences over time. Haven't tried arch on AMD yet, but I will soon. Nvidia and especially their driver devs can suck a dick.

Repeating what I have been told recently, AMD only fully supports the consumer grade 7k+ series of GPUs. The other consumer stuff is a whole different thing when it comes to ROCm, HIPS, and the AI frontier. From what people have said about gaming, the AMD stuff is great.

For shitvidia the best integration of the proprietary binary blob is on Pop OS. Nvidia has also worked directly with RHEL for a seamless experience, so Fedora has this same integration. Still, no Wayland due to a lack of benevolence from the hardware rental overlords of criminal exploitation that is shitvidia.

I hate that I have to buy their junk because there is no portable hw alternative that works with AI right now. I've been on Wayland for years and must step way backwards to x11 because Nvidia is run by thieves stealing property ownership using digital exploitation.

No issues gaming with a 5900x/6800xt but I cannot comment on streaming. I really enjoy not having to install the additional NVIDIA drivers anymore. Encoding works well with Openshot and OBS(local screen captures)

I've had many issues with AMD to be honest. I have used a Vega 64 in my desktop and a Radeon 680M in my laptop and both experienced numerous hard system hangs. The Vega 64 eventually got better, but the Radeon 680M is still dealing with a lot of ring0 hang issues: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/issues/2220. I mostly get these hangs when using Firefox's hardware accelerated video playback while running in Wayland. People in that thread seem to think its an issue with accessing VCN.

Regarding video acceleration itself, the Radeon 680M also seems to not work properly in Firefox. Videos will frequently get stuck on a frame before continuing normal playback after a few seconds.

Meanwhile, my Nvidia 3090 on my desktop has been working without issue. Sure you don't get Wayland, but I don't really have a need for it just yet and I vastly prefer being able to use DLSS and raytracing. Wayland also needs a few patches to enable tearing protocol support and a few other fixes that help input latency before I switch over. The upcoming Nvidia 545 drivers are supposed to help out their Wayland support quite a bit, so I am excited for that.

I gamed on both green and red. Nvidia drivers messed things up very often back then. I built a new gaming rig one year ago and went straight with amdgpu, no matter the question. Never had any issues. Bad thing atm is that GNOME is still working hard on VRR. There is an AUR patch available which is either buggy or outdated atm. Thats why I switched to KDE to use FreeSync. Performance related I think they both good, to me it was more a choice of compability and less hassle.

Is AMD really that much better?

As someone who swapped out their RTX 3060 for an RX 6900 XT, yes, yes it is. Everything. Just. Works. Display sync, high refresh rate, Wayland, Source games (yeah some native source games just won't play nice on NVIDIA randomly, lmao), driver installation (or lack thereof). It's just a WAY better experience, especially not having to track down and install NVIDIA's drivers. Seriously, you don't realize how much of a convoluted (and frustratingly distro-specific) process it is until you switch to AMD.

NVIDIA will play nice if you put in ALL the work it needs to behave, X11, proprietary drivers, etc. Don't play by its rules? Then Jensen Huang himself put a pipe bomb under your pillow. If you don't mind catering your setup to NVIDIA, then you won't really notice a difference. I mean, in all fairness I now cater my hardware to Linux, buying only AMD/Intel GPUs, so I can't judge.

Great question. All I know that my Ryzen 7 4800H and 1650ti laptop can handle a bunch of wine game, but my 7600X and 6700XT setup barely runs wine games, and most of them are seriously laggy.