It’s no surprise that NVIDIA is gradually dropping support for older videocards, with the Pascal (GTX 10xx) GPUs most recently getting axed. What’s more surprising is the terrible way t…
According to the Steam HW survey around 6% of users are still using Pascal (10xx) GPUs. That’s about 8.4 million GPUs losing proprietary driver support. What a waste.
Not sure if you’re on Windows or Linux but, on Linux, we have to actively take explicit actions not to upgrade something when we are upgrading the rest of our system. It takes more or less significant effort to prevent upgrading a specific package, especially when it comes in a sneaky way like this that is hard to judge by the version number alone.
On Windows you’d be in a situation like “oh, I forgot to update the drivers for three years, well that was lucky.”
I believe the same SW version is packaged. Nvidia said they’d drop support in the 580 release, but they shifted it to 590 now.
The arch issues are another layer of headache by the maintainers changing the package names and people breaking their systems on update when a non-compatible version is pulled replacing the one with still pascal support in it.
Not really a problem of Arch, but of the driver release model, then, IMO. You’d have this issue on Windows too if you just upgraded blindly, right? It’s Nvidia’s fault for not naming their drivers, or versioning/naming them in a way that indicates support for a set of architectures. Not just an incrementing number willy nilly.
But yeah, I agree, if package maintainers were astute there, a warning would’ve probably been good somehow. Not sure pacman supports pre-install warnings. Maybe? It does support warning about installing a renamed/moved package. But the naming would’ve had to be really weird for everyone involved if the warning would be clear in that case.
According to the Steam HW survey around 6% of users are still using Pascal (10xx) GPUs. That’s about 8.4 million GPUs losing proprietary driver support. What a waste.
GPU % 1060 1.86 1050ti 1.43 1070 0.78 1050 0.67 1080 0.5 1080ti 0.38 1070ti 0.24Fixed: 1050 was noted as 1050ti
Interesting, I’m about to move one more machine to Linux (the one that’s been off for a while) and I’ve got exactly 10xx GPU inside lol.
Are they all on Linux though?
Are they supported longer on the windows driver?
Apparently? Title only mentions dropping the support on Linux. 🤷♂️
You don’t have to updare your drivers though, isn’t this normal with older hardware?
Not sure if you’re on Windows or Linux but, on Linux, we have to actively take explicit actions not to upgrade something when we are upgrading the rest of our system. It takes more or less significant effort to prevent upgrading a specific package, especially when it comes in a sneaky way like this that is hard to judge by the version number alone.
On Windows you’d be in a situation like “oh, I forgot to update the drivers for three years, well that was lucky.”
I believe the same SW version is packaged. Nvidia said they’d drop support in the 580 release, but they shifted it to 590 now.
The arch issues are another layer of headache by the maintainers changing the package names and people breaking their systems on update when a non-compatible version is pulled replacing the one with still pascal support in it.
Not really a problem of Arch, but of the driver release model, then, IMO. You’d have this issue on Windows too if you just upgraded blindly, right? It’s Nvidia’s fault for not naming their drivers, or versioning/naming them in a way that indicates support for a set of architectures. Not just an incrementing number willy nilly.
It’s 2025, can we not display a warning message in pacman? Or letting it switch from nvidia-590 to nvidia-legacy?
I’m not an arch user, I admit, I don’t like footguns.
TIL Arch is a footgun. 🤡 cope. 😉
But yeah, I agree, if package maintainers were astute there, a warning would’ve probably been good somehow. Not sure pacman supports pre-install warnings. Maybe? It does support warning about installing a renamed/moved package. But the naming would’ve had to be really weird for everyone involved if the warning would be clear in that case.
I admit, all distros are a different degree of footguns, I’m saying this as a nix user. lol