I have a high end build I built this year and have been using the dreaded windows 10. I need to install linux asap but I heard the support is pretty bad at this stage so if someone could tell me which one to install I would appreciate it.

Hope my hardware has at least some support:

6700k, Asus z170 Premium and GTX 1080. Also all my storage is SSD's (not sure if that matters).
I want to dual boot with the current win 10 installation that I have and use linux for everyday and windows 10 for graphical, video editing and even dx12 games.

Over the past 2 weeks I've been trying to install the latest ubuntu (although I don't like it) and have been having big problems with it so I'm hoping there's a better distro for my needs as I'm about to give up.

Also the last time I used linux was 5 years ago in slackware so treat me like a beginner.

Thanks.

Grab a LiveCD of your choice (Fedora, Debian, Mint etc) pop it in and see if it works with your hardware. If it does, install it with dual boot in mind. If they do not work, then you have found hardware that doesn't work out of the box.

Unlikely, but possible.

Ubuntu ought to work -- it's a bit of a pain (in my opinion) at times but ought to be modern enough.
Fedora is bleeding-edge -- so that's definately worth a try and it's fairly easy to install though things like multimedia codecs (think DVDs) could be a little work.
Personally, I run Debian Sid which is the "unstable branch" of Debian and, currently, use the NVIDIA drivers from the "experimental" repository in case my (now ancient) 970 benefits somehow. I can't recomend Debian Sid as a first install though as it can be frustrating to get installed even.
For a new user Linux Mint is, I think, the most common recomendation nowadays and I would suggest installing that then reporing what doesn't work. I would choose Mint over Fedora since it has non-free CODECs and drivers by default so you're only looking at the hardware issues.

Mint is sometimes called "Ubuntu done properly" and it should also be quite up-to-date, as version 18 only came out in June.

You might like to look at PCLinuxOS, which is rolling-release but pretty reliable, and specifically aimed at the non-geek / home user.

The default desktops (and hence the best maintained ones) are Mate (plain) and Cinnamon (fancy) for Mint, and KDE for PCLinuxOS. For me, getting the right GUI is one key to happy computing!
https://renewablepcs.wordpress.com/a...gnome-or-xfce/

LMDE 2 runs newer packages compared to Mint.

1 members found this post helpful.

Good call -- does it occasionally remove lots of packages for apparently no reason should one dist-upgrade (as Debian Sid does)?

Don't know, I just installed it in a VM for testing. It sounds like a rolling distro - which I'd like.

I have done the same -- it looks like a rolling distro with the corners smoothed, as it were.
I've used some Mint in the past and always found it a decent install.

LMDE 2 is a non-rolling release based on Debian "Stable" ("Jessie") so one would hope it does not "remove lots of packages for apparently no reason" like Debian Sid.

https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=192429

Now that LMDE is simply based on Debian Stable, it is not much more up-to-date than the ordinary Mint. The current release is actually a year older: although new features are added an a rolling-release basis, that only makes it 6 months behind the regular Mint point releases.

Mint have always warned users that LMDE will be less user-friendly than the regular Mint and unsuitable for beginners, and I can't see that changing. One point of Ubuntu (inherited by Mint) was to make Debian less unfriendly. The only review of LMDE2 I read reported hardware problems, which are uncommon for Mint.

Yes I lost interest, LMDE 2 software versions are still rather old, even gcc is 4.8.

Indeed, I thought LMDE was tracking Unstable or, at least, Testing. If it's tracking Stable it's a no-go for many people (touchpad drivers, graphics drivers, some games) and they would be better off learning how to install the new release of Mint every so often.

Arch is always up to date with the latest software, yet incredibly stable for a constantly updated distro. Personally I find it much less buggy than Fedora, with which I have always had bad luck. Your mileage may vary.