Need Help: EndeavourOS or Garuda Gaming

Hey all,

I am currently running Ubuntu 20.04 and would like to make a change. I am not thrilled with the upgrade process and how things have been handled as of late. So I posted on Reddit (FindMeADistro subredit) asking for some suggestions. Endeavour OS was highly recommended and I installed it in a VM to give it a whirl. And I love it! This would be a big change for me not just to a rolling release distro but also moving from Gnome to KDE, but I am feeling pretty good about it.

Then someone mentioned Garuda Dragonized KDE (or something like that) and I am giving that a try in a VM. What I do like about Garuda is the BTRFS with auto snapshots when updating (especially since it would be my first time on a rolling release) and the zen kernel for gaming. The default KDE theme is a bit much, but I am sure I can change that up.

What I am wondering though, is could I go with Endeavour but add in the BTRFS (w/snapshots on updates) and zen kernel? I do not do a ton of gaming, but my machine is powerful enough I would like to take advantage of it for NBA2K and some other games. My laptop specs are:

Host: X705UDR 1.0 (Asus Vivobook Pro)
CPU: Intel i7-8550U (8) @ 4.00GHz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile
GPU: Intel UHD Graphics 620
Memory: 32GB
SSD: 1TB (OS, steam games, swapfile)
SSD: 4TB (home directory, storage)

So, sorry for the long and rambling post (it’s late over here and I am out of coffee). So can I install Endeavour OS with the BTRFS and auto-snap-shot on updates thingy like Garuda and the zen kernel to improve gaming performance? Or is that going to be a real headache and make my want to run away screaming/ I love everything about Endeavour, I just want to have that backup as someone new to rolling release and the better kernel for gaming. Any advice or thoughts are appreciated!


Yes. Installing snapper-support from AUR will setup most of the btrfs stuff for you. That package comes from Garuda in the first place. The zen kernel is in the Arch repos, that can be easily installed as well.

That being said, you should use whichever one you prefer.

1 Like

If you really look at the benchmarks:

The Zen kernel gives very little real world performance gains. The perception of speed is increased because the scheduling is geared more towards desktop use, but the actual overall performance gain is negligible. As for btrfs and snapshots, I would not bother with it. If it makes you feel better, then go ahead. Lastly, if you don’t like the candy store kiddie theming of Garuda dragonized, then go with the vanilla KDE edition, you get all the tools without the glitter. Because Garuda dragonized uses Latte Dock, you will be hunting down settings to change to get rid of the default look.

Forum decorum prevents me from listing all the reasons why I would never recommend Garuda, especially over EndeavourOS, but the choice is always up to you. :slight_smile:


Welcome to the EndeavourOS forum. I hope you enjoy your time here.


1 Like

Both are good distros. Obviously I’m a little biased toward Endeavour, but the Gardua guys have made a good distro too, and some of their team participate here as well. I tend to recommend Garuda for people who have a little less experience and might need more help in deciding what they need installed (Garuda will set up a lot for you, and hold you hand for a lot of other things as well). Others might consider that “bloat” and prefer to start minimal and add things to it, and Endeavour is a better choice for them. For the most part you can do anything with one that you can do with the other, including snapper snapshots in the bootloader. But there are a few other things Garuda does that might be a little tricker to set up on your own, I took a look at what they’re doing with zram and decided zswap was good enough for me and I didn’t want to go down that rabbit hole. :slight_smile:

Anyway, it’s all personal preference. And with enough patience you can make Garuda look like Endeavour and vice versa. Though I have to admit I do NOT like the “Dragonized” setup, just not for me. But I do keep a Garuda GNOME on my Ventoy stick. They also have a slimmer more vanilla KDE setup that has access to all of their scripts and tools, but I’m not a KDE guy anymore and never tried it.

Welcome @revm ,pretty much everything above is what I would have mentioned, I prefer EndeavourOS as is easier for me to set up to my liking but as said both are good distros, it really depends on how much work your willing to put into after your initial setup.

Just keep in mind, Btrfs will not improve the performance of your games. If storage speed is essential for you (to decrease loading screens, or improve performance in storage intense games, like Minecraft), you’ll probably get slightly better results just sticking to ext4.


You can absolutely make EOS a gaming distro, with a litle (or a lot of) effort, but Garuda comes fully (bloated) equipped from get go.

However, as Garuda Dragonized makes my eyes bleed in seconds, I’d rather go for Nobara of Glorious Eggroll fame. Fedora based with a custom zen kernel, an installer for just about everything gaming related, and is easy to customize to your likeing.


They both are great distros and serve your needs. I prefer EOS because it offers mostly Vanilla experience without any fancy bells and whistles.


Sorry for necroposting but I think this is worth mentioning in a way that’s easy to understand for anybody coming here looking for answers:
Garuda Linux is the kind of “just-works” distro, which equates to it being a “bloated” distro. Both namings are purely based on opinion. EndeavourOS is almost just a beginner-friendly version of Arch that doesn’t have many things pre-installed with it, which are things that you might find on other distros, even ones “less-bloated” than Garuda, which might make it a little difficult to pick up right after Ubuntu, especially if you’re new to Linux and Ubuntu was your first experience. However, for those who want to get more presets (and decent ones!) than archinstall will certainly appreciate EndeavourOS, and they can even someday contribute back to the project by making a community edition of EOS that uses a desktop environment that’s not already in an official edition.

If you’re not bothered, I’d like to hear your opinion about Garuda.

I think I summed up my opinion of Garuda in the old post. I am generally not a fan of Arch based distros that start to stray from Arch, and Garuda does that in spades. Sadly, EndeavourOS is also following down the path of divergence from Arch, at least in the adoption of Dracut and encouraging the use of Systemd-boot, both requiring small custom tweaks and EOS specific packages with settings to support those choices.

I enjoy the social aspects of this forum and the people are friendly. When I use Arch, it is my own installation, as that is the way Arch is meant to be experienced. Some people here will assert that EndeavourOS is just Arch with some additions. If that is what some people want, then there is a purpose for the distro.

1 Like

But systemd is the default Arch installation now. In fact, isn’t that the whole thing behind Artix Linux existing? Using “real” init systems?. If Arch has it by default, I wouldn’t count it as a negative towards EOS. Or am I confusing things?

Edit: there are even posts from more than a decade ago stating Arch has systemd by default. Here and here.

I think they meant EnOS now defaulting to the systemd-boot as bootloadre/boot manager instead of Grub.

Even so, Arch doesn’t seem to promote any default bootloader. The choice is for the user to make:

Choose and install a Linux-capable boot loader. If you have an Intel or AMD CPU, enable microcode updates in addition.


He is probably referring to the fact that we use kernel-install which is a more modern approach to image management with systemd-boot. As a result, we have a package that enables this functionality.

Since kernel-install is part of systemd, I really don’t see this is a being “different” from Arch personally but opinions vary.

1 Like

I guess my thinking is that encouraging the use of systemd-boot requires the addition on a package that is supplied from a non-Arch repo, and correct me if I am wrong, the package kernel-install would require that EOS repos are needed. As I understand it, the use of dracut also requires a package or two that is delivered from EOS repos as well? It may be a small detail, but I grow concerned when required packages are supplied from outside the Arch repos.

I know dracut and systemd-boot are provided by Arch, but their use is a decision I feel is best left to the user. I know systemd-boot is an option, but dracut is not.And I know dracut can be swapped out for mkinitcpio after install, but that is just one more thing to consider when choosing a distro.

1 Like

That would pretty much reduce any arch based distro to just an installer and nothing else. E.g. No special look&feel for a distro. Everything native arch. This is not what I would look for.

And that is a choice you make, and many others make. I am not suggesting it is wrong to want something customized. As long as you get a system that meets your needs and does what you want, that is all that matters. I can only speak for myself. Arch Linux is about making choices, and none of those choices are bad or incorrect. I simply take issue with not acknowledging that choices are being made for you when any Arch-based system is used. If those choices are ones you would make yourself, then there is no problem using whatever makes you comfortable. I am not condemning EndeavourOS, or any Arch-based distro. I am just responding to a question honestly, and for myself.

Help me to understand where you are coming from. It sounds like you are an Arch user who likes EndeavourOS for the installer which helps you installing Arch Linux. But you dont want anything else from the distro. No additions to Arch. Only plain Arch Linux.

When I install Arch, I like certain things setup in a certain way. I have found no Arch-based distro that meets my requirements out of the box. All Arch-based distros carry some degree of divergence from where I want to end up. EndeavourOS used to come closest to my desired end goal. It no longer does that. I still respect the people and the project. Since the tools to create an Arch-based respin are readily available and easy to navigate, I chose to build my own Arch-based respin for my own needs. Once I setup the build environment and process, I find it easier to maintain my own respin for my own use. I still enjoy the occasional banter and conversation of this group, so I like to participate, but I use my own Arch install. :grinning: More often than not, I am using Debian. :rofl:

Historical context: