Btw you can load them to a USB and try out without installing if picking one is kinda hard tho remember performance will depend on USB quality.

mint

Bazzite for a first try. If you never hit a wall needing to make system tweaks, stick to it in the long term. Otherwise, I’m really liking Fedora. KDE/Gnome is personal choice.

Fedora.

It’s been asked a million times, and it’ll be answered every time, and the answers will mostly be “Mint, Fedora, FedoraKDE, and if you wanna game Bazzite.”

The real advice that gets posted less, regardless of distro:

• Back up your important files to an external drive, often. It’s entirely possible you’ll fuck up an install beyond repair (or beyond what you know how to do at the time) and you end up reinstalling. If you can just put your important files back and be up and running, nothing of value is lost.

• Don’t be scared of the terminal, it’s incredibly useful. Look up a few YT vids like “bash basics” or “linux terminal for beginners” or something and follow along like it’s a class, you’ll soon be comfortable enough to use it when you need it, and you will, and you may come to love it. It’s not as bad as windows cmd! Be careful when using sudo or su, that’s when you could really screw up the system (but mostly it’ll be fine just be careful.

And most importantly, have fun!

As someone who’s been in this for a while, go with Mint.

It’s not a “beginner distro”. You can start there, you can stay there as long as you don’t develop any super niche prerequisites. Even then, Mint can probably do it.

The developers are sane and it’s a popular system that has been in development for years with many tweaks and improvements. There’s a big community around it if you need help/guides.

You just can’t go wrong with it.

I’d recommend either OpenSuSE or Fedora, both with KDE. They’re big, well supported distros, which should install without issue and provide a slick modern experience. I use OpenSuSE, as I find the YaST system tools convenient and user friendly.

I’d avoid Ubuntu, multiple issues. Mint is a good distro but I think any big mainstream distro “just works” now, so I’d go for something that uses a slicker desktop. I prefer KDE, which is available on Mint but just isn’t as tightly integrated as their own Cinnamon desktop.

ZorinOS is doing awesome for begginers, LinuxMint is also a reliable option that might makes you learn more about GNU/Linux OSes

sounds like you have a decent computer so try bazzite gnome for your gpu

it’s great for normal stuff, development and gaming

Mint is fine, Ubuntu sucks ass, don’t use that. Zorin OS is also fine.

Gnu

Mint is the OS of choice for beginners. It’s hassle free and it just works. Ubuntu is good, but its snap package got a bad rap when it was launched. It’s not that bad. But it gets confusing since you end up with 3 different software packaging systems. (Apt with .deb files, Flatpak and Snap)

Personally I use Kubuntu, the KDE Plasma desktop version because it’s so much more like Windows and has many more features. I don’t mind the Snap packages, but I avoid them if I can if I can use Flatpak instead. Snap and Flatpak are essentially the same thing: it installs and runs software in a sandboxed environment which makes it safer to use.

Mint 100% to start with, install Nvidia drivers if you have an Nvidia graphics card. Install and run a game though Steam or whatever and if all the hardware works and you can get the refresh rate you want you’re good to go.

If not, install Fedora KDE and do the same.

If you still have issues on Fedora make another post here with some hardware details and say what you tried.

Linux is linux. In the end it’s more your personal taste with just a little sprinkle of use case that decides.

The main differences are:

• Update speed: How quickly are the repositories getting updates. That’s a spectrum between getting cutting edge version in days or weeks or having things unchaged for up to several years. Or in other worlds you will see more bugs in freshly released software, but also bugfixes often within days. Compared to getting new feature only after years, but rarely any bugs (the very few ones that slip through… well, you will get the fix in a few years). That’s also where use case plays a bigger role. If you use very new hardware and want software that uses their newest features, a rather stale slow updating distro might not be the right fit for you.

• Update scheme: Fixed vs. continues release. Continues releases are slowly but constantly changing over time but once installed they can basically used forever. While fixed releases are mostly just shipping critical bugfixes and security patches and doing everything else in big release steps (think in terms of Windows upgrades here: You mostly have the same thing for years but at a certain point there is a newer version that might bring changes in defaults, new pre-installed software, UI changes etc. and after a couple of years you lose support if you don’t do that step).

Also more depending on your personal taste and habits:

• How much are you willing or interested in tinkering? Basically all distros give you access to all software. But what is pre-installed changes, both in what is provided by default and also how much software is there already. For example do you want stuff for video editing set up already or don’t you care as you will test out all the options available anyway?

• The same is true the basic desktop environment. Gnome and KDE are the two big ones (with some more oftens based or forked from those two). And it mostly a difference of “here is our environment exactly as we think it’s best with very little customisation” (Gnome - also the one with most forks, by people who did not agree with the Gnome devs vision) and “have fun customising” (KDE). Is customising stuff to your liking your thing? Or do don’t care and also prefer something as close to what you are used to on Windows? Again: Distros have all the options available. But some have one environment or the other pre-installed. Or they come in different flavors from the beginning. If customisation isn’t your cup of tea the decision on a certain distro matters much more.

Other considerations:

• Immutable distros are more on the newer end of things. They are basically designed more like for example Android. There is a base system that rarely changes and allows basically a “reset ot factory settings”, with updates and additionally installed software provided as incremental changes and/or highly containerised. That has benefits (you can revert screw ups easily) but also drawbacks (decades of available linux instructions are now worthless until you really understand where that regular config file you can’t edit anymore is now located in some separate container only used by one specific piece of software - and most people that google for such solutions don’t). Again this is mostly decided by habits. Are you expecting to tinker with your system or do you just want something that works on its own that neither you or an upgrade cannot possibly break. In the latter case an immutable distro can be the thing for you. And as always… you have all the options and you can also setup most other distros with extensive systems of “save points” to revert problematic changes anyway.

Things to not consider:

• ignore the answers speaking about “it provides WINE for running windows stuff” or “it comes with NVIDIA drivers” because they basically all do (minus the already mentioned combination of running cutting edge hardware with very slow updating distros - that’s not a good idea). At the worst it usually requires clicking some “Yes, I don’t insist on open source stuff exclusively but will also to use proprietary drivers if available” checkbox in the installer.

I use Pop! OS and I’m also a first time linux user! The installation process was pretty straightforward and I got used to it pretty quickly