Building a PC for Linux


Recommended Posts

Good morning!

 

I'm choosing the components for my new PC and I would like your opinion about it.

 

First I'd like to know if the components are linux-friendly enough, meaning I won't get any troubles getting them recognized by the OS and getting them to work properly.

 

Secondly I'd also like your general opinion about the build, I'd like this PC to serve me for at least 5/6 years.

 

I'm considering installing either Kubuntu or Xubuntu 16.04 LTS, 64-bit if possible. I really like Kubuntu aesthetically but I'm afraid it would grow over the years and I won't be able to run it properly in the future, that's why I'm also considering Xubuntu, because it's extremely and easily customizable, much more than Lubuntu, so I'd also like an opinion from you guys on this matter.

 

As for what I do with my PC:

  • Web browsing;
  • HD (1920x1080) video playback;
  • Audio playback;
  • Video streaming;
  • Light LibreOffice work (small spreadsheets, documents writing, simple flyers, maybe powerpoint);
  • Very light GIMP editing (like stitching two or more pictures together or obscuring children's faces from pictures);

 

Here's the build:

 

Case: Coolermaster Silencio 352

MoBo: ASUS H110M-K

CPU: Intel Core i3-6300 or Pentium G4500

HD 1: Samsung 850 EVO 120GB

HD 2: HGST Travelstar 1 TB

RAM: 8GB (2x4) Corsair vengeance 2133 Mhz

GPU: Intel HD 530

PSU: Corsair CS450M 450W

 

Total cost is between 500 and 600 €, which is fine, but if it can be lowered would be a nice touch :D

 

Thanks a lot!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally the only real stopping point has been GPU on any build being considered. Nvidia is supported the best, followed by Intel. AMD shouldn't be considered for Linux in any case, because the 3D Drivers aren't ever up to par.

 

As far as your Ubuntu flavors go, any of them will generally work about the same on new builds. I'm a big proponent of Mint, because of the "user friendliness" touches they throw in that attempt to go the extra mile. Plus, easy installation of newer kernels from Mint Update is helpful.

 

If you don't find Mint to be to your liking you can always install an Ubuntu flavor as you intended. :yes: 

 

But yeah, I'd go Nvidia GPU rather than sticking to the Intel one, even if it's a budget offering you'll get way less hassle out of the driver.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ Agreed. Most computers will run Linux without any special modifications. I agree that Nvidia is a better choice, simply because their drivers have been incorporated into Linux better, but AMD also works (in most cases). Sometimes it depends on the distribution.  Good luck and enjoy! (Y)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^^ Agreed. I never had a problem with any hardware with Linux. Except back in 2003  or something. Everything I threw at it would work.

 

NVIDIA is better, plain and simple. I ran AMD in the past, never really got the best performance out of it.

 

I like Mint, like @Unobscured Vision. It just... works. I've gone from Debian to Ubuntu, to Debian, To Ubuntu, to Mint, to Ubuntu, finally back to Mint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Unobscured Vision said:

Generally the only real stopping point has been GPU on any build being considered. Nvidia is supported the best, followed by Intel. AMD shouldn't be considered for Linux in any case, because the 3D Drivers aren't ever up to par.

 

As far as your Ubuntu flavors go, any of them will generally work about the same on new builds. I'm a big proponent of Mint, because of the "user friendliness" touches they throw in that attempt to go the extra mile. Plus, easy installation of newer kernels from Mint Update is helpful.

 

If you don't find Mint to be to your liking you can always install an Ubuntu flavor as you intended. :yes: 

 

But yeah, I'd go Nvidia GPU rather than sticking to the Intel one, even if it's a budget offering you'll get way less hassle out of the driver.

Well, I've actually never considered Mint because I've been using Lubuntu exclusively since Microsoft stopped supporting XP, and I've never had any troubles, I can install newer kernels via the automatic update system in Lubuntu, I just remove older kernels and packages using Ubuntu Tweak, before that via Terminal or Synaptic.

 

The only doubt I have regarding Kubuntu is the future. I've started using Linux with Kubuntu 8.04 and when I upgraded to 9.04 my PC wasn't able to run it, so when I switched to Linux dull time I had to install Lubuntu. I wouldn't want to having to do that again in the future, that's why I was considering Xubuntu. As far as Kubuntu goes it's just a matter of aesthetics for me, there are no KDE softwares I use, but Xubuntu is extremely customizable so I think I'll be able to tweak it to my liking (which would be either Mac OS or Deepin) .

 

I like Elementary OS too, but I don't know that distro that well.

1 hour ago, Barney T. said:

^ Agreed. Most computers will run Linux without any special modifications. I agree that Nvidia is a better choice, simply because their drivers have been incorporated into Linux better, but AMD also works (in most cases). Sometimes it depends on the distribution.  Good luck and enjoy! (Y)

And considering my usage, and my budget :D , what card do you guys suggest?

 

I mean GPUs are crazy expensive :( Even a GTX 750TI goes for 160 €. Is the Intel HD 530 really that problematic?

 

As for AMD, I've been using Linux on a AMD-based system (AMD Athlon 64 3500+)  and I've never had any problems with drivers, if by going AMD I can save money and avoid problems I'll happily go AMD :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should be fine with the Intel Integrated. I'm messing with a laptop with a roughly 2 or 3 year old Pentium and the Integrated graphics are rock solid on Linux.

 

I'm currently running Manjaro. I recently found this Arch based Distro and have been in love with it. XFCE is the primary Desktop Manager on it.

 

edit: remember you can ALWAYS add a Graphics Card later if you feel the integrated is not enough as well :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Brandon H said:

You should be fine with the Intel Integrated. I'm messing with a laptop with a roughly 2 or 3 year old Pentium and the Integrated graphics are rock solid on Linux.

 

I'm currently running Manjaro. I recently found this Arch based Distro and have been in love with it. XFCE is the primary Desktop Manager on it.

 

edit: remember you can ALWAYS add a Graphics Card later if you feel the integrated is not enough as well :)

That's also my reasoning behind using the integrated one. I feel I don't need a dedicated GPU to do what I do, consider that I can do it on my current machine which is a 2006 Acer desktop computer, using the integrated GPU because the dedicated one died on me. I also feel I don't need to spend 135€ on a Windows licence and I wouldn't want to end up spending that kind of money on a GPU that I don't need.

 

Arch? Isn't Arch too hardcore? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Gabe84 said:

Arch? Isn't Arch too hardcore? :D

Not really. vanilla Arch doesn't have a graphic installer and you need to choose everything you want to install from nothing but that is remedied using a Distro. Manjaro even has a graphic installer and a graphic packager manager with AUR support.

 

Arch is really nice because of the AUR repository. it is community run so EVERYTHING is pretty much available right from the package manager.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you wanna go Arch-based then Manjaro is really the way to go. :yes: Good Community too, but it's not so different that the Arch documentation doesn't apply.

 

If you prefer Debian-based, Mint has their LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition) flavor that gets all the goodies before the Ubuntu-based Mint does, usually. It's a bit "rougher around the edges" than Mint, but it does a lot of stuff that Debian does not do. Lot of folks like it.

 

Up to you, and what your needs are. The future of Kubuntu being what it is, there's even a KDE/Kubuntu flavor of Mint .... but .... it's kinda weird. I didn't like it. The Kubuntu Team works closely with the Mint Team to bring people that one. That particular project (Mint KDE) might merge, who knows. There are only a couple of people within the Mint Team that actually work on it, and it's not a big focus. Might get spun off into a rebranded Distro ... lot up in the air currently with Mint's direction between now and Ubuntu 18.04. Changes afoot? Possibly ... I'm not one to say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Unobscured Vision said:

If you wanna go Arch-based then Manjaro is really the way to go. :yes: Good Community too, but it's not so different that the Arch documentation doesn't apply.

 

If you prefer Debian-based, Mint has their LMDE (Linux Mint Debian Edition) flavor that gets all the goodies before the Ubuntu-based Mint does, usually. It's a bit "rougher around the edges" than Mint, but it does a lot of stuff that Debian does not do. Lot of folks like it.

 

Up to you, and what your needs are. The future of Kubuntu being what it is, there's even a KDE/Kubuntu flavor of Mint .... but .... it's kinda weird. I didn't like it. The Kubuntu Team works closely with the Mint Team to bring people that one. That particular project (Mint KDE) might merge, who knows. There are only a couple of people within the Mint Team that actually work on it, and it's not a big focus. Might get spun off into a rebranded Distro ... lot up in the air currently with Mint's direction between now and Ubuntu 18.04. Changes afoot? Possibly ... I'm not one to say.

I think I'm fine with Ubuntu.

 

Distro-wise my question lays in the hardware. I mean, Ubuntu's system requirements show minimum a 2 Ghz dual-core CPU, going for an i3 I don't want to be forced to install a new distro in the near future, and by near future I mean 2/3 years, because my hardware can't run it, that's why I was also considering Xubuntu, even if Unity, whose appearance I deeply dislike, can be completely customized. Although the SSD should be helping.

 

The other question is the GPU, a friend of mine never had problems with the Intel GPU on his 2 years old laptop, I'd really like to avoid having to buy a GPU, I changed the case and the PSU to a 430W and now the price is down to 500 €, great success! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ubuntu's Unity is almost as bloated (if not worse) than KDE IMHO

Wayland should help a bit once support grows but until then I am quite happy using XFCE for my Desktop Environment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like to add that you can run a Linux live CD first to see how your hardware functions on many different distros. If they work well, you can then install it. If not, shut it down and reboot to your hard drive with nothing touched.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Barney T. said:

I would like to add that you can run a Linux live CD first to see how your hardware functions on many different distros. If they work well, you can then install it. If not, shut it down and reboot to your hard drive with nothing touched.

I think the only doubt is the GPU, I've read around that problems with Intel GPUS were fixed in 16.04 and the new 4.4 kernel.

 

I don't want to go back to Windows :cry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah 4.4.x kernel is fine on intel integrated. i've been running 4.8.x myself lately as i find it runs better than the 4.4.x kernal.

 

the only issue i've had is the new 4.9.0 kernal won't boot on this laptop i'm playing with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Brandon H said:

yeah 4.4.x kernel is fine on intel integrated. i've been running 4.8.x myself lately as i find it runs better than the 4.4.x kernal.

 

the only issue i've had is the new 4.9.0 kernal won't boot on this laptop i'm playing with

That's great news!!!! Thanks!!!

 

Here's the updated build:

 

Case: Zalman T4 Micro ATX

MoBo: ASUS H110M-K

CPU: Intel Core i3-6300

HD 1: Samsung 850 EVO 120GB

HD 2: HGST Travelstar 1 TB or WD Blue 1TB

RAM: Corsair vengeance 2133 8gb

GPU: Intel HD 530

PSU: Corsair CX430 430W

OS: Xubuntu 16.04.1 64-bit

 

Total: 506 € (with current Amazon prices)

 

What do you guys think?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Unobscured Vision said:

Generally the only real stopping point has been GPU on any build being considered. Nvidia is supported the best, followed by Intel. AMD shouldn't be considered for Linux in any case, because the 3D Drivers aren't ever up to par.

 

As far as your Ubuntu flavors go, any of them will generally work about the same on new builds. I'm a big proponent of Mint, because of the "user friendliness" touches they throw in that attempt to go the extra mile. Plus, easy installation of newer kernels from Mint Update is helpful.

 

If you don't find Mint to be to your liking you can always install an Ubuntu flavor as you intended. :yes: 

 

But yeah, I'd go Nvidia GPU rather than sticking to the Intel one, even if it's a budget offering you'll get way less hassle out of the driver.

Basically, what can be said of Mint can be said of Ubuntu (like Mint, it is Debian-based) - I went with Kubuntu because it's favored for Android development and builds.  I will have to redo my build drive now with Cyanogen/LineageOS's server restructuring, so I may also change the core to Mint (from Kubuntu).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, PGHammer said:

Basically, what can be said of Mint can be said of Ubuntu (like Mint, it is Debian-based) - I went with Kubuntu because it's favored for Android development and builds.  I will have to redo my build drive now with Cyanogen/LineageOS's server restructuring, so I may also change the core to Mint (from Kubuntu).

 

I thought Mint was Ubuntu-based... Only their LMDE version is Debian-based. But, whatever, they're moving away from Ubuntu right now. Or was the latest talk..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One more question. What about the SSD?

 

I know Ubuntu is already optimized for Samsung and Intel SSDs, so I shouldn't have to change settings once installed, but before the installation process should I change the SATA controller from UEFI to AHCI in the BIOS? Any other known issues? I'm reading some folks can't get Ubuntu to see SSDs during the installation.

 

This machine will not be partitioned, it will be only Xubuntu on the SSD and datas on the HDD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SSD should be fine - I'm using them for my Windows/macOS/Arch/Ubuntu installs and they work great.

 

Also think that TRIM is enabled by default in at least in Ubuntu-based distros.

 

P.S. Add another vote for Arch/Antergos/Manjaro here. :p

 

EDIT: Personally, I only use UEFI (no CSM enabled) on the motherboard along with all my partitions using GPT - I don't recommend using IDE at all, always use AHCI. Also make sure secure boot is disabled.

Edited by Boo Berry
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Boo Berry said:

SSD should be fine - I'm using them for my Windows/macOS/Arch/Ubuntu installs and they work great.

 

Also think that TRIM is enabled by default in at least in Ubuntu-based distros.

 

P.S. Add another vote for Arch/Antergos/Manjaro here. :p

 

EDIT: Personally, I only use UEFI (no CSM enabled) on the motherboard along with all my partitions using GPT - I don't recommend using IDE at all, always use AHCI. Also make sure secure boot is disabled.

Thanks, I'll keep that in mind. I knew about secure boot but I thought that it was enabled only when another OS was previously installed, I thought this was a problem only for dual-booters. Luckily ASUS MoBos' BIOS is fairly easy to navigate, so I'll just build the machine and then I'll check the BIOS before installing the OS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Brandon H said:

Not really. vanilla Arch doesn't have a graphic installer and you need to choose everything you want to install from nothing but that is remedied using a Distro. Manjaro even has a graphic installer and a graphic packager manager with AUR support.

 

Arch is really nice because of the AUR repository. it is community run so EVERYTHING is pretty much available right from the package manager.

You could download the arch anywhere ISO and setup arch that way. It gets past having to know all the damn commands to set it up and it gives you most of the options to choose from right out of the box. It does not install anything extra. Technically speaking there is no way to tell a arch system setup manually vs using the arch anywhere ISO after it has been setup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Gotenks98 said:

You could download the arch anywhere ISO and setup arch that way. It gets past having to know all the damn commands to set it up and it gives you most of the options to choose from right out of the box. It does not install anything extra. Technically speaking there is no way to tell a arch system setup manually vs using the arch anywhere ISO after it has been setup.

Also recommend this, although the latest 2.2.3 ISO is somewhat broken when booting EFI (requires a manual fix) - I keep 2.2.2 for installs as it works fine. Arch Anywhere is basically just a installer for vanilla Arch, kinda like Antergos is. Manjaro is a straight Arch-based distro.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Gotenks98 said:

You could download the arch anywhere ISO and setup arch that way. It gets past having to know all the damn commands to set it up and it gives you most of the options to choose from right out of the box. It does not install anything extra. Technically speaking there is no way to tell a arch system setup manually vs using the arch anywhere ISO after it has been setup.

I learned of ArchAnywhere shortly before I learned of Manjaro. Great little installer, I've messed with it tones in a VM on my tower. Couldn't get it to install on this laptop though for some reason, would keep erroring out on partitioning. Though now that @Boo Berry says the above I wonder if I had the 2.2.3 ISO as it is an UEFI laptop.

 

Manjaro is great though, I love the pacman/(yaourt/AUR) GUI front-end they created and IMO a well customized XFCE desktop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.