- AMD has better support for the "blessed" Linux 3D stack. This manifests itself as more mature support in Wayland compositors for example, which is still rockier with nvidia.
- With AMD you need to care about running recent kernels, because improvements to the drivers are tied to the kernel, as is support for newly released cards. With nvidia it doesn't matter - I can run a stable distro like Ubuntu 20.04 LTS and still use the latest driver.
- Nvidia support for switching between discrete and integrated graphics in laptops used to be crap. I'm not sure if it's still the case as I don't follow this closely, but given historical record, it's likely still crap.
- Nvidia driver quality is historically better than AMD (across the board, not just in Linux). If gaming is your primary use, things are still more likely to "just work" on nvidia than AMD, although AMD will usually fix problems eventually.
> Nvidia support for switching between discrete and integrated graphics in laptops used to be crap.
That's okay, I'm staying with Apple for laptops. I'm just setting up a Linux/x86 box in addition to the Apple desktop.
> As usual the hivemind just regurgitates memes without understanding.
I can't edit the OP any more, but I meant 3d drivers wise generally, not ML wise.
I haven't cared about 3d on Linux in ages, but now I do (thanks Apple for the architecture change) and need to decide what video card to get in the next year as prices go back to a reasonable-ish level. As in AMD or NVidia, not what price/performance tier. And my general impression from the internets(tm) is amd drivers are more stable. Am I wrong?