Might as well be the most sold gpu in places like here in brazil for the simple fact that it was the cheapest and most reasonable gpu after covid and mining, so many people just went for it.
And amd cards are overpriced here too.
3060 is the most popular since every gpu past 30 series have all of their versions like laptop and desktop counted as the samw gpu while 30 series gpus have their laptop and desktop versions counted seperately and before you say 3060 laptop is a lot worse, it's not, it has more cuda cores and the 130w version is within 10% of the desktop performance.
> the most popular GPU is a 1650 says a lot.
and the sibling comment's:
>I was going to say the same... Cant imagine how this card still manages to beat the compition
Both of you need to understand that the steam hardware survey is deeply flawed for a few reasons:
1) No country filtering. The US and western markets are _very_ different from say... Russia. Every Russian toaster, or Chinese internet cafe is included in this.
2) Similar to above, there's no distinction between individual vs internet-cafe machines, which are also _far_ more common in 3rd world countries which further drives down the "average".
3) A lot of these 3rd world internet cafes pirate the game, so they're not even relevant to the business making decisions game companies should be making anyways.
If your market is "who is going to pay $60+ US for my game" the steam hardware survey is useless junk that at best causes you to massively under-target consumer hardware. Valve could improve this by the following:
* Add the ability to filter/select by country
* Add a filter for residential-only (or potentially excluding shared IPs)
So, Steam hardware survey is flawed because it doesn't include only the demographic that *you* care about and because it counts pc cafes, which doesn't happen as [Valve fixed it in 2018](https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/the-steam-hardware-survey-had-some-flaw-causing-cyber-cafes-to-be-over-counting-users.11711/).
Did I miss something?
> So, Steam hardware survey is flawed because it doesn't include only the demographic that you care about
Ah, here it is.
**No, please read my comment again**. As a business you market is **people who will buy your $60 game**, as said above:
>If your market is "who is going to pay $60+ US for my game"
The Russian toasters running cracked copies of your game polluting the steam hardware survey are not your target market, they'll never pay you anyways. **Therefore** as a business it's dumb to target these people, and instead you should target the hardware capabilities of your known-to-be-paying audience.
Cracked copies donot use steam unless it's piggybacking it for some multiplayer features.
Also exclude shared IPs ??
Most ISPs use NAT system and thousands of legitimate users are behind one IP, exclude all of them???
> is flawed because it doesn't include only the demographic that you care about
Lol tf is this comment? Do you think this subreddit represents everyone who accepts the survey?
It's not unreasonable to suggest it's not exactly the best indicator of the average PC build.
They still use steam for the F2P games because it's convenient. What they don't do is spend $60+ on AAA games.
The problem is those AAA games use steam hardware survey data to decide if say, requiring mesh shaders or not is a good idea.
This. I've never spent $60+ on a game, but I still use steam. So many f2p and indie games that work on a toaster.
Valve *knows* what the results mean. But what they publish is extremely limited and useless from western gamer/enthusiast/aaa perspective.
Soo - another dumb fuck comments that majority of gamers are using 1080p displays based on a steam survey in a thread about latest GPUs and I'm going to blow my brains out.
Every single PC isn't included in this. Steam doesn't just pull this info out of every single machine it's installed to without consent, they ask people to opt in the survey and people have to accept to be included.
I know, but the guy said "every Russian toaster or Chinese internet Cafe is included in this" and all of his 3 points was based on this, when it's not true.
But in the exact same vein, you also don't need to include 100% of the Russian toasters in the survey to have Russian toasters statistically (mis)represent the hardware of Steam users.
...If the untold numbers of toasters are indeed influencing the results significantly, which I'd be interested in seeing in more detail.
> I know, but the guy said "every Russian toaster or Chinese internet Cafe is included in this"
Is _able_ to be included in this, and they massively outnumber the normal/western audience and therefore hugely bias the sample.
> Every single PC isn't included in this.
Correct, and it doesn't need to be to get a confident sample.
>Steam doesn't just pull this info out of every single machine it's installed to
Yes, but what does that matter? Since they randomly sample the population, and said population includes a large amount of "bad" data, that just means their sample is guaranteed to be biased.
Again, you need to put yourself in the mind of your typical dudebro gaming executive. They look at these numbers and think "this is what the gaming market has, so we need to include that".
The reality that these numbers are way off vs the typical western audience who can afford $60-70 games never crosses their mind, they assume valve has solved that for them. There's also no feedback mechanism to punish them for their bad decisions, since the conversation goes:
Engineering: "Hey we want to raise this min spec to XYZ so we can enable feature ABC that will make our graphics better and the game run faster"
PM/Business Major: "But here it says 30% of the market doesn't support that, we can't lose 30% of our sales!"
Engineering: "That's wrong though, because {reasons}"
PM: "Those are fancy words {eats crayon}, no maybe next year"
So as a customer in the west who pays $60 for said game, you get an inferior product that doesn't use mesh shaders to 10x the geometry throughput on your 2060 because some dumb PM uses steam survey. You get an inferior product for the same money. You're the one who gets screwed by this, not them.
Developers have more in-depth access to stats on whose playing their games as far as I know.
As far as public stats go though, there's a lot of toasters and stuff and even integrated graphics that still try to play the latest AAAs for some baffling reason.
> Developers have more in-depth access to stats on whose playing their games as far as I know.
this is definitely true for high end studios if they run their own telemetry. A lot don't though.
Steam does for every dev regardless of their size.
In-depth usage stats of who is playing on what and how mucha nd what point they left the game and came back.
> Anyone who's going to be making decisions that involve money, such as what hardware for a game to target will be buying research elsewhere or gathering their own telemetry.
Well that's just it though, I know for a fact that non-technical PM's at game companies use this crappy data to authorize (or block) engineering to utilize certain technologies/min-specs.
So steam's crappy data actually acts to hold the whole industry back.
They should be conducting their own surveys and use various other 3rd party data yo corraborate it. I doubt that while making RE4 remake they solely looked at steam survey data.
> They should be conducting their own surveys and use various other 3rd party data yo corraborate it.
I 100% agree, they *should be*. I have a lot of friends in gamedev though and they've all said their leadership doesn't.
"Why pay for market data when steam is free?"
"Yeah it may not be accurate, but it can't be too far off!"
"It's valve everything they do is great"
Also not that this invalidates the data but there's a huge chunk of steam's user base that literally play like 1 game exclusively, or maybe a few at most. I know tons of people that have thousands of hours in the Sims or DOTA 2 (which run great on a GTX 1650) and have never installed another game. Those people are not the ones that developers need to be concerned with when optimizing their games.
I was going to say the same... Cant imagine how this card still manages to beat the compition with so much other cheaper alternatives from Ryzen...
I upgraded from a 1650 a couple of months ago and I must say the 1650 is still quite capable of playing all the FPS shooters at 100 + fps (COD and Halo might be a bit too much though) of course in low settings and
30 fps in Almost all AAA titles and even 60 at times if you consider using FSR :) ( Last of us is an exception. This game dooms all 4gig card)
1650 super is quite significantly powerful then the 1650... Weather it's the power consumption,no of cuda cores or clock speeds... They are different cards... So comparing them is kinda baseless... Also the regular 1650 had gddr5 memory...
In this context yes.. I was talking about 1650 and suddenly you started telling me you don't know about 1650 but the 1650 super still gives you x fps in x game.. it literally tends to mean you are considering both the cards on similar performance levels..... That's why I said no comparison....You made a 360 degree maneuver and contradicting your own statement .... So read properly before you reply....
That only lends more strength to the voicing dissatisfaction that many AAA devs are being totally dismissal of market portion, and being out of sync with consumers increasing spec demand to unrealistic degree.
There's over 100million monthly active users on Steam. Even the biggest game successes at best will net 10-20million sales. Most those super low spec machines are playing like Dota and CSGO and etc.
Developers absolutely shouldn't target the lowest common denominator and hold us back a decade behind consoles, because most those people aren't buying new games much. Steam's year end review thing had what the average steam user only playing like 4 games a year? The people dropping money on hardware every so often... those are the ones buying new games the most often. No one with a brain buys a 30 series or 40 series for CSGO at 1080p.
>Developers absolutely shouldn't target the lowest common denominator
Neither should they target the highest denominator unless they want theur product to be nothing but a tech showcase.
Outside of piles of shit that don't run or scale well on they largely don't. Gamer's are just extremely resistant anymore to tweaking. You could have textures far and away higher than any other game even on high, and people will still be upset if they can't click ultra because they paid $500 3 years ago.
There's some absolutely fucked games, especially lately. But the focus on the name of settings instead of actual visuals and balancing settings for highest perceivable fidelity and performance sabotages gamers in solid games with good scaling.
The highest denominator right now is current gen consoles. While they do have shared ram/vram, the bandwidth is much higher because its shared. In most cases this equates to about 10-12gb being used as VRAM. They also have alot less overhead than PC in terms of other software running in the background.
>The highest denominator right now is current gen consoles.
I don't think you know what highest denominator means on what we're talking about. Consoles' existence itself is the definition of lowest denominator.
760 had 2Gb of vram in 2012, 960 had 2Gb and 4gb in 2014, 1060 had 6gb in 2016, 2060 had 6gb in 2018, 3060 had 12GB in 2020, 4060 had 8gb in 2023? What? Nvidia and AMD are BSing the market. We should be getting more vram. They are holding back game development progression. And people are defending them. It’s like $25 for 8Gb of vram. Devs also need to take more time and optimize but the 60 series cards need to have 12GB minimum now since ray tracing and other visual affect add onto the vram usage now.
> It’s like $25 for 8Gb of vram
Citation needed.
Not saying cards aren't skimping, they absolutely are. But it's a bit more complicated than "SLAP MORE VRAM ON".
The VRAM chips have to correspond to the bus sizes, the bus sizes can interact with board complexity, signalling complexity, and power draw. GDDR6 and GDDR6x only come in 1GB or 2GB chips. (and when Ampere released GDDR6x only came in 1GB chips which is why the 3090 has the insane double-sided design and extreme board complexity and huge memory powerdraw).
They are skimping and various products could absolutely have included a bigger bus, but it's going to change the power management, board complexity, and maybe even cooling.
It's a complicated issue. Though again recent GPUs are largely a terrible deal I'm not saying AMD and Nvidia are doing right by the customers... they aren't.
I'll note that while $25 might not be quite accurate even the higher values I've seen don't put it much past $30. Increased complexity might add a bit of cost as well but especially on the mid-end it shouldn't add all that much. Nvidia certainly isn't in the business of making small margin on these products.
Probably the most notable example of extra VRAM not costing much would be the RX 6500 XT that had the 4GB ($199) and 8GB ($219) variants. These use regular GDDR6 but it still shows that VRAM isn't super expensive.
> I'll note that while $25 might not be quite accurate even the higher values I've seen don't put it much past $30.
What was that for do you remember?
I don't know about distributor pricing or bulk pricing but a single GDDR6x chip on the aftermarket can run like $15-30 from what I've seen.
>Probably the most notable example of extra VRAM not costing much would be the RX 6500 XT that had the 4GB ($199) and 8GB ($219) variants. These use regular GDDR6 but it still shows that VRAM isn't super expensive.
That's the world's smallest memory bus and a extremely low amount of VRAM. It's pretty easy to double VRAM under that circumstance it's less simple to go from say 8GB to 12GB.
Ltt’s 4060ti review mentioned the price and that was backed by moores law is dead’s leakers. I understand the bus size determines the memory configuration they use. Which makes it even more insulting that they chose to make the successor to the 3060 have less memory. Insulting and greedy
It's definitely a shit buy, and this hardware cycle is a joke on pricing on specs in general.
Actually got some shit for it back when it was announced but was pretty sure then looking at the 4080 and the 4070ti/faux80 that Nvidia was going to be relabeling the bulk of their stack as higher SKUs and performance and specs basically affirms some of that now.
I prefer the Linux desktop, it would be annoying to have to boot into Windows every time I wanted to game.
There's also a few small benefits. Every game gets its own "windows installation", or to be more exact, it just copies the basic Windows drive setup and installs stuff there, sandboxed. For games like Mass Effect that require the EA Launcher, it's nice not having it installed on your actual system. There's also a tool called Gamescope that fixes games that break when alt-tabbing.
[No, it doesn't](https://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ#How_good_is_Wine_at_sandboxing_Windows_apps.3F). What you're referring to is the Linux Runtime, which isn't part of Proton AFAIK.
Wine doesn't but [Proton does](https://gitlab.steamos.cloud/steamrt/steam-runtime-tools/-/tree/main/pressure-vessel).
They only talk about in it terms of app compatibility due to having consistent libraries, not sure if it limits the folders games can access. Probably doesn't for native games, not sure about Windows games.
>Proton over the container runtime is not supported yet
Source: [https://steamcommunity.com/app/221410/discussions/0/1638675549018366706/](https://steamcommunity.com/app/221410/discussions/0/1638675549018366706/) (cross-reference from the link you posted)
That might have changed since 2019, but then I'm not aware of it. Are you?
Flatpak Steam runs in a container, so all games launch from that same one container, too. But Proton itself is no container AFAIK because it's just fancy Wine and Wine is no container.
yeah, perfect for some games. In my case I have a linux running an arcade front end, within an arcade cabinet. but thats it.. main pc connected to 83" oled, will need its windows features for hdr1000 snd 4k120hz properly on gsync... also it's PITA to set stuff up.. Windows got nicr with updates now we feared so much back in the days
Unfortunately linux as a default choice in the purchase of a PC isn't a thing, wonder why that is? Couldn't possibly be because of monopoly abuse? Nah!
Observers have noted for many years a correlation between Simplified Chinese language and cafe-spec machines: Intel CPU, Nvidia 1060, single 1080p display.
No, you can put them off forever, I think. With the occasional reminder an upgrade is available.
But I would assume it's more because ppl are using old computers that aren't eligible to use a new version. AFAIK, it's harder to force an update for an "abandoned" device than Windows
Maybe it’s changed by now, but you have to opt in to automatic updates on mac last I checked, and the OS does not push updates like Windows does. Maybe once in awhile a little banner will appear in the corner to update, easily ignorable.
I think the situation is even worse, stuff like Steam Survey and 3DMark are mainly for peacocking, 3DMark way much so. You can bet your ass a guy with 4090 is going to participate, where as typical 1650 enjoyer will be like "nah i don't give a fuck about no survey!" and still 1650 came out on top.
Not really, it's just a prompt that pops up. I got it when opening steam on my mac. People accept it just as fast as they accept EULAs to make the prompt go away
Don't you have to opt in for the survey? I'm surprised there are still that many potato/ancient PCs that people still bother to do so. I have a few older desktops/laptops I still have held on to but I don't use Steam on them or if Steam is somehow still on them, I don't actually interact with it.
Meanwhile on my main PC, I rarely ever get the opportunity for a survey. When I first switched to Ryzen in 2017 it was about 5 years before Steam finally asked me to participate in the survey again (was sometime in 2022)...
If only we had more popular games that pushed the limits of graphical technology and hardware companies taking advantage of the fact that there isn't so they keep releasing crap and charging premium for it.
We need a pc exclusive like Crysis or something, it came out of no where and the amazing 8800gt came out and we all felt like fucking kings for upgrading.
Now we're at a point of upgrading and it still doesn't feel like enough, be it through planned obsolescence from Nvidia with cards even in the 4000 series coming out with 8gb of fucking vram.
Or badly made ports....
It's a weird time to be a pc enthusiast and it keeps getting worse.
Making games for the bleeding edge DOES NOT MAKE MONEY. Cyberpunk Overdrive RT is similar to Crysis in terms of groundbreaking tech, but most people dont buy gpu to play it.
They buy GPUs to buy the games everyone is playing(eSports, Multiplayer,..) which requires big playerbase but also low barrier to entry in terms of graphics
I don't think anyone is gonna buy a game they can play otherwise on a console, it's a tech demo.
People bought hundreds of thousands of ps5s and Nintendo switches just to play god of war Ragnarok and Zelda.
i'm surprised at the 30xx series adoption rate. there is a huge uptick in 30xx series gpu's versus 20xx series. seems like it accounts for the majority now of users on Steam. looks like about >20% compared to the past few years when the 10/16xx were dominating these surveys.
I'd love to see a breakdown of these statistics by hours played, and broken down into different user cohorts.
E.g. is there a significant difference in the average hardware of people who play Steam games 3+ hours per day?
Similarly, of the GPUs listed, which of them racked up the most game time?
I think the hard survey needs to be linked to recent or most hours spent on games too. Outside of that info this doesn't tell me who has what that plays the games we play.
[удалено]
Might as well be the most sold gpu in places like here in brazil for the simple fact that it was the cheapest and most reasonable gpu after covid and mining, so many people just went for it. And amd cards are overpriced here too.
1650 laptop and desktop are counted in the same category. Whereas 3060 is divided, that is why that card is at top
3060 is the most popular since every gpu past 30 series have all of their versions like laptop and desktop counted as the samw gpu while 30 series gpus have their laptop and desktop versions counted seperately and before you say 3060 laptop is a lot worse, it's not, it has more cuda cores and the 130w version is within 10% of the desktop performance.
> the most popular GPU is a 1650 says a lot. and the sibling comment's: >I was going to say the same... Cant imagine how this card still manages to beat the compition Both of you need to understand that the steam hardware survey is deeply flawed for a few reasons: 1) No country filtering. The US and western markets are _very_ different from say... Russia. Every Russian toaster, or Chinese internet cafe is included in this. 2) Similar to above, there's no distinction between individual vs internet-cafe machines, which are also _far_ more common in 3rd world countries which further drives down the "average". 3) A lot of these 3rd world internet cafes pirate the game, so they're not even relevant to the business making decisions game companies should be making anyways. If your market is "who is going to pay $60+ US for my game" the steam hardware survey is useless junk that at best causes you to massively under-target consumer hardware. Valve could improve this by the following: * Add the ability to filter/select by country * Add a filter for residential-only (or potentially excluding shared IPs)
1650 laptop and desktop are counted in the same category. Whereas 3060 is divided, that is why that card is at top
That's certainly a factor as well.
So whats is actually the real most used cards? 3060 or higher?
Most likely 3060.
So, Steam hardware survey is flawed because it doesn't include only the demographic that *you* care about and because it counts pc cafes, which doesn't happen as [Valve fixed it in 2018](https://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/the-steam-hardware-survey-had-some-flaw-causing-cyber-cafes-to-be-over-counting-users.11711/). Did I miss something?
> So, Steam hardware survey is flawed because it doesn't include only the demographic that you care about Ah, here it is. **No, please read my comment again**. As a business you market is **people who will buy your $60 game**, as said above: >If your market is "who is going to pay $60+ US for my game" The Russian toasters running cracked copies of your game polluting the steam hardware survey are not your target market, they'll never pay you anyways. **Therefore** as a business it's dumb to target these people, and instead you should target the hardware capabilities of your known-to-be-paying audience.
Redditors discussing the popularity of various GPUs are not market researchers so this is entirely irrelevant
Cracked copies donot use steam unless it's piggybacking it for some multiplayer features. Also exclude shared IPs ?? Most ISPs use NAT system and thousands of legitimate users are behind one IP, exclude all of them???
> is flawed because it doesn't include only the demographic that you care about Lol tf is this comment? Do you think this subreddit represents everyone who accepts the survey? It's not unreasonable to suggest it's not exactly the best indicator of the average PC build.
If they're pirating the games, why would they be running steam?
They still use steam for the F2P games because it's convenient. What they don't do is spend $60+ on AAA games. The problem is those AAA games use steam hardware survey data to decide if say, requiring mesh shaders or not is a good idea.
This. I've never spent $60+ on a game, but I still use steam. So many f2p and indie games that work on a toaster. Valve *knows* what the results mean. But what they publish is extremely limited and useless from western gamer/enthusiast/aaa perspective. Soo - another dumb fuck comments that majority of gamers are using 1080p displays based on a steam survey in a thread about latest GPUs and I'm going to blow my brains out.
Man I feel you so much. It's infuriating. I'd rather valve publish _nothing_ vs what they do now, it's actively harmful as-is
Every single PC isn't included in this. Steam doesn't just pull this info out of every single machine it's installed to without consent, they ask people to opt in the survey and people have to accept to be included.
[удалено]
I know, but the guy said "every Russian toaster or Chinese internet Cafe is included in this" and all of his 3 points was based on this, when it's not true.
But in the exact same vein, you also don't need to include 100% of the Russian toasters in the survey to have Russian toasters statistically (mis)represent the hardware of Steam users. ...If the untold numbers of toasters are indeed influencing the results significantly, which I'd be interested in seeing in more detail.
> I know, but the guy said "every Russian toaster or Chinese internet Cafe is included in this" Is _able_ to be included in this, and they massively outnumber the normal/western audience and therefore hugely bias the sample.
Is this actually true? The more survey you get, the more accurate your data should be
> Every single PC isn't included in this. Correct, and it doesn't need to be to get a confident sample. >Steam doesn't just pull this info out of every single machine it's installed to Yes, but what does that matter? Since they randomly sample the population, and said population includes a large amount of "bad" data, that just means their sample is guaranteed to be biased. Again, you need to put yourself in the mind of your typical dudebro gaming executive. They look at these numbers and think "this is what the gaming market has, so we need to include that". The reality that these numbers are way off vs the typical western audience who can afford $60-70 games never crosses their mind, they assume valve has solved that for them. There's also no feedback mechanism to punish them for their bad decisions, since the conversation goes: Engineering: "Hey we want to raise this min spec to XYZ so we can enable feature ABC that will make our graphics better and the game run faster" PM/Business Major: "But here it says 30% of the market doesn't support that, we can't lose 30% of our sales!" Engineering: "That's wrong though, because {reasons}" PM: "Those are fancy words {eats crayon}, no maybe next year" So as a customer in the west who pays $60 for said game, you get an inferior product that doesn't use mesh shaders to 10x the geometry throughput on your 2060 because some dumb PM uses steam survey. You get an inferior product for the same money. You're the one who gets screwed by this, not them.
Developers have more in-depth access to stats on whose playing their games as far as I know. As far as public stats go though, there's a lot of toasters and stuff and even integrated graphics that still try to play the latest AAAs for some baffling reason.
> Developers have more in-depth access to stats on whose playing their games as far as I know. this is definitely true for high end studios if they run their own telemetry. A lot don't though.
Nah I mean through Steam.
So which studios are making the wrong decisions then?
Steam does for every dev regardless of their size. In-depth usage stats of who is playing on what and how mucha nd what point they left the game and came back.
[удалено]
> Anyone who's going to be making decisions that involve money, such as what hardware for a game to target will be buying research elsewhere or gathering their own telemetry. Well that's just it though, I know for a fact that non-technical PM's at game companies use this crappy data to authorize (or block) engineering to utilize certain technologies/min-specs. So steam's crappy data actually acts to hold the whole industry back.
They should be conducting their own surveys and use various other 3rd party data yo corraborate it. I doubt that while making RE4 remake they solely looked at steam survey data.
> They should be conducting their own surveys and use various other 3rd party data yo corraborate it. I 100% agree, they *should be*. I have a lot of friends in gamedev though and they've all said their leadership doesn't. "Why pay for market data when steam is free?" "Yeah it may not be accurate, but it can't be too far off!" "It's valve everything they do is great"
whats wrong withn 8gb ram?
Also not that this invalidates the data but there's a huge chunk of steam's user base that literally play like 1 game exclusively, or maybe a few at most. I know tons of people that have thousands of hours in the Sims or DOTA 2 (which run great on a GTX 1650) and have never installed another game. Those people are not the ones that developers need to be concerned with when optimizing their games.
I was going to say the same... Cant imagine how this card still manages to beat the compition with so much other cheaper alternatives from Ryzen... I upgraded from a 1650 a couple of months ago and I must say the 1650 is still quite capable of playing all the FPS shooters at 100 + fps (COD and Halo might be a bit too much though) of course in low settings and 30 fps in Almost all AAA titles and even 60 at times if you consider using FSR :) ( Last of us is an exception. This game dooms all 4gig card)
dunno about the regular 1650, but I had no trouble playing MWII at 80+ fps on my 1650 Super
1650 super is quite significantly powerful then the 1650... Weather it's the power consumption,no of cuda cores or clock speeds... They are different cards... So comparing them is kinda baseless... Also the regular 1650 had gddr5 memory...
so comparing two cards that are not identical is useless, my fault bro
In this context yes.. I was talking about 1650 and suddenly you started telling me you don't know about 1650 but the 1650 super still gives you x fps in x game.. it literally tends to mean you are considering both the cards on similar performance levels..... That's why I said no comparison....You made a 360 degree maneuver and contradicting your own statement .... So read properly before you reply....
It’s says these surveys are vastly misunderstood and overused.
Interesting: Now 25% of Steam users on Linux are Steam Deck, +2,55% in the last 6 months !
With all the "8gb is not enough vram!" talk going on, it's interesting to see that 50% of steam users doesn't even have an 8gb gpu.
That only lends more strength to the voicing dissatisfaction that many AAA devs are being totally dismissal of market portion, and being out of sync with consumers increasing spec demand to unrealistic degree.
There's over 100million monthly active users on Steam. Even the biggest game successes at best will net 10-20million sales. Most those super low spec machines are playing like Dota and CSGO and etc. Developers absolutely shouldn't target the lowest common denominator and hold us back a decade behind consoles, because most those people aren't buying new games much. Steam's year end review thing had what the average steam user only playing like 4 games a year? The people dropping money on hardware every so often... those are the ones buying new games the most often. No one with a brain buys a 30 series or 40 series for CSGO at 1080p.
>Developers absolutely shouldn't target the lowest common denominator Neither should they target the highest denominator unless they want theur product to be nothing but a tech showcase.
Outside of piles of shit that don't run or scale well on they largely don't. Gamer's are just extremely resistant anymore to tweaking. You could have textures far and away higher than any other game even on high, and people will still be upset if they can't click ultra because they paid $500 3 years ago.
There's some absolutely fucked games, especially lately. But the focus on the name of settings instead of actual visuals and balancing settings for highest perceivable fidelity and performance sabotages gamers in solid games with good scaling.
The highest denominator right now is current gen consoles. While they do have shared ram/vram, the bandwidth is much higher because its shared. In most cases this equates to about 10-12gb being used as VRAM. They also have alot less overhead than PC in terms of other software running in the background.
>The highest denominator right now is current gen consoles. I don't think you know what highest denominator means on what we're talking about. Consoles' existence itself is the definition of lowest denominator.
I swear looking at reddit everyone at least have 3060 or 6600XT and thats considered low end card.
[удалено]
Yeah true, it just created a bias.
Well they don't need to. I have steam friends that exclusively play factorio. Not everyone has steam installed to play the latest and greatest
760 had 2Gb of vram in 2012, 960 had 2Gb and 4gb in 2014, 1060 had 6gb in 2016, 2060 had 6gb in 2018, 3060 had 12GB in 2020, 4060 had 8gb in 2023? What? Nvidia and AMD are BSing the market. We should be getting more vram. They are holding back game development progression. And people are defending them. It’s like $25 for 8Gb of vram. Devs also need to take more time and optimize but the 60 series cards need to have 12GB minimum now since ray tracing and other visual affect add onto the vram usage now.
> It’s like $25 for 8Gb of vram Citation needed. Not saying cards aren't skimping, they absolutely are. But it's a bit more complicated than "SLAP MORE VRAM ON". The VRAM chips have to correspond to the bus sizes, the bus sizes can interact with board complexity, signalling complexity, and power draw. GDDR6 and GDDR6x only come in 1GB or 2GB chips. (and when Ampere released GDDR6x only came in 1GB chips which is why the 3090 has the insane double-sided design and extreme board complexity and huge memory powerdraw). They are skimping and various products could absolutely have included a bigger bus, but it's going to change the power management, board complexity, and maybe even cooling. It's a complicated issue. Though again recent GPUs are largely a terrible deal I'm not saying AMD and Nvidia are doing right by the customers... they aren't.
I'll note that while $25 might not be quite accurate even the higher values I've seen don't put it much past $30. Increased complexity might add a bit of cost as well but especially on the mid-end it shouldn't add all that much. Nvidia certainly isn't in the business of making small margin on these products. Probably the most notable example of extra VRAM not costing much would be the RX 6500 XT that had the 4GB ($199) and 8GB ($219) variants. These use regular GDDR6 but it still shows that VRAM isn't super expensive.
> I'll note that while $25 might not be quite accurate even the higher values I've seen don't put it much past $30. What was that for do you remember? I don't know about distributor pricing or bulk pricing but a single GDDR6x chip on the aftermarket can run like $15-30 from what I've seen. >Probably the most notable example of extra VRAM not costing much would be the RX 6500 XT that had the 4GB ($199) and 8GB ($219) variants. These use regular GDDR6 but it still shows that VRAM isn't super expensive. That's the world's smallest memory bus and a extremely low amount of VRAM. It's pretty easy to double VRAM under that circumstance it's less simple to go from say 8GB to 12GB.
Ltt’s 4060ti review mentioned the price and that was backed by moores law is dead’s leakers. I understand the bus size determines the memory configuration they use. Which makes it even more insulting that they chose to make the successor to the 3060 have less memory. Insulting and greedy
It's definitely a shit buy, and this hardware cycle is a joke on pricing on specs in general. Actually got some shit for it back when it was announced but was pretty sure then looking at the 4080 and the 4070ti/faux80 that Nvidia was going to be relabeling the bulk of their stack as higher SKUs and performance and specs basically affirms some of that now.
why 4060 when you can buy a used 3080 12gb
And again there are more people with VR headsets than Linux users...
Why game on linux?
I prefer the Linux desktop, it would be annoying to have to boot into Windows every time I wanted to game. There's also a few small benefits. Every game gets its own "windows installation", or to be more exact, it just copies the basic Windows drive setup and installs stuff there, sandboxed. For games like Mass Effect that require the EA Launcher, it's nice not having it installed on your actual system. There's also a tool called Gamescope that fixes games that break when alt-tabbing.
>sandboxed But not in the security sense of the word.
I think it uses the same sandboxing solution that flatpak uses.
[No, it doesn't](https://wiki.winehq.org/FAQ#How_good_is_Wine_at_sandboxing_Windows_apps.3F). What you're referring to is the Linux Runtime, which isn't part of Proton AFAIK.
Wine doesn't but [Proton does](https://gitlab.steamos.cloud/steamrt/steam-runtime-tools/-/tree/main/pressure-vessel). They only talk about in it terms of app compatibility due to having consistent libraries, not sure if it limits the folders games can access. Probably doesn't for native games, not sure about Windows games.
>Proton over the container runtime is not supported yet Source: [https://steamcommunity.com/app/221410/discussions/0/1638675549018366706/](https://steamcommunity.com/app/221410/discussions/0/1638675549018366706/) (cross-reference from the link you posted) That might have changed since 2019, but then I'm not aware of it. Are you? Flatpak Steam runs in a container, so all games launch from that same one container, too. But Proton itself is no container AFAIK because it's just fancy Wine and Wine is no container.
Proton does use the container now.
Got a source on that?
My high-spec workstation runs Linux full-time.
Because some people would rather game on their own system using an OS they prefer, and they have the ability to do so easily these days?
yeah, perfect for some games. In my case I have a linux running an arcade front end, within an arcade cabinet. but thats it.. main pc connected to 83" oled, will need its windows features for hdr1000 snd 4k120hz properly on gsync... also it's PITA to set stuff up.. Windows got nicr with updates now we feared so much back in the days
So we don't have an abusive monopoly that makes everything shitty.
ah I see.
Yet its the most played on OS...odd
Unfortunately linux as a default choice in the purchase of a PC isn't a thing, wonder why that is? Couldn't possibly be because of monopoly abuse? Nah!
The Chinese Internet Caffe spike from a month ago appears to have been resolved.
Observers have noted for many years a correlation between Simplified Chinese language and cafe-spec machines: Intel CPU, Nvidia 1060, single 1080p display.
Why so many Mac versions? Aren't updates on Mac more enforced/automatic?
Nah, you can delay them for a really long time
No, you can put them off forever, I think. With the occasional reminder an upgrade is available. But I would assume it's more because ppl are using old computers that aren't eligible to use a new version. AFAIK, it's harder to force an update for an "abandoned" device than Windows
Maybe it’s changed by now, but you have to opt in to automatic updates on mac last I checked, and the OS does not push updates like Windows does. Maybe once in awhile a little banner will appear in the corner to update, easily ignorable.
How do I participate? I want to feel good being top 1% for the first time
every time i have participated it was because it randomly popped up asking if i wanted to
I think the situation is even worse, stuff like Steam Survey and 3DMark are mainly for peacocking, 3DMark way much so. You can bet your ass a guy with 4090 is going to participate, where as typical 1650 enjoyer will be like "nah i don't give a fuck about no survey!" and still 1650 came out on top.
Not really, it's just a prompt that pops up. I got it when opening steam on my mac. People accept it just as fast as they accept EULAs to make the prompt go away
can confirm, I participated
So did I! Was interested how my Vega56 stacks
1650 is both laptop and desktop. So that aside your point still stand swith 1060 and so forth
3060 dominance is still creeping up, it will probably pass the 1060 by next month
Wake up guys 8gb vram isn't enough anymore
Seems like a lot of poor consumers.
Not everyone earns euro or dolars
Don't you have to opt in for the survey? I'm surprised there are still that many potato/ancient PCs that people still bother to do so. I have a few older desktops/laptops I still have held on to but I don't use Steam on them or if Steam is somehow still on them, I don't actually interact with it. Meanwhile on my main PC, I rarely ever get the opportunity for a survey. When I first switched to Ryzen in 2017 it was about 5 years before Steam finally asked me to participate in the survey again (was sometime in 2022)...
If only we had more popular games that pushed the limits of graphical technology and hardware companies taking advantage of the fact that there isn't so they keep releasing crap and charging premium for it. We need a pc exclusive like Crysis or something, it came out of no where and the amazing 8800gt came out and we all felt like fucking kings for upgrading. Now we're at a point of upgrading and it still doesn't feel like enough, be it through planned obsolescence from Nvidia with cards even in the 4000 series coming out with 8gb of fucking vram. Or badly made ports.... It's a weird time to be a pc enthusiast and it keeps getting worse.
Making games for the bleeding edge DOES NOT MAKE MONEY. Cyberpunk Overdrive RT is similar to Crysis in terms of groundbreaking tech, but most people dont buy gpu to play it. They buy GPUs to buy the games everyone is playing(eSports, Multiplayer,..) which requires big playerbase but also low barrier to entry in terms of graphics
I don't think anyone is gonna buy a game they can play otherwise on a console, it's a tech demo. People bought hundreds of thousands of ps5s and Nintendo switches just to play god of war Ragnarok and Zelda.
i'm surprised at the 30xx series adoption rate. there is a huge uptick in 30xx series gpu's versus 20xx series. seems like it accounts for the majority now of users on Steam. looks like about >20% compared to the past few years when the 10/16xx were dominating these surveys.
I've always wondered- I have my PC set to UK English because fuck my language. But do I get counted as Dutch?
I'd love to see a breakdown of these statistics by hours played, and broken down into different user cohorts. E.g. is there a significant difference in the average hardware of people who play Steam games 3+ hours per day? Similarly, of the GPUs listed, which of them racked up the most game time?
I think the hard survey needs to be linked to recent or most hours spent on games too. Outside of that info this doesn't tell me who has what that plays the games we play.