Building new Ubuntu PC...what works...and what doesn't...???
 

Am on the verge of updating my 8 year old PC, and this time, am looking to build one myself.:)

I'm no gamer, or 3D designer......but would like to include a DVB-S2 card to give the machine PVR capability.(Have my eye on a TBS card...apparently work with Linux!!)

Will probably go for a Motherboard with on-board 'everything'

Has anyone out there recently built their own machine, and has some wisdoms to share?? :scratch:

I'm sure the HCL will be your friend here :)

Thanks Snark1994....that appears to be what I was looking for
....but had totally missed!!:redface:

....on reflection...the Hardware Compatability list ...HCL...wasn't that helpful, as many of the components listed are no longer current...

.......so opinions still welcome....;)

Would be simpler if you look for hardware that fits your needs and then post the manufacturers and models here. Possibly someone here is using that hardware already, but given the description of the hardware we should in any case be able to give you some information about compatibility.

Thinking about building your own, or getting custom built system?

Budget and location would be a help. Preference for intel or AMD?

Onboard network works, onboard sound isnt that bad these days. I try to avoid onboard video, it tends to be found on 'low end' motherboards, and unless you get a (fairly uncommon) board with 'sideport ram', onboard video will use some of your main system memory.

Not that 'losing' 128-512MB is that bad in these days of cheap ram, but it also stresses the main memory and the memory bus harder than if you had a cheap video card.

Also, the newest intel and AMD 'video on CPU' models are still getting drivers added into xorg and the kernel. They will work, though you might have to stuff aroudn to get them working well. Its easier to avoid video on CPU for now.

Will be putting it together myself......probably using AMD (if only for the reason that my current PC is an AMD!!)

Interesting what you say about the on-board video....will now look at 'cheaper' video cards with HDMI to suit my new Samsung BX 2231 led monitor :D

new build
 

Yea I have been building my own for a while, as far as hardware goes other than linux compat issues how good the hardware is where I like to start... and easiest way I found was @ newegg, alot of choices and more important user feedback.... The review sections are usually really good of course alittle common sense helps.
After getting @ least 3 choices I go to mfg site and check for driver support and any FAQ that pertain and finally a "google" on the item.
If after that I still have questions un-answered I move on to check my next choice out.
Of course this doesn't guarentee success but it helps weed out alot of mistakes, and the insight into what your computer can do is invaluable.

AMD, more bang for your buck. Or is that more power for your pound, or more enjoyment for your euro?

Right now, AMD is moving sockets from AM3 to AM3+, in perperation for the yet to be released 'bulldozer' CPUs. AM3 CPUs will work in AM3+ boards, AM3+ CPUs (when they come out) will not work in an AM3 socket. There is a new set of northbridges (9XX) and southbridges (SB9XX) for the new socket. The new 9XX boards are also the 1st to have hybrid BIOS/EFI or uEFI setups, which is nice in that you will get 2.2TB+ HDD support (BIOS is limited to 2.2TB HDDs). As far as I know the new 9XX/SB9XX chipsets work fine with linux.

To me, it looks like a winner- get a decent board now, with better suport for up and coming tech like bigger HDDs, and the ability to upgrade to a bulldozer CPU later on as well.

I'll have a bit more of a look to see if there is some better info for linux comptibility with the 9XX/SB9XX motherboards, if this idea intrests you.

HDMI is just DVI with added audio (and some other stuff that really doesnt matter for your use). Since that monitor doestn have speakers at all, HDMI is pretty pointless. DVI will do exactly the same job.

As for cheapish cards, ATI/AMD HD 5450/6450, or nVidia GT220/GT430. Low power requirements and heat output, not expensive, and work well with both the open source and closed (ATI/AMD and nVidia) drivers.

If it works for you, OK, but I've seen far too many 'reviews' on newegg that were total bull.

I dont think I've seen any manufacturers list driver support for linux for system parts. Maybe I'm looking at different manufacturers to you?

You've lost me a bit here.....how does 9XX/SB9XX translate into a motherboard model...? :confused:
Any light you can throw to help me make a good choice would be most appreciated!

......so the video card only requires a DVI out...? There was me thinking that the HDMI represented a hike in quality... :o

Umm...oopps. I forget that not everyone knows how to read motherboard manufacturers model numbering schemes.

There are currently 3 9XX chipsets- 970, 990X, 990FX. The main difference between them is the number of PCIe x16 slots. Unless there is some plan to make this a multi-video card gaming monster, or run a PCIe x16 RAID card (or similar) the 970 would be enough.

As for how to tell its a 9XX chipset? Not always easy, unless you are silly enough to remember the previous motherboard numbering schemes. All the following are 970 chipset boards:

Asus- M5A97, M5A97 EVO, M5A97 Pro. (970), thats the hint.

Gigabyte- GA-970A-D3, GA-970A-UD3

Asrock- 970 Extreme4

MSI makes 9XX chipset boards as well, but the ^&*$^* MSI site keep kicking me back to the .au msi site....and msi isnt importing the 9XX chipset boards here yet, so I get no listings.

Purely on previous experience, I'd be getting the GA-970A-UD3 myself. My 2nd choice would be the 970 Extreme4.

HDMI a hike in quailty? Thats what the marketing people seem to think, but its not true.

research
 

As far as "total bull" goes thats why I said common sense, sometimes you can see right thru the post if the builder messed up, or has an axe to grind etc, also does the mfg respond etc..
To your point of no linux reference hmm have you been looking lately ?
Especially ATI/AMD sites...in ref to mobo's I have tried to stick with MSI and Gigabyte.
Some of my fellow builders tell me they have had good luck with Asrock but I can't speak 1st hand on them.
Also I have fired an e or 2 to the support people on these sites and my questions get answered within a timely manner, even if I haven't purchased yet...hence my recomendation.

My personal opinion: You can't be wrong with Gigabyte, if I built a PC I choose always Gigabyte (if the person wants to spend some money), otherwise, if the PC has to be cheap I choose Biostar or Asrock, had good experiences with them.

....seems like Gigabyte it is then!!! :)

I imagine I won't need the latest Quad-core.....surely that would be over-kill for a non-gamer such as myself!!?

Depends on what you want to do. If you want to compile a kernel or any other larger software package a quad- or even six-core CPU is quite handy. Also if you want to run some virtual machines simultaneous is it good to have some power. If that is not your business, the no, you don't need a quad-core (although some of them are cheap, like the Athlon X4). For "normal" desktop use a dual-core is sufficient.