They need to price this properly and all will be fine.
Looks like many do forgot, this is mid-cheap intended machine, not top tier tech race.
Still some depends on price, but I’m hyped for 500€ upgrade of whole 6yo rig, all in one, well build (not like most supermarket prebuild crap). I see flaws in Cube, may need to spend some 100€ extra for missing things (sdd to usb adapters, audio extractor from hdmi to 3.5jacks, extra sdcard for less intense data), still hyped.
Like this is cheap family car talks, Koenigsegg is 2 links to the left.
+1 for Koenigsegg. always have been some of the coolest cars around.
itt gamers act like anything that doesn’t do ray tracing is literally a commodore 64.
yall got some spoiled child ass ideas about hardware longevity, im over here on a 3gb 960 running most things just fine on lowered settings.
I remember playing a game, I think it was either Spiderman or Control with Ray Tracing on and I was like “wow, these are amazing!” Then I realized I didn’t actually turn it on. My dumb ass can’t tell the difference.
Exactly. One of the benefits of patient gaming (shoutout to !patientgamers@sh.itjust.works) is I don’t need top of the line hardware to enjoy my hobby. I’m sure the GabeCube will run multi-year old games very well.
Between working >40 hours a week and raising a kid I only really care if the game I spent 2 hours a week on is going to run and look good enough. If I have to play on high instead of ultra I’m not gonna have a meltdown.
People in this thread may be hardcore and spend a lot on their game consoles, but Valve’s statement is probably accurate, they’ve got the most data on computer hardware usage.
not to mention the joy of emulation, which older hardware does very well these days
Do you blame them? So many games these days force ray tracing. If your card can’t do that very well, then that game runs like crap.
What games? the overpriced crap pushed by big companies, that massively fails on using UE5, that do look worse than 10yo games with worse performance? Sure popular, but I’d be happy when they fails.
Fuck ea, ubi, actiblizz and all their copy-paste year to year shit!
Indies, too. Not just big publishers/developers using UE5.
Please do tell which games force ray tracing?
Indiana Jones and the Great Circle, The Last Caretaker, Squad, anything using UE5 and Lumen.
Alan Wake 2, Indiana Jones, Doom TDA, Stalker 2 all have no fallback lighting option and won’t work on PCs less capable than a Series S or Nintendo Switch 2.
Which is totally fine. Not every game has to support older hardware. Games are allowed to use “newer” tech.
Worth noting that I played Indy at 1600p/60 on an RTX 2080, which is a card from 2018 that I bought used for 200 bucks two years ago. This card can still run every single game out there and most of them extremely well, despite only having 8 GB of VRAM.
The whole debate is way overblown. This doesn’t mean that there aren’t games that could run a whole lot better, but overall, PC gamers with old hardware are still eating good.
I’m still chugging along with a 1070 Ti. Then again, I don’t play many top-of-the-line AAA titles these days. For example, I know Doom Eternal and Dark Ages won’t run on this card unless I mess around with tweaking ini files or something, but I wouldn’t bother.
True. But it doesn’t change the fact that it is still quite crap for a brand new gaming pc/console
Some modern games look like absolute dirty brown water trash when you lower the settings a ton
That’s HROT on max settings and it’s fucking amazing!
granted but i feel like the expectation there ought to be on the dev to not rely on resource intensive post processing gimmicks to make their game not look like trash
I rarely play the latest games, so that machine would be a good upgrade for me. Especially with the ability to load a different OS that I could use for both productivity and gaming.
Bump it to a bigger SSD and 64GB of RAM and I’ll be happy with it.
SteamOS in desktop mode is still pretty great for productivity, im pretty sure you can set it to automatically boot into desktop mode too.
I believe I saw that both were user upgradeable in YouTube videos, though I am curious what options they will have for purchase.
if you can find any RAM at a decent price at all
Not an issue limited to the Steam Machine, but yeah…
I’m sure it does, considering even my old busted laptop has hit the Steam hardware survey before, but it’s not one of my primary gaming PCs.
Another way of saying this is Steam Machine is slower than about 44 million gaming PCs (30% x 147 MAU, a very conservative number since that’s monthly and number of users instead of number of computers).
The fact that its GPU is slower than the 5 year old PS5’s, and it only has 8GB VRAM, makes me question Steam Machine’s longevity. And it apparently can’t do FSR4 cause it’s RDNA3.
It needs to be cheap.
I’m rocking a 2060 with an astounding 6GB VRAM… And the only game that gave me trouble so far is Clair Obscur. I had to close everything else, and use a mod to optimize the graphics.
I’ll blame the shitty Nvidia drivers for Linux though, cause there is no shared RAM, unlike on Windows. 8GB with an AMD card should be fine -if a bit limiting- for a generation, except for high end AAA gaming I guess.
I just replaced that exact card in my machine last week in preparation for dual booting Linux for the first time (I needed a new NVME as a Linux drive and figured I’d future-proof my setup at the same time with an RX 9070 XT for the native AMD drivers), and the only games that I hadn’t been able to run on medium-high settings had been unoptimized games, bad ports, and early access stuff like Monster Hunter: Wilds and Cities Skylines 2.
IMO 8 gigs is plenty for the average person, all things considered.
It has to be $400 or $500. If they, Valve, really think they’re sitting on a $800 or even a $1,000 machine then they’re lying to themselves.
I saw a really good video from someone who seemed very well-informed do a bill of materials analysis and come to the conclusion that it will be priced between $449 and $599 depending on how aggressive Valve wants to be, with the caveat that the current tariffs and RAM pricing could throw that off. The BOM for it totaled $425, from what I recall. It seemed like quite a bit better analysis than the wild guesses some other people have been throwing out, like $1200, etc.
Here, I found it in my history - someone here on Lemmy had recommended it to me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJI3qTb2ze8
I just ordered thebparts for a ~$900 gaming pc that boils down to Ryzen 7500F and Radeon 7600. I’ll believe “priced like a PC” to mean that.
Depends on Tarriffs. Unfortunately a $500 PC in 2024 can be like an $800 PC now due to Trumpflation.
This thing has 1/6th the ongoing utility cost of a spec’d out gaming pc (assuming 850w psu and something like 4090 and 7900x3d). Granted it’s not much to run a pc like that, like 15-20 a month, but running this thing will cost like $2-3 at most. Its power supply is 43% smaller than a ps5s.
Not gonna be the deciding factor for most people but something to consider. Does 4k120 really matter vs 4k60? Do you really need to turn every slider to ultra? In a world that is boiling with energy costs that are ever increasing?
Power optimization of chips has long been good enough to make that a completely moot point. Unless you’re doing something 100% of the time like crypto mining, or extremely pressed on the price of power, it doesn’t matter.
Even top of the line CPUs and GPUs idle at extremely low wattage.
Like running a video game at 4k120 with ray tracing for 4-6 hours straight? Bc that’s the use case, not idle
You’re getting a direct use out of that power, then. It’s also dependant on the hardware in it. I can run 4k gaming all day and never break 1kw, because I don’t use nVidia that just throws more and more power at their problems instead of engineering them away.
(even they still do not idle at crazy power usage, too)
You’re missing the point:
4090 with 7900x3d and 850w psu running games at max will generally use about 550w. The same build swapping in a rx 7900xtx is ever so slightly more economical at around 520w. Getting into pissing matches about brand loyalty (when they’re both companies that will ultimately fuck you over for another cent) is stupid, and doesn’t change that this box, if accurate to advertising, does 80% of the work they do at 140w under load (essentially 1/4 the power of your precious amd, which you’d still be using here btw).
It would matter more for the environment if tons of gamers actually had these GPUs but based on what valve is saying here (and the fact that as others have said they likely have very good statistics on the machines accessing steam) they likely don’t. Most fancy GPUs probably go to crypto farms and llm bullshit, which is dumb and means this doesn’t really matter I guess
It literally uses AMD, so you’re just being a fuckwit for saying there is no brand competition here…
In my humble opinion, 4k is a bit of a joke. I pick a high as possible frame rate over 4k any day of the week.
4K is just another dumb marketing jargon to make people think something is better than what we currently have.
I always bring up the argument of transitioning from VHS to DVD, there were vast improvements there in terms of quality. DVD is still around, why? Because it just does good enough and that’s what all anyone can ask for. Blu-Ray is incredibly old now and eventually will take DVD’s spot someday as the ‘good enough’ standard because really streaming is dependent on internet connection speed which can vary the quality which exits itself out of the argument.
And with every gaming generation that comes and goes, it has become harder and harder to notice any groundbreaking differences. It began to get harder when we went from PS3 - PS4 for example. It is now all about just resolutions and nothing else.
Yeah I tried playing Dispatch on my TV in 4k, and it sounded and felt like my laptop was going to catch on fire.
Lowered the TVs resolution to 1080p, and the game looks exactly the same and the fans barely even turn on.
That could be an optimization issue though I guess.
4k is 4x the resolution of 1080p, so that’s not totally surprising. Good thing you did this too, because I was reading some comments just the other day about people’s gaming laptops failing because of repeated/prolongued overheating.
Gaming laptops are notorious for dying from overheating. These things need to be meticulously maintained if you want to use them for their intended purpose for long.
With AAA game graphics, 4K is kind of silly.
It kind of makes sense on consoles with fixed hardware when the devs design specifically to hit that target.
On a PC, I think high framerate 1440p is a much more reasonable goal, but frame generation and upscaling are sold to consumers like some magical solution to poor performance instead.
Steam survey is monthly too and most people don’t have two computers
Source on RDNA3 on Linux not doing FSR4? Linux drivers are far ahead of Windows drivers.
Source is RDNA3 not being able to handle FP8 on any OS. It just can’t do FSR4.
There is an unofficial INT8 version of FSR4 that was leaked from AMD that works on RDNA3, but it’s a lot slower, and FSR4 is already pretty heavy.
Would FP8 be exposed as the VK_KHR_shader_float8 vulkan extension?
https://gpuopen.com/fidelityfx-super-resolution-4/
uses the hardware-accelerated feature of the AMD RDNA™ 4 architecture
AMD FidelityFX™ Super Resolution 4 upscaling requires an AMD Radeon RX 9000 Series GPU or better and can only be used on appropriate hardware.
Requirements
[FSR 4 Upscaling] AMD Radeon™ RX 9000 Series and above
It’s possible they add compatibility at a later time (with reduced performance and/or quality due to lack of hardware acceleration), but they haven’t announced anything like that currently
It’s not a hard requirement. Gamers have used the SDK to get FSR4 working on Steam Deck. Here’s a video of it in action.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95N6-2U5YQo
TL;DW – It’s good to have as an option but not necessarily better than FSR3 on Deck due to tradeoffs. Depends on the game.
The majority of gamers game at 1080p. Both on PCs, and especially on consoles. Most people’s TVs aren’t even big enough for people with average eyesight to see a difference between 1080p and 2160p.
So the question to ask is if the steam deck is too slow, because the steam machine at 1080p will solidly beat the steam deck at 800p.
If you want something faster for desktop, just build a matx mid tower with a 9070xt. It’ll cost double, but you’ll be able to game in 2160p.
Most people’s TVs aren’t even big enough for people with average eyesight to see a difference between 1080p and 2160p.
Why do people keep repeating something so easily disprovable? You can tell 1080p and 1440p apart on a laptop, let alone 1080p to 4k on a TV.
It’s all about PPI. Pixels per inch.
Usually when people post a source, the numbers say that at median screen sizes and distances from the screen, 4K isn’t perceptibly better than 1440p, and the person writing it up as an article has misunderstood the conclusion as saying 4K isn’t better than 1080p rather than that it isn’t better than 1440p. TVs tend not to be made with 1440p resolution, so upgrading from 1080p gets you right to 4K, skipping the sweet spot.
It really depends on your viewing distance and the size of the display. If you’re sitting 15 feet away fom a 55 inch TV, the difference between 1440p and 4k is going to be a lot less noticable than when you’re 2 feet from a 32 inch monitor.
they did the maths
It depends how far away you sit. And size (inches) of the TV. You sit closer to a laptop than a TV.
If you have 20/20 vision, you need to sit 2 meters away from a 55" to be able to tell the pixels apart. You might see some improvement from 4K but it wont be that significant. If you are 3-4 meters away, you need a bigger TV if you want to start thinking about gaming in 4K.
3 meters away from a 55" TV gives you a very poor 23 degree viewing angle, let alone 4. The maximum SMPTE recommended viewing distance for that screen size in 16:9 is 2.3m.
In other words, for 4K to stop being perceivable, you have to make your experience worse in other ways.
Yeah, we sit about 2 meters from our 100" projector screen lol
Oh definitely. I have a large TV because I understand that. I don’t know anyone else with a TV that actually sits that close though. Most people are gaming like 4-5 meters away.
I’m amazed they went for 4k.
It’s fake upscaled 4k from 1080, though.
Fascinating. Is that how the ps5 and Xbox whatever work?
“Outperforms 70% of Gaming PCs” is the sort of statistic you’d only quote if you thought it sounded more impressive than it actually was, and it already doesn’t sound impressive.
I knew it. I still clicked but I knew it. The sound in my head. It has never stopped.
Around the wuuuurld around nhe wuuurrrld
8 GB of VRAM and 16 GB of RAM … those are the specs of my almost 15 years old legacy machine. I doubt that the Steam Machine outperforms anything made in the last 5-10 years.
Which might just be 70% of gaming rigs. Steam would know best.
Steam would know best.
indeed!
https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam
seems like 16 GB ram and 8 GB vram is the most popular setup.
Also, wasn’t the ram upgradeable in the gabecube?
Yes RAM is upgradable using SODIMM modules I believe.
Why aren’t they using SOBRIGHT modules, are they stupid?
… I’m still waiting for SOFETCH format to catch on…
Yes RAM is upgradable using SODIMM modules I believe.
Yep, just like a regular gabeputer.
This is the moment where you realize that you are either uncommonly wealthy, or spend significantly more of your money on gaming pcs than most people do.
In the whole ~30 years I’m using computers now I probably owned 2-3 computers in total. I wouldn’t say I’m wealthy or spend too much money on PCs, I just get the best hardware available and use it as long as possible.
Hey I’m not saying too much money, I’m saying significantly more than what most people spend.
The first is a value/ethical/moral judgement, the second is just numbers, just objective reality.
8 gigs VRAM, 16 system RAM, 15 years ago?
Most GPUs 15 years ago had one or two gigs of VRAM.
As far as I can tell, no consumer grade, 8 gb VRAM gpus even existed in 2010.
(tho, i guess SLI and Crossfire were things people did back then… maybe you had a dual or even quad gpu system?)
The first 8 gig VRAM GPU was, I think, the Radeon 290X VAPOR-X, this thing:
https://videocardz.com/49757/sapphire-launch-radeon-r9-290x-vapor-x-8gb-ram
Launch MSRP of $650.
In 2014 dollars.
That’s roughly $880 in todays dollars.
Thats more expensive than me, right now, getting a 9070 (non xt), those are down to under $600, or not too far off of that, at this very moment.
Meanwhile, most AMD, budget conscious people are probably still gonna find that too pricey, and go for a 9060 XT, 16 gb version, as they’re closer to $350.
Either your specs are wrong, your recollectiom is wrong, or you’re spending a good deal more money on your pc builds than the average person.
A person who is able to save up and buy some.e pretty solid hardware, only occasionally?
That’s a sign of relative wealth, having the ability to save up and plan. Most people don’t have that, at least 25% of the US right now has more debt than wealth, ie negative equity, ie, theyre essentially debt slaves.
Most people are constantly needing to buy new, shitty shoes, that wear out, because they never have the budget margins to have any real savings, but they gotta keep walkin.
Like, I also am a person who will save up a good chunk of change, get a new solid machine that’ll last a while.
But I realize that that is far from common.
These figures just haven‘t gone up all that much over the last decade. Sure, you can get 128GB of RAM and 24GB of VRAM if you‘re willing to pay for it. But if you don‘t want to spend upwards of $5000 for your PC and you‘re maybe not that experienced, you might just look for a gaming rig from a vendor you‘ve heard of before and get 16GB RAM and 8GB VRAM even in 2025 with current-gen hardware.
I agree, I think it’s all about affordability and ease of use. If they can sell them for a nice price (somewhere around the price of a PS5 pro) and they’re easy to use I don’t see a reason why they wouldn’t sell. Hell, I might even buy one myself. I have a very old gaming pc (close to 10 years old now) and even though I’ve replaced some parts over the years (ram, GPU, storage), the core of it is still very outdated and it might almost be cheaper to switch to something like this then to upgrade my existing pc.
I’m always amazed how much you get taxed for prebuilts. This thing is at least $1k more than what I spent (with a similar config), and the CPU is still worse than the one I got lol.
Your own time to research, build, debug, service, and troubleshoot your own build is a tax as well.
Sure, doesn’t really take that long to research and build it though, and in my experience if you get a prebuilt, most people aren’t gonna like get it serviced or troubleshoot it with CS unless there’s something seriously wrong with it. They’ll likely just live with minor annoyances.
The only significant benefit IMO is if you really end up needing to RMA something (like if the motherboard is shot), you can just RMA the entire thing instead of figuring out which part is messed up. However, I’ve had mixed experiences RMAing laptops before, so I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s just as bad for desktops.
It’s definitely not worth $1k+ IMO. If I spent $1k more, I could’ve gotten a 5090.
I agree with you, but, I also realize that I’ve been building my own PCs and keeping up with the ins and outs of hardware/software design/developments since roughly the age of 14.
Most people don’t do that.
Most people (in the US) read write and think at a 5th or 6th grade level.
They just want box that make play video game go whee!
IMO if you “just want box that make play video game go whee,” you should just buy a console (the Steam Machine, for example). That’s literally their purpose.
Anyway, if you, for instance, just buy parts using recommended parts lists (some of the review sites have good enough builds, or you can just use the brain dead “build with AI” option on Newegg), you could probably just pay a computer store to build it for you for a lot cheaper than $1k.
Or you could just read the manuals and build it yourself since the manuals are usually pretty straightforward with pictures showing you what to do. It’s basically just an expensive LEGO set lol. Really, as long as you can read a manual with pictures and use a screwdriver you’re pretty much good.
Are we looking at the same link? The one I see is listed for $1099, so I’m not sure how you managed to spend $1k less.
Though anything with an Intel Ultra CPU should go right in the garbage, but that’s a different issue.
It’s configurable. The base model is $1k. Upgrading it goes upwards of $3k (dunno what the max is).
I doubt that the Steam Machine outperforms anything made in the last 5-10 years.
It’s all about the price… and the very recent years weren’t exactly kind in relation for price per performance
Must be nice to have such awesome 15yo machine, as my 6yo still have only 4gb vram (1650s).
If You had enough coins to buy top top tier 2010 rig with 8gb vram back then, You surely had much to upgrade it in 2015, 2020, and also did nice 5090 upgrade this year too! Who cares single 5090rtx do cost 4-6x than whole Gabecube is expected to cost.
Having industry market is awesome, You can find something ultra powered for Yourself, and I can do find some budget for myself too.
Ngl, I’m slightly jealous You’re in the top 30%, even top of the top of it these 30%, that article is NOT about.
Yeah, I admit, it was quite expensive. I never updated one single bit of it, except switching to a 1080 one or two years after buying it, though.
Many modern games can run on a 780m integrated AMD GPU(APU) with FSR and other bells and whistles enabled. One can run some games on a em680 - a palm-sized PC with underpowered 680m GPU. It is not gonna be 4k@60 of course. Could probably be 1080p@30 depending on release year, requirements and settings. But that is a super tiny computer with a built-in GPU that has more power over your typical GPU from 2015!
Now, Steam Machine is going to have a dedicated GPU that is around as powerful as 7600. With FMF and FSR it could probabaly do many games from 2020 to today at 4k@60. Hardware is not as bad as many think here. There are not so many games that require more than 8gb of VRAM. Maybe they also design SteamOS to work better with custom PCs that are more powerful than Steam Machines. Who knows? But so far, hardware is not so outdated and will be sufficient for a few years.
Do you think RAM is the only thing that factors into performance?..
So the engineer state that it can run ‘all games of the market’. Okay, cool, but at what kind of settings?
Like, it undermines the expectations of what one has when it comes to approaching the idea of having a PC to run games they want to see run flawlessly. I have been there before where I was not satisfied running games at Medium, hell, I wasn’t satisfied when I ran some games at even High. My targeted goal of building a machine, is if it can run at least 90% of games that I throw at it, with optimum performance. Suffice to say, I think I’ve achieved that.
If someone gets a Steam Machine and find that it cannot run that particular game someone buys the Steam Machine for at their preference, you’re going to see refunds flying around.
The Steam Machine development should’ve never went in with the concept of “just run games”, they should’ve went in with the concept of “run games and run them well”.
I have some of the same concerns with the Frame. It is a stabdalone headset, but also just runs Steam games; it’s not its own ecosystem like a Quest which has different versions for the headset vs what you stream from PC. But I haven’t seen much hands-on stuff other than a physical hardware breakdown; never anything running on it.
Like, how well would it run Half-Life Alyx vs how well it might run something like Gorn? How is it gonna handle informing users what games would actually run well in standalone vs PCVR streaming?
I mean the Steam deck can’t max out most games, and it’s been wildly successful.
The difference is, is that the Steam Deck is a handheld and for what it can do as a handheld is actually impressive. Given how the handheld market is dominated by Nintendo.
The Steam Machine is marketing itself as a console and a PC, two things in where it can be outclassed in.
I think the goal was 4K at 60 fps, but likely varying level of “detail” like you can probably do it with lower detailed settings rather than ultra or epic or what-have-you.
Just keep in mind that those targets are with FSR.
That’s great info, I had to read up on it
FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution) is an open-source technology from AMD that improves gaming performance by rendering games at a lower resolution and then upscaling the image to a higher resolution, with versions also including frame generation to increase frame rates.
