According to the linked wiki, try to go to https://nouveau.freedesktop.org/CodeNames.html.

Check on your laptop with dmesg | grep -i chipset the codename of your graphic card. With this you can check which driver is the best on https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/NVIDIA. There is a paragraph, explaining which driver is the best.

If I understand it right, the nvidia package is the correct one for 1050. So you can use pacman -S nvidia with root privileges. All dependencies should be resolved automatically.

I would recommend to reboot, in case there are changed kernel modules.

2 things i have to note: Using Wayland is a total mess with nvidia. Specially on Arch Linux. I have screen flickering in GUI and games, the performance is so lala and tools like KeePass which needs access to the text in window titles did not work complete. On Manjaro, the flickering doesn’t exist, but the other symptoms do. Maybe im missing some packages on Arch.

Second with Vulkan i have some tearing in games. I have not looked further in to that.

On the other hand, games like Satisfactory or Elder Scrolls Online, have more FPS with the same settings as on Windows.

Currently i test Arch and Manjaro in parallel on the same Laptop. But I tend to keep Manjaro and remove Arch. There are light pro’s and con’s, but overall, I’m more happy with Manjaro. But this has nothing to do with you’re issue.

I have a 1050 in my Laptop and it works fine with the nvidia package AS proprietary driver

I got it to work…

I have used the command grub-install --target=x86_64-efi --efi-directory=esp --bootloader-id="Arch Linux" before, but without success. This didn’t worked before. But now…

I have no idea, whats changed. Anyhow. Im happy.

df -h

Manjaro:

dev             7,8G       0  7,8G    0% /dev
run             7,8G    1,9M  7,8G    1% /run
/dev/sdb3        68G     50G   15G   78% /
tmpfs           7,8G       0  7,8G    0% /dev/shm
tmpfs           7,8G    9,0M  7,8G    1% /tmp
/dev/sdb4       587G    272G  285G   49% /mnt/games
/dev/sda1       296M     56M  241M   19% /boot/efi
tmpfs           1,6G    100K  1,6G    1% /run/user/1000

Arch:

dev             7,8G       0  7,8G    0% /dev
run             7,8G    1,7M  7,8G    1% /run
efivarfs        128K     46K   78K   38% /sys/firmware/efi/efivars
/dev/sdb5        69G     21G   45G   32% /
tmpfs           7,8G       0  7,8G    0% /dev/shm
tmpfs           7,8G    8,6M  7,8G    1% /tmp
/dev/sdb4       587G    272G  285G   49% /mnt/games
/dev/sda1       296M     56M  241M   19% /boot/efi
tmpfs           1,6G    108K  1,6G    1% /run/user/1000
/dev/sdb2       1,2T    796G  332G   71% /mnt/volume

Oh there is a APK, when using Chrome or Samsung Internet (installed via Samsung Store). The store is generating and signing the APK. Only with such a signed APK OS Level functions will work. A good example is the share_target functionality. If this is enabled by the PWA and installed as APK, you can share text and links with the PWA. The same applies for PWAs on the Desktop, for example with Edge on Windows.

If you use the same PWA with Firefox or Samsung Internet installed from Play Store, it can only add a shortcut on the home screen, without share_target functionality.

Additionally some service worker functionality is very basic on some browsers. On one hand this is bad for functionality, but good for privacy. Assume a PWA uses a background sync service for example. This can exchange a lot data and sync it with any target in the web, without user consent. This is only a small part where service workers do not respect users privacy.

If you look at that we come in fast steps to this insane and total crazy manifest v3 webextensions. They are completely privacy nightmare at least how Chromium designed them. The Mozilla implementation is a lot better, but incompatible to Chromium.

Welcome to the ugly world of new web technologies.