Lets jump right into this:


The Set up
I plan on building a new PC at the beginning of this year. I have never been a Linux user before now, and I want to utilize this system to my full advantage. I realize there are some incompatibilities when it comes to using hardware for Windows based computer systems and switching to Linux. I know they can run-- but I would estimate that it could be better with the right equipment.

Therefore, since I have a painfully shy approach to fellow humans in the real world, could some of you give any kind advice on what some of your favorite pieces of computer hardware are if you were putting together a machine specifically for Linux?


Building the PC
This thread would be for anybody who wanted to search for this question. So please include any versions of Linux that are your favorite and what you would use per; video card, motherboard, RAM, hard drives...etc. well some of these would certainly be up to personal electronic tastes as not every piece of a computer would participate in the functionality of a Linux operating system.

I use my personal computer for Internet browsing, downloading videos/music/programs, recording videos, a little gaming, so personally my RAM and hard drive will be higher and should be taken into consideration with the rest of the PC building. (Not very much gaming so the hardcore video card stuff is not necessary for this).


Linux distros to include and for consideration- Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xbuntu, Fedora, CentOS, Debian, and more.

I have only used 2 versions of Ubuntu and have had issues with both on my netbook. So when I build this computer I would like it to run better than ever, and I would like to try out several others I have heard a little about, but never gotten close to installing.


Price
Also my budget is around the mid thousand dollar mark. So $650 would be a desired limit. Of course this is just to get something up and running and additional money can be added as time progresses.

Please discuss, thank you.

Hardware incompatibilities aren't near as bad today as they once were. Even most wireless adaptors work out of the box on most Linux distros these days. I say, post what you want to buy, then we can critique it. Easier that way.

The only issue for most is graphics. If you plan on playing any demanding games in Linux, the Nvidia drivers tend to be much better than the Ati drivers. (Although it's much better than it was) I use an Ati card just fine though. It plays 1080p no issues, which is all I cared about.

As for a Linux distro, I think these days it's better to steer away from *ubuntu distros. Even when they work, they tend to be loaded down with stuff that you don't need. Linux Mint Debian Edition is a great starter distro. Much lighter than *ubuntu. There is an Xfce edition as well if you like a more traditional desktop. Gnome 3 and Kde4 aren't too well liked, although Kde has ironed out some of their rough edges.

I also recently tried out Vector Linux. It runs really well both on my desktop, and my notebook. It's based on Slackware.

1 members found this post helpful.

As Ion Silverbolt says, it's not as bad as it once was. However, try to avoid brand spanking new hardware. Chances are higher it's not yet supported.

You can also have a look at hardware compatibility lists (hcl) and check whether the hardware you want to buy is actually supported.

Ubuntu helped me out in the beginning of my Linux days since it detected practically every piece of hardware I threw at it. Even proprietary drivers (like Nvidia) were very straightforward to install.

Another very good recourse is linuxquestions.org . You may find an answer to practically everything. Err.. Linux related that is .

Good luck!

1 members found this post helpful.

Of the last machine I built I never bothered looking if it would work on Linux. I stuck with mainstream brands. It worked out pretty well.

I'm not advocating this slap dash attitude, but it serves to show how hardware compatibility has improved in recent years.

Search the HCL for the components that you're interested in. Alternatively google the manufacturer/model and include the term linux. It'll be obvious if the particular component works.

1 members found this post helpful.

I think the mobo is the only part that can give you some trouble. I would stay away from the following chipset manufacturers, which tend to be on mobos a lot: JMicron, Marvell, Silicon Image, Broadcom.

I would recommend an ASUS board, and I would stay away from Gigabyte.

For graphics, if you want to do any gaming, I recommend an nivida card. It doesn't have to be the latest, but it depends on what games you play.

Note that SSDs require firmware updates and few provide Linux methods to do so (OCZ does). HDD prices are inflated now, so it's your choice.

1 members found this post helpful.

I tend to think that the most common and lower priced stuff runs linux better. The more devices are out there the better.


You could look to some of the company's that make linux computers for clues to what they are using.

Could go to computer stores and boot to live cd's. If they want to sell you a system they ought to let you boot to a cd. I tend not to ask them. It is easier to walk out if they get upset.

I second/third the recommendation for NVIDIA. Significantly better Linux support imle than ATI, and much better than Intel.

This is excellent information. I would really rather build my own PC so I will understand each piece of technology installed that is best or otherwise. I will check up on the mobos before-hand.

Actually my roommate works at a University in Irvine, Cali, and they are upgrading all their computers so they are throwing out all the ones they have currently. He brought home 5-6 Dell compact size desk tops. So, by what you guys are saying here, it seems as though this computer may be efficient enough to run Linux Mint and thats exactly what I am going to do.

(FYI, he told me the electronics department sells broken computers for $5 to use as scrap and parts. Probably available in many other school districts. )

I have not heard of these other Linux Distros (Vector, Kde), but the Xfc sounds like a really good place to start. Thank you all very much.

In my experience the cheapest mobos have the worst driver support. I tend to spend around 100-120$ on them. Also the cheapest boards tend to have annoying bugs. Like one of my old boards (a 50$ one) would lock up when rebooting with Linux. Another one of a no name brand would lock up when transferring data over the network for too long.

As for graphics card go for Nvidia. Check that the official nvidia driver supports the card before you buy it. Intel cards that are built into motherboards may work just fine too depending on how old the model in question is.

Every soundcard I have just works.

Magnetic hdd's just work if the controller on the mobo works. Same goes for DVD-RW drives.

Just pay attention to the mobo as the most important component. Well that and the powersupply. Mess up with those two and you're in for a really bad time.

KDE, Gnome and XFCE are the three desktop environments that are regarded as the most easy to use for beginners. The Linux distro is the compilation of all the basic software that makes up a working Linux operating system. Any Linux distro can run any desktop. It's all about how you choose to set up the system.

Good luck with your new build

I would go the other way. Its mostly personal perference if you prefer gigabyte or asus.

ATI/AMD is actually more 'open source friendly' than nVidia is.

$650, eh? Do you need to get a case and monitor from that budget, or do you already have them? (though getting a new case isnt that expensive).

Depends on how old the dells are.

Unless they are _really_ old the systems will probably run Mint. Going under 512MB of RAM, or a slower CPU than a P3-1GHz/P4-1.5GHz (or similar) will probably make Mint run very slowly though.

Also, most 'compact' dells use intel onboard video. The older intel onboard video (i845 in particular) can have problems with some distros.

Vector is a distro, but KDE and Xfce are DEs (desktop enviroments).

1 members found this post helpful.

I bought a used generic computer from a school for 69 USD that has an intel board with a 950 pent. D and 1 gig of ram and a nvidia video for my wife. If my computer goes down with any major costs I will probable buy one for myself. For that price you can not afford to replace any major parts.

I'm against Gigabyte for 2 reasons:

1) The heat sink fell off the northbridge on the board I bought, because the attachment system is very lame. The whole board looks cheaply made, and the included components as well.

2) The JMicron controller caused problems as well the Marvell ethernet card, both had to be disabled to make the system stable and usable.

ASUS vs. Gigabyte:
I personally never had problems with my mainboards, regardless if they were from Gigabyte or ASUS (currently running a Gigabyte GA-MA770-UD3, soon be replaced with ASUS M5A99X-Evo). If you buy in the mid-price section (or higher) you shouldn't have any problems.

My I ask which board this was exactly? If you go for the UD boards you shouldn't have such problems.

I had a JMicron controller on my GA-EP45-UD3, worked with Debian without any problems.

AMD vs. NVidia:
When it comes to "more Linux friendly" AMD is definitely the way to go. They support the development of open source drivers, instead of closing their hardware specifications, like NVidia does. There are still horror stories out there about none-working ATI drivers, but I personally never had an issue with their closed drivers. I still would like to see any horror stories from users of recent AMD cards instead of old crap from the net. This said, I also never had issues with the closed NVidia drivers. My reason to change my Geforce GTX260 (NVidia) for a Radeon HD6870 is simply that it delivers the best performance for the money I wanted to spend. I have no doubts that there will be no problem at all with the AMD hardware.

1 members found this post helpful.

It's the GA-P35-DS3. They were IRQ issues and I had to disable both the SATA controller and ethernet card for it to work properly, if I didn't neither would work properly. It also has an Intel SATA controller, so I just used that and bought a PCI ethernet card. In fact, I suspect that nearly all integrated ethernet is the cheapest possible, and I've had problems will all of them on all boards that I have ever bought (even on my netbook), except for realtek ones. Ones I've had are Intel e1000e (this one causes hang on shutdown), marvell (IRQ issues with JMicron), atheros (drivers are experimental, and sometimes its IRQ is disabled). I've had 3 realtek cards and they worked and are still working fine, they were RTL8139C. I think in the future I'll just buy a PCI ethernet card and disable the onboard one just as a precaution.

Rather the lower mid-price-segment, but nonetheless something like that shouldn't happen.

I am astonished about that. I have used the SiS900 (or named something similar,on an ASRock K7S41GX), the Atheros L2 in my eeePC 4G, the Marvell 88E8042 in my laptop (Compaq 615) and a few different Realteks (8039C, 8069, 8111/8168B, 8201CL, may be some others) and never had any problems with them.

1 members found this post helpful.