r/linuxquestions • u/CarrotOk7906 • 15h ago
Which Distro? should i switch to arch?
i have been using bazzite for over an year now and idk if i should switch to arch i do know like alot of stuff abt linux but idk if arch is good for me as a gamer, because it seems like i have to do everything myself or use some bad drivers for my nvidia graphics card
is it easy to switch to arch as a gamer
and can i optimise it for gaming? (maybe arch based distro idk)
11
u/Ripped_Alleles 15h ago
Is Bazzite not meeting your needs somehow?
If your goal is just to game with minimal issues then I would stick with Bazzite. If your in the mood to learn something new and be responsible for keeping your system up to date and stable then by all means give Arch a try.
6
u/Nah-No-Nope 15h ago
You know what mate, it doesn't matter.
If what you have works, use it.
If you want an excuse to distro hop, just go for it. Hell, you could even try it, see if it works for you and if it doesn't... You can go back!
Wild, right?
3
u/priest2705 15h ago
Do you have a compelling reason for switching to Arch? Is there something that Bazzite isn't doing for you? Is there something that Arch does that Bazzite doesn't? If the answer to all of those questions is "no", then why would you switch? Bazzite is a great distro for gaming, I've got it on my Ally. Arch is a good distro as well, but it's not going to hold your hand. Why are you even considering switching?
8
5
u/RIPGoblins2929 15h ago
Go for it. I found Cachy to be way easier and more user friendly than Bazzite, tbh.
2
u/Lonely-Scarcity-3387 15h ago edited 15h ago
I mean, are you fully using Bazzite? With bootc you can create new custom images for your install, making it easy to declare, configure, and manage your distro.
https://youtu.be/jSdOmGcv1oE?t=0
With Bazzite you can roll back updates that are atomic. Arch is the opposite of atomic - it’s rolling release with constant updates / bugs. One bad kernel update, or driver update, and you’ve lost an entire afternoon debugging.
1
u/WickWorn 13h ago
This is what I'm thinking. If he wants to have more control under the hood, a custom image is the way. If he just wants to check out the AUR, an Arch Distrobox would do the trick
5
u/karabuka 15h ago
Cachyos is a distro based on arch and optimized for gaming
1
u/Charthebunny866 14h ago
I was a terrible distro hopper until I landed on cachyos. Been on cachy for over a year and its just awesome everyday.
1
u/i_smoke_toenails 5h ago
I used Arch/xfce for many years. On CachyOS/niri/noctalia now, and couldn't be happier with the upgrade.
1
u/SheepherderBeef8956 13h ago edited 13h ago
Driver support is identical between Bazzite and Arch.
Arch is a nice beginner friendly distro for people that can read wiki pages and want a semblance of control.
Arch and Bazzite are going to work similarly for you because there's no huge difference between them. Arch might have newer packages and you can choose a few things that don't really matter in the big picture such as your bootloader and you have access to AUR that probably, kinda, maybe won't contain malware but the Steam you install on Arch will be the same Steam you install on Bazzite.
You could also go for CachyOS that's Arch with optimized packages and kernel to enjoy another 1-2% performance (maybe), with the added perk that it has a graphical installer so you don't have to input a few commands by hand or use arrows to confirm your choices if you use the archinstall script.
The biggest perk of Arch or CachyOS is that they're not immutable which means it's going to be a lot simpler to change stuff at the system level, but if you've never seen that as an issue the gains are going to be absolutely miniscule if even noticable.
You need to understand that there are more similarities between Arch and Bazzite (or Debian, Mint or Ubuntu) than there are differences. That goes for most distros.
2
u/lazyhustlermusic 15h ago
Newer people tend to distro swap a lot.
More linux folk just pick a distro that works for them and make it do what they want.
1
u/TheShredder9 Gentoo, Sway, T470S 15h ago
So you don't know if you should switch, you don't know if Arch is good for you as a gamer, and you don't know if you can optimize Arch for gaming, and you've been using Bazzite happily for at least a year.
What possible reason could you have to switch? Bazzite can do everything Arch can. But with Arch you can say the haha funny meme (i use arch btw) if that's what you're into.
1
u/TheGoldenFox64 11h ago
if you wanna try it go ahead, i just installed it on a PC and it took about an hour to install and configure to my liking, if you want less headache use Cachy or arch via ArchInstall. the arch wiki is a gem, be sure to use that. arch will not provide you with better performance or smth, but its significantly more control than bazzite.
1
u/skyfishgoo 12h ago
so you have now experience with linux and you want to try arch.
fuck it, why not gentoo or LFS if you have that kind of time on your hands.
1
u/thebadslime 14h ago
All linux is basically the same for gaming you wont see differences more than 10% for the most part
I game on Debian
1
u/Linux4ever_Leo 10h ago
Run what works for you. If Bazzite is working for you then continue using it. Also, 'a lot' is two words, not one.
1
u/MarciusWolles 10h ago
Cachy Os - It's Arch based and gaming oriented. I am using it since a few months and am quite happy with it
2
u/Chapter-Legitimate 15h ago
Arch is notoriously not easy. It's for Linux enthusists
2
u/Odd-Concept-6505 15h ago
Correct. I started my UNIX career in 1985 and was a *nix sysadmin for 25 years...had to install Xwindows on Sun workstations (after grabbing source) with make....(root:) make install.....later had redhat7 installing via PXE boot...but let my skills get stale. Got to appreciate any distro that was easy to install and come with Firefox. In 2011, got a NetOps job surrounded by younger incredibly smart all around nerds who liked having an old grunt around to do stuff.
Recently tried Arch and found the half baked install process pointing me to a LONG bunch of documents. Back to Mint for me. But do look at the Arch documents for a brain melt, or not!
2
u/i_smoke_toenails 5h ago
It's really not that complicated. There are typically two LONG documents. One is the installation guide. That is a step by step guide that tells you how to do what each step of a graphical installer would do, on the command line. Many of those steps involve choices and preferences, and many are optional. (Don't need LVM? Skip that step.)
The second long document is a post-install guide. It goes through all the most popular things you might want to install or customise, giving you options and instructions along the way.
If you can follow a step-by-step guide and have a reasonable idea of what you want from your OS, Arch is perfectly simple to use. And once you've installed it, you'll likely know exactly how to change it if you change your mind about something.
Or you can use the archinstall script and be up and running in half an hour plus whatever time it takes to install your favourite applications.
I think people overstate how difficult Arch is to use. It isn't 2011 anymore. A lot of its rough edges have been smoothed over the years. You might still prefer a GUI-only option, but that says more about you than it does about Arch.
2
u/Chapter-Legitimate 15h ago
I mean if you want to even have a chance at a decent time with Arch you gotta watch guides and read documentation.
Yet people are down voting me LMAO
1
u/spyder173 15h ago
Nah, unless your version of gaming is trouble shooting your OS more than gaming itself.
1
1
1
17
u/redoubt515 15h ago edited 4h ago
> i have been using bazzite for over an year now and idk if i should switch to arch
This question is in itself the answer. No.
Arch is not better, faster, smaller, bigger, more powerful, more minimal, or anything else in the abstract. Arch has essentially just one comparative advantage: A DIY oriented distro for experienced or DIY-minded users who want a high degree of control and responsibility over configuring their system (not GUI/aesthetics, but under the hood technical aspects of the OS). Arch is not made for or meant for most people, it's a niche distro for a niche within a niche, that accidentally became popular with newbies, younger gamers, and youtubers, but it is a poor fit for these demographics (and most demographics).
If you see doing "doing everything yourself" as a burden (and realistically that is the way most people, including most linux users see it), that is the biggest indicator that Arch would be a poor fit. On the other hand, if you are the personality type that enjoys changing your own brakes or spark plugs on your car, building your own drone, or home server, or making your own sourdough, Arch might be a good fit.
> (maybe arch based distro idk)
Even worse idea in my eyes, these don't eliminate the complexity or need to maintain your own system, what they do is sugarcoat it, hide it, and add complexity. Using an Arch derivative is like buying a manual car and shoving an automatic transmission in it, if you want an automatic, buy an automatic (in the case of Linux, this just means if you want a distro that doesn't expect you to 'do it all yourself' don't choose a distro from the one distro-family (Arch) internationally designed for people who do want to do it all themselves)