Hot take

Test them out on a virtual machine

I particularly like Cinnamon, it's very simple and nothing fancy (while still looking great and modern).

The other popular choices include:

Gnome
KDE (customizable to hell)
XFCE (very easy on resources, good for old hardware, or if you like simplistic DE)
LXDE (similar to XFCE in the resources department, but looks more modern, IMO)

There are others, but I can't speak for them as I've never tried them. I can't really describe modern Gnome as well, because the last version I used was 3 and it doesn't look at all as the same DE, so someone else will have to provide that info.

I‘ve recently used lxqt in a project. Very cool and the successor of lxde afaik at least for lubuntu.
modern gnome is simpler to learn and more polished than basically all other DEs. i think its better for someone that wants something new and for people who just started using a computer, because of just how easy it is to use. its not good if youre switching from windows or mac and want something similar.
- I tried it recently and it was confusing as hell.
  
  first time i tried it, i felt it was easier than any other de ive tried, though different people of course wont have the same experience

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Desktop_environment

You can use the list there to look up images or videos of the DEs

If you think you’d prefer one then you can try it but you aren’t likely to find an advantage over what you’re used to (there are some like old hardware wanting lighter weight) it’s mostly preference.

If you changed your Window Manager to i3 then you would probably hate it just for being so different

Don't. It's a trap. Most of them have compatibility issues with software. Stock Ubuntu is the benchmark for every piece of software these days. Deviating is fun until it isn't.

Unless you want to go a non Debian based distro, always pick Ubuntu.

Compatible issues on desktop environment level? This is the first time I ever hear about that.
- Tried switching to KDE Plasma and then OpenCV broke because of outdated QT version or some shit. Same with another distro. And I couldn't install two versions at the same time.
  It's all fun until you get dependency conflicts.
  
  Bro. I think you would benefit from sticking to Chrome OS.
  
  That's a great insult, I love it :D
  
  Nice comeback when you get evidence of how a different DE breaks software compatibility.
  It's clear that this is a forum of people that only install Linux to open their terminal and type neofetch.
  
  Fair, that reply above is not helpful at all. I mean yeah, I have had my fair share of dependence hell as well. Mostly when trying to install an external deb package. I know how to prevent it nowadays but it ain’t user friendly at all.
  Also I would be hesitant to use Linux as a workstation. If I had the luxury of time I would for ideological reasons alone. But I don’t have that kind of time. Troubleshooting can become costly when you get paid by the hour.
  
  Depends on what you do, most of the deep-learning world and scientific computing is based on Ubuntu. And not just Ubuntu but currently 22.04. Even upgrading the distro can bring compatibility conflicts.
  I have a massive hate boner for development on Windows for things such as the \ in the paths and needing to install a 10gig IDE to do cpp development. Or they tell you WSL "just works" while it doesn't "just work" because it can't cv2.imshow your images because there's no X11 passthrough etc.
Stock Ubuntu is the benchmark […]
…for nothing this days. The only people using Ubuntu now are dinosaurs and system managers running cheap servers or locked into Canonical's ecosystem, and the latter are using headless servers, remotely managed, not the DE. Variety is the spice of life. All mainstream DEs are perfectly serviceable, 100% compatible with everything and completely stable and reliable. FFS, Ubuntu's snaps don't even work well on their own DE. Stop fearmongering for Canonical, let people live life.
- You do you. Just stop wasting other people's time with this worthless false hope. What I'm saying here is what I would have liked people to tell me before I wasted my time troubleshooting issues caused by custom Desktop Environments. What's next you're going to tell me Wayland already runs without issues too?
  The stock Ubuntu environment looks pretty decent to begin with.
  
  Wow, you really are aggressive and hostile for no reason. You can use Ubuntu all you want. But don't go around spreading lies just because you are too cognitively challenged to change your DE without breaking the OS. Most people are fine making a fresh install with the DE they want to try preinstalled and it works fine 100% out of the box. It's trying to make two different DE live on the same system at the same time that is only partially supported and thoroughly discouraged by every single DE developer. Most of the time installing a new DE on a system and uninstalling the old one is a pretty straightforward, although dirty process. Guess who is particularly bad and incompatible with that process? Ubuntu. It has the worst support for alternative DEs, because Ubuntu is not the benchmark for squat shit anymore. Use a real end user distro, and you'll be able to change DE to your heart's content without issue.
  
  I'm only on Linux for a few months (as a daily driver, always used headless servers before that), and I'm almost certain that my Fedora install came with both KDE and Gnome in Wayland and X11 flavors pre-installed out of the box, and I could just choose between them at login screen. Or am I wrong, and I do I just not remmeber installing the other manually? I mean, that's also possible, it's been a while.
  
  Because advice like this is an enormous waste of time. Calling people dinosaurs for using Ubuntu instead of KDE is a pretty out there take. The only more modern option is arch based distros like Manjaro but since every programming tutorial assumes you have APT and are running Ubuntu I don't see much of a reason to deviate from that.
  
  it seems you should be using debian or distros based on it. ubuntu, as far as i know, uses apt as a mirror to snap, so as long as the tutorials youre following letter for letter arent too recent, you really should be using debian for actual apt packages, since ubuntu used those a couple of years ago.
  you can also use fedora or arch, but it seems you dont want to check what package youre downloading at all, and just want to follow tutorials blindly.
  
  People here are under the illusion that a DE changes nothing about the base OS. It seems like those people have never actually been using their OS.
  
  the DE doesnt change anything in the base os unless you count its packages and rare incompatibilities as noticeable changes.
  what it does change is the visual experience.
  
  No it installs and uninstalls a ton of packages and often relies on specific versions of certain packages. This is like saying Ubuntu isn't different from Debian.
  Some DE's even use Wayland which will break a ton of software such as OpenCV.
  
  Dude...I build my desktops from a bare Debian text only terminal by installing it piece by piece and only what I need. This current install has bee running fine for three years and I have no issues installing and configuring anything you can on Ubuntu.
  This is a skill issue on your part, not an OS issue. At a certain point, if you've been using it enough, the distro literally doesn't matter anymore. Linux is Linux is Linux.
  
  That's like saying that you run Gentoo but you don't even have the street cred of running Gentoo.
  
  Noobs gonna noob
Ubuntu is shit. It used to only be shit under the hood if you were an enterprise sysadmin building your own packages and managing versioned repos for thousand machine fleets, but now it is shit from a user experience, too. Fuck snaps, fuck walled gardens, and fuck vendors attempting lock-in.
I hate everything but Matlock!
Yeah I agree.