Steam Hardware Survey: November 2012

That Hardware Survey is very [H}ard is it ;) nice to know why we are getting so many console ports now . . .
 
WinRAR-45.28%
QuickTime-43.95%
No faith in avg steam user to be able to use steam box
 
Looks like too many people trying to play games on laptops without a real GPU.
 
None of those stats are very surprising. Well maybe the fact that the HD 3000 already has such significant penetration.
 
GPU-Marketshare.png


That really goes to show you how much people prefer laptops over desktops and how successful APUs have been in market penetration.

The discrete numbers look different, with nVidia top dog and AMD slipping a bit behind, although that too has mostly to do with the lack of AMD's response to Optimus.
 
If you drill down into the stats it's a bit more sensible in the GPU space.

The list is spammed with people using their work laptops and what not I suspect.
 
Assuming users aren't running multiple virus scanners, then 43% have anti-virus. Surprised about dual core and total hdd space and cpu speed. I guess most are casual gamers playing Plants vs Zombies with that chart topping HD 3000 ...
 
xorbe said:
Assuming users aren't running multiple virus scanners, then 43% have anti-virus. Surprised about dual core and total hdd space and cpu speed. I guess most are casual gamers playing Plants vs Zombies with that chart topping HD 3000 ...
Click to expand...

I didn't run one for the longest time.
 
ianken said:
If you drill down into the stats it's a bit more sensible in the GPU space.

The list is spammed with people using their work laptops and what not I suspect.
Click to expand...

thats what i was thinking...I wonder how it sees my XPS laptops dual gpu setup (onboard intel for regular use and then it kicks over to the nvidia 550 for games)
 
The only one that ever interests me is the 64 bit OS for windows. Come on Valve be adventurous and release a 64-bit client and game. At 70% of all OS used on Windows and 100% of OS X and Linux I think its time to do it!
 
Vicinity said:
If they use those stats for the Steambox, it's going to suck.
Click to expand...

Yeah kind of what I was thinking about, something like a 2.6Ghz i3, 4GB of ram, 320GB HD, and an Intel 3000 graphics chipset :D (although in fairness this is the "top" one simply due to dilution of options)
 
thinking about the intel think it has more do with EVERY NEW intel CPU has a intel GPU in it soo kinda makes them take the top

now what Steam needs to do is look if there is another GPU and if its its a dedicated or not
 
Elios said:
thinking about the intel think it has more do with EVERY NEW intel CPU has a intel GPU in it soo kinda makes them take the top

now what Steam needs to do is look if there is another GPU and if its its a dedicated or not
Click to expand...

That's what I'm thinking. Aren't all top end i7's HD3000's?
Probably just needs a little tweak in the detection algorithm.
 
The Steam survey enumerates all adapters, not just the primary. They should probably start sorting adapters into primary and secondary/tertiary/etc.
 
Some people really do play games with Intel graphics. I did for ages on GMA950s, my netbook's 3150, and I really seriously thought about just using a HD 4000 in the desktop I built a few weeks ago, but Intel is kinda a dork about not putting their less lame GPUs in lower end desktop CPUs so it was cheaper to get a low end CPU and lower end discrete graphics card.
 
I don't know how accurate this is (I question that fillrate & mem size should show as 128MB), but.... wow.

lZn5m.png


I'm pretty sure anyone with a 2500K and up isn't playing games on that. I'm certainly not, because the difference is staggering...

LJfBh.png
 
LeviathanZERO said:
I don't know how accurate this is (I question that fillrate & mem size should show as 128MB), but.... wow.

lZn5m.png


I'm pretty sure anyone with a 2500K and up isn't playing games on that. I'm certainly not, because the difference is staggering...

LJfBh.png
Click to expand...

I don't at all argue that most people who do the gaming thing with more conviction are not going to use an Intel anything. I also think the Steam stats are probably not super accurate either since people using Steam are more likely to be more serious about playing games, but really, most computers out there don't have dedicated graphics cards and, when they first are released, Intel graphics can run most stuff currently out at lower settings. A couple years old games are pretty much playable also now that Intel is over the whole thing with putting out graphics cards that don't even render stuff correctly.

Ugh, up to the 4500MHD actually getting stuff to even display without freaky glitches was a complete pain (and still was on the Atom's 3150 which was based on the GMA3100 that predates the 4500MHD).

Anyhow, its worth saying that more serious gaming on PC types of people are a smaller minority of computer buyers so Intel being so dominant (if Steam's stats are accurate) isn't actually a big surprise.
 
LeviathanZERO said:
That's what I'm thinking. Aren't all top end i7's HD3000's?
Probably just needs a little tweak in the detection algorithm.
Click to expand...

just a fast look and the number correlates with the % of Intel CPUs pretty close with in a few % or so any way

so id almost bet thats whats going on
 
The survey isn't compulsary. It's just people who choose to run it.

I tried on the laptop (with Nvidia optimus) and it only lists a single graphics adapter, not both.
 
SkribbelKat said:
I don't at all argue that most people who do the gaming thing with more conviction are not going to use an Intel anything. I also think the Steam stats are probably not super accurate either since people using Steam are more likely to be more serious about playing games, but really, most computers out there don't have dedicated graphics cards and, when they first are released, Intel graphics can run most stuff currently out at lower settings. A couple years old games are pretty much playable also now that Intel is over the whole thing with putting out graphics cards that don't even render stuff correctly.

Ugh, up to the 4500MHD actually getting stuff to even display without freaky glitches was a complete pain (and still was on the Atom's 3150 which was based on the GMA3100 that predates the 4500MHD).

Anyhow, its worth saying that more serious gaming on PC types of people are a smaller minority of computer buyers so Intel being so dominant (if Steam's stats are accurate) isn't actually a big surprise.
Click to expand...

Oh I wasn't disagreeing or anything, I just wanted to post those to add a little perspective on the huge delta of performance that exists between the 2 platforms(Dedicated card vs. on- board). The rest of the stats look about right, most PC's even cheaps ones come with 4GB of ram, so I think it's really just how they report the detection of video cards that needs some work.
 
LeviathanZERO said:
Oh I wasn't disagreeing or anything, I just wanted to post those to add a little perspective on the huge delta of performance that exists between the 2 platforms(Dedicated card vs. on- board). The rest of the stats look about right, most PC's even cheaps ones come with 4GB of ram, so I think it's really just how they report the detection of video cards that needs some work.
Click to expand...

Oh...but if you don't disagree, how can we get into a pointless, stupid argument? :p I bet if they wanted, they could just set their stats collection stuff to opt for a dedicated card as the one that gets counted. Meh, it probably isn't that simple though and there's all those SLI/Crossfire stuff that would confuse things further.
 
I would have assumed with all the digital media crap out there, hdd space would be going up. Wonder if Steam doesn't look at externals.
 
Just out of curiosity ... how do they do the survey ... is it built into my settings ... I don't recall ever being asked about the survey ... is it a setting I set long ago and just forgot about
 
SkribbelKat said:
Intel graphics can run most stuff currently out at lower settings. A couple years old games are pretty much playable also now that Intel is over the whole thing with putting out graphics cards that don't even render stuff correctly.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call sub 30 fps on lowest settings possible "playable". At this point you're better off playing games at youtube. That's enough for most current AAA "games" anyway.
 
pelo said:
GPU-Marketshare.png


That really goes to show you how much people prefer laptops over desktops and how successful APUs have been in market penetration.

The discrete numbers look different, with nVidia top dog and AMD slipping a bit behind, although that too has mostly to do with the lack of AMD's response to Optimus.
Click to expand...

Not according to the actual Steam hardware survey, which has the rates as follows:

53.13% - Nvidia
34.92% - AMD/ATI
11.53% - Intel
0.42% - Other

Though, like I said their detection seems kind of crap.
 
Only 4 GB of RAM? Seriously? We have the horsepower of a supercomputer from the previous decade and no one uses their PC for anything more than low end gaming and email?

Oh yeah, and Pr0n.
 
mrpc9886 said:
Only 4 GB of RAM? Seriously? We have the horsepower of a supercomputer from the previous decade and no one uses their PC for anything more than low end gaming and email?

Oh yeah, and Pr0n.
Click to expand...

Well, I haven't participated in this review. But I have 16 GB of RAM. =)
 
mrpc9886 said:
Only 4 GB of RAM? Seriously? We have the horsepower of a supercomputer from the previous decade and no one uses their PC for anything more than low end gaming and email?

Oh yeah, and Pr0n.
Click to expand...

23.43% is hardly representative.

Laptops obviously count in this survey. How many of them have more than 4GB? Do they need it?

I think you underestimate how much people would have paid in 2002 for a laptop that can casually stream 720p videos (2.67x the res of DVD) or store an entire television series in mkv files and not fill up the hard drive, all while staying cool. Now that's inexpensive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top