nvidia having a better performance to cost ratio

Every time I've checked, AMD has way better raster performance to cost ratio. If you want RTX though (does it work properly on Linux?), NVIDIA is the best option.

My AMD card doesn't use a ton of power. I'm rocking a 6650XT, which has pretty good performance (rivals consoles), was pretty cheap ($200-ish IIRC), and works for everything I've needed it for. It's probably a bit sketchy for VR, but VR on Linux has bad enough support that it's probably not going to matter either way. The HDMI 2.1 thing doesn't bother me at all because I just use DP on my PC (doesn't solve the living room system use case though).

I used NVIDIA for 5-ish years and it was fine, just not great. I'd have a driver breakage about 1-2x/year, which was easy enough to fix, but the more annoying thing was lack of Wayland support. Maybe it works now, but will it work for whatever comes out some years from now? I'm confident AMD will support Linux, I'm not confident that NVIDIA will.

So my choice is AMD because:

• fantastic price/performance, provided you're looking at mid-range - top end seems to use a lot more power
• fantastic Linux support - haven't had a single issue with drivers since switching from NVIDIA, and I'm loving Wayland
• does everything I need it to do

But you do you. I've heard NVIDIA works fine as well, you just might run into a few issues here and there. For top-end performance, they have the crown, and nothing is close on RTX. I personally don't need top-end performance, and the other issues are more important to me.