Intel, Nvidia top Steam Hardware Survey

The latest Steam Hardware & Software Survey is out, and it paints an interesting picture of the PC landscape—or, at least the part that interfaces with Valve’s content delivery platform. Let’s get right to the numbers, starting with CPUs. Unsurprisingly, Intel dominates, with a 72% slice of the pie. Almost exactly half of Steam users have dual-core CPUs, while 38% are running quads. The number of single-core users (7.5%) is more than double the number with greater than four cores.

On the graphics front, 47% of Steam users are running an Nvidia GPU. 36% have a Radeon under the hood, and 11% are stuck with Intel integrated graphics. The remaining 6% are filed under an “other” category that seems to have popped up in the last four months or so. I wonder if Virtu configurations or beta graphics drivers could be responsible for some of that total.

If we drill down into the graphics numbers, we see that Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 560 is the most popular GPU of the DirectX 11 generation. Its 10% share is notably higher than that of the next closest rival, the GeForce GTX 460, which sits at just under 6%. There’s only one AMD GPU in the top six: the Radeon HD 5770, which sits in third place at a little less than 5%.

Mid-range cards dominate the top of the standings, which should come as no surprise considering 95% of folks have their desktop resolution set at 1920×1080 or lower. DirectX 11 GPUs have the largest share, though, with over 41% to DirectX 10’s 37%.

There are a few interesting Windows software statistics in the mix, as well. 63% of users have Firefox installed, but less than 12% are running Chrome. Also, there are nearly as many folks running iTunes (31%) as there are with μTorrent installed (29%).

Comments closed
    • wujj123456
    • 7 years ago

    Looks like Steam users get more interesting things to do than playing with different browsers. FF does fulfill my need well…

    • Shobai
    • 7 years ago

    I wonder if the Steam Android app covers some of that 6%?

      • Martian
      • 7 years ago

      Not on my phone anymore, when it started launching itself to bother me with offers I’m not interested in I got rid of it.

    • Chrispy_
    • 7 years ago

    It’s really hard to see how many laptops there are compared to desktops/HTPC’s

    There are a few “mobility radeon” and “GTxxxM” chips shown, but no real pie-chart/timeline showing how people are supposedly defecting from desktop PC’s to mobile solutions.

    The introduction of Llano/Bobcat/Sandy Bridge brought even cheap non-gaming laptops into casual-gaming territory, and there’s no easy way to see the results of that.

    • shaurz
    • 7 years ago

    The best bit… Norton AntiVirus – 1.78% (LOL!)

    • Malphas
    • 7 years ago

    torquer could have phrased himself in a less inflammatory manner, but he’s basically right. Hearing all the repetitive pro-Linux/anti-Windows rhetoric is ridiculous. I’m assuming none of these same people remember what a hit-and-miss experience configuring a PC game was before Windows, Direct X, etc.

    If for the sake of discussion we entertain wild fantasies like Linux actually garnering siginificant desktop/gamer marketshare then then it would in some ways probably hark back to those bad old days due to the FOSS’ world obsession with insisting everything be a fragmented , disorganised mess in the name of “freedom” and “openness”.

    Stallman’s latest blog on Valve bringing Steam to Linux sums up what a backward and delusional mindset the FOSS folk have, where for some reason software being open source is valued far more highly than it actually being half decent. A few choice quotes:

    [quote<]Nonfree games (like other nonfree programs) are unethical because they deny freedom to their users. If you want freedom, one requisite for it is not having these games on your computer. That much is clear.[/quote<] [quote<]If you want to promote freedom, please take care not to talk about the availability of these games on GNU/Linux as support for our cause[/quote<]

      • A_Pickle
      • 7 years ago

      Stallman is an over-the-top open-source fundamentalist. Eric S. Raymond is far more practical.

      I like FOSS. I like the concept, I like the philosophy. But the philosophy is, in many cases, taken to an extreme level instead of being taken by baby-steps, compromises along the way. I don’t see what Stallman gains by being such an obstinate fellow — the simple fact of the matter is, open-source does not and cannot do everything that people, today, use computers to do. I would like to see a good, open-source video editing program. Such a program does not really exist, Adobe Premiere Elements blows KDenLive out of the water.

      So, they really can’t expect the whole world to stop using commercial software, and donate money to FOSS alternatives. That type of thinking has never, ever worked. Eric S. Raymond is far more pragmatic, urging (but not being listened to) the FOSS community to unify and standardize, to put more human resources towards making existing software packages more usable. I’m fully on-board with this, simply because usability AND a strong featureset will win out over commercial software in the end. Honestly, open-source doesn’t have very far to go — most open-source software is robust, capable, and reasonably easy-to-use.

      But man, did they bork up operating systems. It astonishes me how many people, all over the world, are reinventing the wheel to an absolutely negligible amount, in free-as-in-freedom OSes. How many different distros of Linux are there, that look, feel, and work EXACTLY the same? It boggles the mind, truthfully. And yet, the teams behind each of these will insist that theirs were legitimate arguments for not simply helping out another distribution. If you want to know why “the year of Linux” has never come, it’s because THEY CAN’T AGREE ON ANYTHING. If Linux was usable, compatible with Flash, Microsoft Office documents, Android, Windows Phone, iOS, Palm, printers, and network sharing with Windows, most people could be convinced to switch. But it’s NOT compatible with Flash, nor is it reliably able to read and save Microsoft Office documents. Configuring it to work with iOS and Windows Phone is a pain, and not everyone has drivers for it. Some of this falls back on lazy manufacturers, but some of it also falls on developers who have nothing to add to the FOSS community than another, cookie-cutter Linux distribution.

    • LaChupacabra
    • 7 years ago

    I think the interesting thing here is the massive jump of systems with Intel daul-core, DX10 Intel graphics and 4 gigs of ram 4 or 5 months ago. That makes it look like Ultrabooks are selling better than I thought. And that the people that buy them use them to play games on Steam.

    • Deanjo
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]The remaining 6% are filed under an "other" category [/quote<] Probably Linux/bsd users running wine.

      • Duck
      • 7 years ago

      6% would be waaaaaaaaaaaaay too high for that.

        • Deanjo
        • 7 years ago

        I wouldn’t be sure of that, 6% is roughly what WoW sees for linux users and past games like NWN were also a high percentage of linux users. Valve games are the more friendly games to get going under wine.

          • Duck
          • 7 years ago

          Look how many people have installed Adobe Flash Player (96.79%). Steam looking in the add/remove programs list running under wine would presumably record “not installed” for everything. So the number of these Linux users would have to be <3.21%.

          It says Steam is installed on 100% of systems to 2 decimal places. I wonder if it really checks if it is installed or not. If it does a real check that would record “not installed” under wine, these users would be <0.005% of total users in this case by using this data.

            • Deanjo
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<]add/remove programs list running under wine would presumably record "not installed" for everything.[/quote<] That isn't the case at all. When it comes to detecting add/remove programs list, wine emulates that very well. Belarc advisor in wine for example accurately reflects the installed applications under wine.

    • gmskking
    • 7 years ago

    And this surprises whom?

      • ew
      • 7 years ago

      Exactly. These numbers are published every month on the first of the month and the situation hasn’t really ever changed.

    • Bensam123
    • 7 years ago

    I’m sure the Intel share doesn’t take into account GPU on CPUs. So that’s not actually people who are necessarily stuck on integrated graphics, but may have a dedicated graphics card and on-CPU GPU.

    I’ve only been asked to submit my machine stats once, like when I first installed a long time ago. It has to make you wonder if they re-poll machines after a hardware upgrade or if it’s only done once… or if it simply doesn’t ask you after the first time. One has to question the integrity of the data if this is only done once on steam installation and it doesn’t take into account hardware upgrades. There are a lot of people that don’t completely reinstall when they upgrade their graphics card.

      • Narishma
      • 7 years ago

      I also have to question the way they scan for installed applications. Last time it asked me to, which was years ago, I looked at the report it generated and it was completely bogus, showing stuff I’ve never installed and missing obvious applications I often use.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        Yeah, my desktop has went through plenty of repair installations, but I haven’t done a full reinstall… for close to 8 years.

      • Myrmecophagavir
      • 7 years ago

      I’m fairly sure the survey is run once per month, after you’ve opted in. I’d also guess it checks the primary graphics adapter, so secondary GPUs wouldn’t count. In fact, most Intel CPU-embedded GPUs automatically get disabled in the presence of a PCI-E (etc) GPU, so they don’t even appear to the system.

        • Bensam123
        • 7 years ago

        Fairly sure and guessing isn’t knowing. Unless you work for Valve you’re just as much in the dark as rest of us.

        I’ve never heard of GPUs on CPUs being auto-disabled. I don’t know why you’d do that… programs like Lucids Virtu don’t work like that either.

          • homerdog
          • 7 years ago

          Some motherboards don’t support integrated GPUs at all. I’m surprised you never heard of the Intel P67 chipset. It was pretty popular.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            Yeah… Then they wont be counted… But they aren’t auto-disabled, they simply aren’t supported.

          • Myrmecophagavir
          • 7 years ago

          The language on the survey site is pretty clear. I can’t read it any other way than saying “we run the survey once per month”. The current notice explicitly points out that only systems that had previously opted in were asked to run the survey recently, due to a bug. That only makes sense if it works as I described. The opt-in happens when you install, but after that data will be silently uploaded. This is common with software; viz. Microsoft’s similar “Customer Experience Improvement Program” data mining tools in Visual Studio, Messenger, etc.

          I’m surprised you’ve not heard of such GPUs being automatically disabled. I’m typing on such a system right now, where the Clarkdale GPU disappeared when I added my Radeon 7970. In fact since you mention Virtu I’m surprised you haven’t read the Tech Report articles that explicitly mention this – that’s why the newer chipset revisions for Sandy Bridge were needed. The older ones apparently had no way of forcing the integrated GPU to remain visible to the system. It used to happen with integrated audio too, although AFAIK that’s far less common these days.

            • Bensam123
            • 7 years ago

            “Steam conducts a monthly survey to collect data about what kinds of computer hardware and software our customers are using. Participation in the survey is optional, and anonymous.”

            If you’re going to quote something, don’t change what is being quoted. I’ve only been opted for a option once as were people responding. Running the survey once a month would also indicate that there would be a option to take part in the survey, but there isn’t for people. So it also brings up the question of if the consent for the survey is only for one time or all time.

            Once a month could also refer to compiling their database into meaningful results, not the data collection itself too. So one could consent to the survey, have a snapshot at the time of the survey (which is what it does when you push OK) and then have it sent to the server for later compilation. It could mean it does both too.

      • squeeb
      • 7 years ago

      *edit, just read above comment.

    • Meadows
    • 7 years ago

    The “other” section might house other garbage, like S3 Chrome cards, too.

    • glacius555
    • 7 years ago

    Steam: “Participation in the survey is optional, and anonymous.”

    So do they send an email asking random people, coz I was never asked to participate?

      • holophrastic
      • 7 years ago

      it’s a popup, like the news. but I decided not to when I saw that it included the list of software installed. That’s something that I feel is too valuable to give away to steam. Which is a shame because I believe they make the industry better with my hardware selection information — but they don’t give the option to submit only that.

      • torquer
      • 7 years ago

      It asks you when you install it, and also randomly.

      • Bensam123
      • 7 years ago

      I’ve only been asked once and that was like when I first installed Steam close to 8 years ago…

      • moose17145
      • 7 years ago

      I had a popup like 3 months ago asking me if i would like to send in my data to steam for their survey. I have been asked a few other times as well. I thought that when you installed steam there was an option about if you just wanted steam to automatically send its data, ask you first, or just flat do not participate at all and dont bug you about it in the future. I could be wrong or maybe that was a few steam versions ago… but i seem to remember some kind of option in there along those lines…

    • willmore
    • 7 years ago

    I resent that Geoff implies that all intel graphics user are using integrated graphics. I’ll have you know that my i740 Starfighter is a removable card!

    • torquer
    • 7 years ago

    I would like to see how many Steam users there are on Gabe Newell’s beloved Linux instead of Windows. You know, since Linux is the future of PC gaming *eyeroll*

    I love listening to guys like him bite the hand that feeds them. If it wasn’t for Microsoft and Windows, Gabe would still be living in his mom’s basement and working part time at Hollywood Video.

    EDIT: Bring on the downrating. If it wasn’t for Microsoft and Windows, PC gaming wouldn’t be anywhere close to where it is today. Microsoft unified the hardware and API standards in a way none of the others like OpenGL could.

    You don’t have to like Windows, but if you’re a PC gamer, your hat should be off to Microsoft for at least that.

      • BobbinThreadbare
      • 7 years ago

      Yes lets all pledge allegiance to the corporations and never dare dissent from the all mighty goal of profit making.

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        Or we can make ridiculous statements and proclamations based on our own enormous egos, completely ignoring all fact and reality.

        Here’s looking at you, Linus Torvals and Gabe Newell.

        Maybe he should spend less time waxing political about the vagaries of unreleased OSes and more time releasing HL3.

          • BobbinThreadbare
          • 7 years ago

          Microsoft has one goal – making money.

          No one “owes” them anything. They’ve already paid.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            Literal commenter is literal. If you don’t think Microsoft deserves a large degree of credit for the evolution of PC gaming to its current state, you aren’t paying them due respect.

            The problem with fanboyism is that it causes people to be blind to the contributions, often significant, made by persons and entities with whom we have some kind of technoreligious disagreement. I prefer Nvidia, but I don’t discount the many contributions made by ATI to the graphics world (or Matrox, or S3 or anyone else along the path).

            I don’t like a lot of the stuff Gabe says, and I hate the fact that Valve takes forever to develop games, but I appreciate and respect what Steam has done for digital distribution.

            • BobbinThreadbare
            • 7 years ago

            I meant everything I said literally and figuratively. Microsoft did what they did to make money, and they made money. End of story. They didn’t do what they did to be nice. We don’t need to be nice to them, corporations don’t have feelings.

            Now the people involved maybe we should respect or honor, but not some abstract organization they belonged to.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            And theres nothing wrong with making money or being successful either. I didn’t say we should bow down to them or that every single thing they’ve done is wonderful. I’m saying that Mr Newell has a habit of attacking Microsoft specifically as it relates to his business, which is making PC games primarily and that during his rants conveniently ignores the contributions they’ve made. Just like Linus conveniently ignores Nvidia’s work with Linux. While not perfect, its better than many other hardware makers and certainly deserving of more than a finger and F U rant.

            And I’m saying a lot of “us” do not give proper credit to the good things they have done, instead smothering the good stuff under a blanket of blind nerd rage.

            Apple, Google, Microsoft, Sun, Nvidia, ATI, AMD, Intel – ALL of them have made significant contributions to our collective hobby, and ALL of them have also made serious mistakes. Reasonable people should be able to separate the two.

            Many of us are not reasonable in this regard. That is my only point.

          • bcronce
          • 7 years ago

          Valve doesn’t make game. The devels at Valve are allowed to come up with and create whatever they want. That’s how Portal/LFD and other were made.

          It’s quite organic and democratic.

        • cegras
        • 7 years ago

        I don’t understand your thinking. Do you make a point of being grumpy and begrudging every time you use a good product / service?

        • Star Brood
        • 7 years ago

        I hope that one day all games are funded on places like Kickstarter, then made available for free.

        Places like Garena can host these games, shifting the dependency on proprietary servers like Battle.net.

        Open source does have a future, unfortunately without funding people don’t have incentive, but thankfully places like Kickstarter exist. Maybe we can get a more user-friendly GUI for OpenGL developers so that cross-platform is easier to work with.

        Game engines could also be funded on Kickstarter so that there can be a really fine-tuned FPS, RTS, RPG (, etc.) engine available for free.

      • 5150
      • 7 years ago

      No fighting when a dude is fully torqued.

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        :p

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<] Microsoft unified the hardware and API standards in a way none of the others like OpenGL could.[/quote<] Facepalm, you know more devices support openGL then DX by a huge factor right? Also openGL is just one component, to directly compare the two you would have to look at openGL / openAL / SDL etc otherwise your are comparing one complete car to another cars wheel.

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        How many games in the last 5 years have been developed exclusively for OpenGL vs DirectX?

        If you don’t like using OpenGL as a comparative API/standard in the context of determining which has done more to unify *gaming* hardware, please offer another.

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          Take a look at pretty much any game not developed for windows or the xbox.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            So limiting to PC gaming which of course is the context here, we’ve got what – half a dozen games at most that have been ported or natively written for Linux or Mac?

        • Corrado
        • 7 years ago

        Right, but before DirectX, games all needed to have a specific sound driver loaded for each one. There wasn’t a common Sound API, or networking API, or controller API that could be programmed to to virtually guarantee compatibility with 90% of the market. Remember having to have a Gravis Gamepad because it was the only one with wide support? Or a Creative SB16 because the Turtle Beach cards weren’t supported by anything specifically?

          • torquer
          • 7 years ago

          Thank you!

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          Actually most sound cards out there had soundblaster emulation and joysticks used a standard port where no specific programming was required in DOS. It was windows that obscured the low level access to the hardware.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            So your vote is a return to per-game config.sys and autoexec.bat configurations, juggling the availability of the first 640K of memory, and games written specifically for one piece of hardware or another?

            Those days were a nightmare compared to today. Next I’m sure we’ll be hearing about the nerd hivemind’s collective nostalgia for COM and IRQ configurations.

            Bring on the dipswitches!

            • Deanjo
            • 7 years ago

            You seem to forget how dodgy and how many headaches pnp was in those days and how bad the drivers were for windows (thus why most games of the period still dropped to dos to run them), it was appropriately called “Plug and Pray” for good reason. In those days, Oh Almighty YES, give me back the jumpers and dips.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            Either you edited what you originally typed or I misread, so my response isn’t valid 🙂

            • bthylafh
            • 7 years ago

            Come on, you’re trolling. He specifically said “in those days” give him dips and jumpers.

            PROTIP: be less obvious.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            He either edited or I misread. Either way, my response no longer applies, so I removed it.

            For the record though anyone who is familiar with my posting knows I’m not a troll. Sure, I enhanced my original post for dramatic effect, but I absolutely believe what I am saying and I reject the hivemind cliche expected beliefs that MS is bad and Linux is good in all ways at all times. Its like this really messed up form of geek political correctness and I reject it.

            • bthylafh
            • 7 years ago

            The plug-n-pray days were fairly short and had mostly disappeared by the time of Win98SE.

            It probably was more aggravating, though, since it was less easy to force hardware into the proper config without those jumpers. Still, it’s a lot better today.

            • bthylafh
            • 7 years ago

            Actually most non-Creative cards’ SB emulation was crap, and almost none of them could emulate anything newer than an 8-bit SB Pro. There was also a lot more setup to do back in the Bad Old Days, like setting jumpers on the cards and then configuring statements in your config.sys and autoexec.bat, and /then/ telling each individual game about them. You’d have to hope you’d gotten the jumpers right and your sound card’s IRQ wasn’t tramping all over your parallel port’s, or that your game’s dev wasn’t braindead and expected you to have only one specific I/O port instead of letting you pick, or even better was when one game expected a certain port but another one expected something slightly different (0x220 versus 0x240, for instance).

            Then let’s talk about memory management, and how in the DOS days your memory was segmented into several types, such as the 640K conventional RAM, upper memory, the high memory area, extended, XMS, EMS, and sometimes you’d have a game that needed a DOS extender that’d follow either the VCPI or DPMI standards. Then unless your game had a DOS extender you’d have to optimize your memory map to make sure you had enough conventional RAM for it to start, and a lot of the time if it used a DOS extender you’d have to boot up with nothing running but the game or Doom (for instance) would run out of memory and crash.

            PC gamers have it a lot easier now than they did before most games were written for Win9x and newer, to say nothing of the devs not having to write their own drivers or purchase an expensive library.

            Piss on your rosy visions of the past. I’ve been there and I don’t miss it.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            ^ This.

      • sschaem
      • 7 years ago

      Borderline insane…. I’m not sure if your post frighten me or amuse me, its soooo out there.

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        I’ve yet to see anyone answer with anything other than “corporations are bad” and “microsoft is bad” groupthink. So, if you can prove me wrong about Microsoft’s contributions to PC gaming evolution, take a stab at it.

      • jdaven
      • 7 years ago

      Why does movement towards a non-MS platform anger/frighten you so much?

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        It does neither. I’m about as afraid of Linux replacing Windows as the PC gaming platform of choice as I am about cheese replacing gasoline as the most used automobile fuel.

          • Kurotetsu
          • 7 years ago

          You’re pretty clearly pissed off about it. At least enough to post a rant about how they’re not bowing down in worship of Microsoft enough. Admittedly it IS disappointing to see Gabe Newell jumping on the “WINDOWS 8 IS THE DEATH OF MICROSOFT” retard wagon before it actually comes out, but declaring Valve’s new Linux initiative a failure before THAT even gets out isn’t any better.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            I didn’t declare it a failure, I just referred to Linux as his “beloved” OS.

            I knew full well my dramatization would cause a hivemind meltdown, and that was really just for theater. However I do appreciate that you can see the meat of what I’m saying, even if you may disagree with my methods. Thanks for being reasonable (not sarcasm)

      • Frith
      • 7 years ago

      You seem to think that if Microsoft never existed the PC graphics market would not have advanced at all and we’d all be running something like DOS. In reality, what would have happened is that another company would have developed something similar to DirectX and PC graphics would have advanced at the same or better pace.

      In 1992 OS/2 was far more advanced than Windows 95, being considerably more stable and significantly faster. Tragically, Microsoft had already established its monopoly by then so OS/2 never took off. Had Microsoft not existed OS/2 would likely be the dominant operating system now and would likely integrate something similar to DirectX, only it would have likely come a lot sooner. As John Carmack once said, “it took Microsoft until version 8 to get DirectX right”, while IBM would probably have achieved the same thing a lot faster.

      Microsoft have always lagged behind the competition in terms of both development speed and quality of products and have done a lot more harm to the PC industry than they’ve done good.

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        So Microsoft has done more harm than good because in a theoretical alternate history someone might have done better?

        • jihadjoe
        • 7 years ago

        Except there would’ve been no OS/2 without Microsoft.

        OS/2 and Windows were developed in jointly by both IBM and Microsoft, with OS/2 borrowing heavily from the Windows UI, but adding a protected-mode codebase.

        Ultimately, OS/2’s lack of success falls on IBM, not Microsoft. IBM purposely kept OS/2 highly proprietary, with many drivers only available for their own PS/2 systems. IBM also insisted on running 286 16-bit protected mode, instead of supporting 386’s 32-bit virtual 8086 mode. IBM also changed the API, making OS/2 incompatible with many applications already being developed for Windows.

        As a result of these, on release of Windows 3.0 was significantly more advanced (32-bit virtual mode), supported more hardware, and had wider API compatibility than OS/2. You could say that Microsoft had established it’s position by the time OS/2 2.0 and Warp came out, but history suggests that was more IBM’s fault than anyone else’s. They certainly had the marketing muscle back then, had they not chosen to cripple their own software to give greater exclusivity to their PS/2 line of hardware.

      • Starfalcon
      • 7 years ago

      Actually Gabe wouldn’t be still working at hollywood video, they shut down in aug 2010. I know because I worked there for 7 years…and the company could not have been run by a bigger group of clueless individuals. Thing that made me mad was I found out in our last year open, our CEO got paid 450k plus a 450k bonus for doing an awesome job as he steered us directly into the iceberg of bankruptcy.

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        Yeah I had a friend that worked there for years. Too bad, they were better than Blockbuster

      • bcronce
      • 7 years ago

      So funny when people get so riled up from the lies of a troll.

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        Evidence of my dishonesty?

          • bcronce
          • 7 years ago

          /yawn

          Prove that you aren’t.

          Your original post was pretty good at trolling, but it detracts from the troll feeling when you try to defend your post. There is nothing to defend unless you actually believe it. In that case, I pity how sad of a person you must be.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            So I am a troll for expressing a perfectly reasonable (though apparently unpopular) position, but you can attack me personally (calling me a liar) and not have to defend yours?

            Hello pot.

      • Chun¢
      • 7 years ago

      Gabe is a Microsoft millionaire. If he says windows 8 sucks, well he knows windows better than I ever will.

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        So every stockholder who has made a million bucks off of Microsoft stock is suddenly intimately familiar with every product, design, and line of code?

        Wozniak co-founded Apple but hasn’t worked there for years. If he says the iWhatever sucks, does that make it so?

          • Visigoth
          • 7 years ago

          The difference is everything apple makes plainly sucks, while Linux clearly doesn’t.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            And you missed the point, obviously.

          • cegras
          • 7 years ago

          Ignore the downthumbs.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            Oh believe me I do. I love the hardware and tech community, but they’re a fickle and often cliche bunch. And, as I stated above, very politically correct and religious in their own ways.

            Its all so predictable and cliche. All of us should be able to be objective and celebrate the accomplishments of everyone who contributes to the industry, even if the contributor makes mistakes.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 7 years ago

      I mean, there are none right now, right? Or did I miss the Linux launch?

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        Well technically they do have Steam for Android, which is based on Linux.

        Hell I’m all for Steam on everything, and I’m happy to have them write every game for Windows and Linux. I don’t advocate for the rejection of any platform. I’m all about the hardware and good quality games. But, I’m not religiously devoted to any platform simply because its not the other guys’.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 7 years ago

          You know that Steam for Android is nothing like actual, real Steam, right?

      • TurtlePerson2
      • 7 years ago

      Gabe Newell worked at Microsoft.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 7 years ago

      You say that we shouldn’t care what Gabe Newell thinks just because he used to work there, right? That it was years ago and he’s like Woz who used to work at Apple, but doesn’t work there now. I can accept that. I mean, the fact that Newell has no reason to publicly bash Windows 8 unless he truly, truly hates it, well there’s that.

      But let’s go with your argument. Newell hasn’t worked at MS, so he has no intimate knowledge of the situation, right? Then I say that Microsoft hasn’t done a thing for PC gaming in years. Many, many years. Let’s review what they’ve done, shall we?

      Games for Windows Live. They tried to charge PC gamers for this abortion of a service the same way they did Xbox Live, but they were offering far fewer features. Games for Windows Live also enjoyed a very low priority until Steam showed up to force MS’s hand by revealing that, y’know what?, indie gaming is actually alive and kicking on PC’s. Games can sell well and make money for publishers, but not via GfWL. On Steam, they do exceedingly well according to not just Valve, but also the very companies that would know. Over time, public outcry has forced several developers to go from GfWL to Steamworks-based development because of all the inane crap that MS’s system nets you.

      Since the Xbox 360 released, they’ve canned, shrunk, and prioritized development from PC’s to their console exclusively. Whereas they used to support both platforms, they started shutting down all PC ports. Gears of War showed up on PC, but MS said no to GoW 2 and 3. Fable 1 and 3 showed up, but Fable 2 did not and by the time Fable 3 was being ported, it was actually such big news that MS was porting a game to PC that lots of gaming news sites made an insanely big deal about it and even LyingHead made a big to-do about how MS was getting “back into PC gaming.” Whereas Halo 1 came to PC and Halo 2 was used as a stick to force people to upgrade to Vista to play it (though it was entirely compatible with XP that came before), every Halo game since has been left unported. Any exclusivity arrangement (Call of Duty, Skyrim) for time-limited DLC or games or whatever, it never benefits the PC platform MS is supposedly helping. The focus is always squarely on just the Xbox platform. If MS is so vested and interested in PC gaming, why must we struggle to find a single example where MS even shared emphasis with PC gaming?

      MS kept Alan Wake off PC’s until their exclusivity contract finally ran out. At which point, Remedy released a port of everything Alan Wake on PC as quickly as possible because they went from having a failure to having success overnight. Simply by going Steam and PC.

      MS shut down Ensemble (because their console efforts sucked and they had a PC focus) and disbanded the Flight Simulator team. MS shut down FASA after they killed the Mechwarrior franchise. Before that, they bastardized it into the MechAssault franchise. Lest we forget that MS bought out Links team to merge them with the stunningly named MS Golf team, only to shut them down, too. They bought LyingHead and shifted them from PC development to consoles. When they bought Bungie, guess where their focus went? Not on PC games, I can tell you that.

      Technically, MS slowed DirectX development to a crawl and will ONLY reach DX 11.1 with Windows 8 and that’s only because they want some new features for Windows 8’s UI tech.

      In all honesty, I think the only thing that MS has done right by PC gaming in recent memory (since the 360’s release) was when they made the Xbox 360 wired controller compatible with PC’s. And the wireless transmitter that makes all Xbox 360 wireless peripherals compatible with PC’s. You’d think that would encourage them to treat PC’s like 360’s with their ports, but in fact… no, they’ve done even less than they did with the prior generation of Xbox.

      If you say I shouldn’t care what Newell thinks because he hasn’t worked for the company for years, then I say I shouldn’t give MS a free pass for what they did for PC gaming in yesteryear because again… they haven’t given a damn about improving PC gaming for years.

      If you want to know why people aren’t willing to give MS a free pass, there’s your reason. MS’s done enough by now to negate any good will the PC gamer of old might have given them.

      • odizzido
      • 7 years ago

      While what you say is correct, you assume someone else wouldn’t have done the same thing. Whether someone else would have done better is an unanswerable question, but MS only did a so-so job so I would say there is a decent chance things would have worked out better without MS.

      I’m not against windows for the most part. It’s pretty open, stable, and usable. The main problem I have with MS is how much they charge for their OS, though with W8 they seem to be more reasonable.

      • cheesyking
      • 7 years ago

      How is MS taking a 30% slice of software sales not biting the hand that feeds them?

      Without all the other software companies out there writing software to run on windows Bill and Steve would also still be living with mom & pop, maybe they’d rent a video from Gabe while on their way home from picking up their social security!

    • DancinJack
    • 7 years ago

    This reminds me, TR needs to do another hardware/software survey! We haven’t had one in years!

      • gmskking
      • 7 years ago

      Keep it updated or remove it

    • DeadOfKnight
    • 7 years ago

    GTX 560 Ti & 448 are nowhere to be seen on the list so I assume they’re included with the GTX 560 total, or perhaps they’re part of the “other” category for some reason.

    First!

      • Farting Bob
      • 7 years ago

      It’s all part of Nvidia’s random naming scheme. Have 17 graphics card all called GTX560 with some suffix, get top result in steam polls!

        • torquer
        • 7 years ago

        Why would Nvidia care which specific model of card got a “high score” in the steam hardware survey? The total number of Nvidia cards would remain the same, so I don’t see where they’d gain anything by this.

          • DancinJack
          • 7 years ago

          They don’t. He was being sarcastic.

            • torquer
            • 7 years ago

            Sorry my sarcasm filter was written by Microsoft :p

            EDIT: LOL @ people downrating me even when I poke fun at myself and MS fanboyism :p

            • Duck
            • 7 years ago

            Not sarcastic, more like facetious.

            • DancinJack
            • 7 years ago

            I almost said facetious. Honest.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This