Steam Hardware Survey Results

Evo

Tank
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
6,517
Reaction score
7
The latest results from the Steam Hardware Survey are now in, and with over 200,000 results the highlights according to Valve are.[br]
Just over 1% of respondents can run a DX10 path for graphics.[br]About 78% of you have microphones plugged in for voice communication. This will help you out a lot in TF2.[br]A little under 5% of you have upgraded to Vista.[br]Around 20% of your PCs are running multiple CPU cores.
[br]Check out all the results here.[br]In other news, Tomb Raider: Anniversary is now available on Steam for $29.95 and the RIP Trilogy is available for $17.95. Find out more about the RIP Trilogy here.[br]Update: Tomb Raider: Anniversary will not be available at all to Western European customers through Steam. Sorry about the inconvenience.
 
5% with Vista now, a lot less than I thought it would be. I think I'll download TR now, see if it's any good.
 
I was given a free copy of Vista by Microsoft and I used it for a month then went back to XP. I know quite a number of people who have done, or want to do this.
 
Haha, there's exactly one guy with a GenuineTMx86 motherboard. I find this very funny.
 
Have had Vista since early Jan :) Been great and won't go back to XP.
 
I'm in like the smallest groups for most of that.
 
8800s are popular! :|

8 Core CPUs? How? lol
 
Probably two Quadcores on a servermobo.

Only 3% of users have only cd-rom? About darn time. The Ram amounts are kind of surprising, I figured everyone had 2gb by now. Guess not.
 
Heh, only 1% of people ready for DX10? You can almost hear the Valve guys pushing implementing DX10 to the back of their minds...
 
Maybe if MS shows us side-by-side comparisons of practical dx10 vs dx9 demos? I haven't seen anything that makes me want to upgrade to Vista and dx10. Not even a little.
 
I upgraded to Vista (last month) when my POS computer crashed for the 5th time. Been working great so far.
 
Have had Vista since early Jan :) Been great and won't go back to XP.

agreed. with the latest driver from nvidia it has been great. some crashes, but stable at most the time. give it till the end of this year, and vista is the way to go.
 
For the last few weeks ive been dual booting with Vista and XP and im trying to find a way to delete/format the partition that Vista is on.

Vista is so annoying, it cant even play WMV files like wtf seriously!? Also everything is harder to use (they changed every around) and it generally more "noob friendly".
 
DX9 to 10 is actually a decent sized jump graphically. Age of Conan is a great example.

http://kotaku.com/gaming/directx/dx-9-vs-dx-10-care-much-242503.php

But I won't be upgrading for it. Dealing with Vista, its errors and bugs not to mention the insane requirements (yes, please take an entire GB of RAM to run the ****ing operating system) isn't worth it for me.

I have Vista Ultimate (Aero/Glass/Transparency, everything) running on a low/mid end laptop (brand new, but still) and it's only using 400 MB of RAM...maybe I'm just lucky? :-/
 
I have Vista Ultimate (Aero/Glass/Transparency, everything) running on a low/mid end laptop (brand new, but still) and it's only using 400 MB of RAM...maybe I'm just lucky? :-/
Vista isnt actually using all of that 1gig, it allocates it to processes which "may" run in the future. XP would just leave the memory free which is a waste of memory when you consider memorys there to be used and it'll offload the memory as needed, thus why under Vista you should see significantly less free memory than under XP. SUre Vista probably uses more memory but definetly that shouldnt be 1gb worth and if so theres issues somewhere. I'm guessing its probably just a cache that will be released as memory is needed.

Anyway I'm not on vista yet. My laptops still waiting on my upgrade redemption (BAH) and my desktop i havent gotten around to installing the copy the Uni provided.
 
If it's harder to use, how is it more noob friendly?

What i mean is that the menu's and the positioning of options is more noob friendly so that it appeals to the 'average' computer user where as people that know what they are doing have a lot more work to do the same thing because of the way that things have changed.
 
hmm I'm in the majority for almost all of the results. So at least valve won't leave me and my POS comp behind
 
The Ram amounts are kind of surprising, I figured everyone had 2gb by now. Guess not.
I know a total of 0 people IRL with 2 gigs of RAM. But then again, I don't know anyone else with Steam either.
 
Still a lot of people using radeon 9600s and geforce fx5200s :O
 
Note this is only a tiny proportion of the 13 million Steam users out there! :O
 
I know a total of 0 people IRL with 2 gigs of RAM. But then again, I don't know anyone else with Steam either.
Heh, well it depends if you know people getting a PC for now or the future. I assumed 2gigs of RAM is the direction soon enough so I got a laptop with that, fingers crossed it will be needed some time (or it was a waste D: )
 
Heh, well it depends if you know people getting a PC for now or the future. I assumed 2gigs of RAM is the direction soon enough so I got a laptop with that, fingers crossed it will be needed some time (or it was a waste D: )
Stupid future. I don't know how long more my graphics card is going to last me before I can't play new (Badly-optimised) games anymore. I started laughing when I saw that in FEAR, which has two settings menus, one for stuff run off your RAM and one for stuff run on off your GFX card, that the recommended settings for the former were all at the highest, and the recommended for the latter all at the lowest. D:
 
Dealing with Vista, its errors and bugs not to mention the insane requirements (yes, please take an entire GB of RAM to run the ****ing operating system) isn't worth it for me.
Vista uses no more RAM on a fresh start than XP does. Fact.

Vista isnt actually using all of that 1gig, it allocates it to processes which "may" run in the future.
True. It also caches a buttload of OS stuff which makes your computer faster, not slower.

XP would just leave the memory free
Not true. It doesn't use it anywhere near as intelligently, however.

I'm guessing its probably just a cache that will be released as memory is needed.
True for both, Windows will give up the memory if applications want to use it. You lose nothing by it caching this stuff.

Vista works ok here, and it's not slow - the one reason I'm sticking with it is that it's faster than XP, in fact. That said, it is currently still beta quality and I wouldn't recommend it, yet. Mostly I blame developers who've had years to get their software in line with the Windows spec (which has barely changed since Windows 2000!) so their software runs fine on Vista, and haven't. It's not hard, guys!
 
Vista uses no more RAM on a fresh start than XP does. Fact.

This depends on what you're running on startup and what skin/theme you're using. I know my Vista is using almost twice as much RAM on startup as my old XP on the same PC. That might be because I'm a sucker for shinny skins though...
 
Vista at startup for me uses 1.4GB, XP uses about the same.
 
Update: Tomb Raider: Anniversary will not be available at all to Western European customers through Steam. Sorry about the inconvenience.

Sorry, Euros.
 
Back
Top