New Steam survey results

R

Rangers

Legend
http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

It would appear to be proof AMD is doing pretty well with the RV770.

"Radeon HD4800 series" sits at 6.53% DX10 GPU share already. It's unfortunate they just pool all 4800 together rather than break it out. However I suspect the vast majority of those are 4850/70 (aren't the lower end models much newer to market anyway?). The 260 has 1.48% and the 280 1.22%, or 2.70% combined.


You can see just how unsuccessful AMD's prior gen was there. As well as Nvidias prior domination, combined 8800+8600=43.75% of all DX10 GPU's.

I added up all the previous AMD DX10 GPU's, excluding 4800 series (thats 2600+3870+2400+3600+3470+mobility2600+2900+3450+3200) and they only amounted to 13.05 % share!
 
Yeah that's the beginning of a comeback but they've got a lot of ground to cover still. Nvidia really dug in deep with G80. And G9x seems to be doing pretty ok too.
 
Heh and already 21.4% are DX10 systems (Vista + DX10 GPU). Of course that includes everything from an 8400GS upward (ie DX10 in name only).

Drama.
 
Hm, I wonder how the future x86 WARP "devices" would be classified as? :LOL:

You know -- for the casual gaming...
 
the survey also says that 1 in 5 users plays on a 27"(or bigger) screen.

now my main display is 24" but i have my plasma connected as a secondary (before, I ran 2x20") will the survey count both and as such, would it be skewed beyond recognition?

Just like it would count any X2 card as two independent GPU's just like it counts cores as CPU's instead of one physical CPU?
 
Florin said:
Heh and already 21.4% are DX10 systems (Vista + DX10 GPU). Of course that includes everything from an 8400GS upward (ie DX10 in name only).

Drama.
Click to expand...
And this is after 2+ years, systems here started selling with Vista vouchers roughly 2 1/4 years ago. Now Windows 7, Vista with lipstick and subtle incompatibilities, will launch within a year. Ain't market fragmentation grand?
 
Entropy said:
And this is after 2+ years, systems here started selling with Vista vouchers roughly 2 1/4 years ago. Now Windows 7, Vista with lipstick and subtle incompatibilities, will launch within a year. Ain't market fragmentation grand?
Click to expand...

I don't understand your market fragmentation comment. If you're referring to DX versions, DX11 will be available to both Vista and 7 so no fragmentation there. If you're referring to OS versions the Windows 95 through Windows XP time period was far more fragmented. Remember XP will exit mainstream support in Feb so, in theory 2009 games only "have" to support Vista and 7. Could you clarify?
 
Richard said:
I don't understand your market fragmentation comment. If you're referring to DX versions, DX11 will be available to both Vista and 7 so no fragmentation there. If you're referring to OS versions the Windows 95 through Windows XP time period was far more fragmented. Remember XP will exit mainstream support in Feb so, in theory 2009 games only "have" to support Vista and 7. Could you clarify?
Click to expand...
Of course I primarily made a cheap shot at the debacle that Vista+DX10 has represented. You are correct that Windows 7 does not equate to the same kind of discontinuity. However, it is a new OS version, and it is certain to introduce its own set of support issues.

That XP "will exit mainstream support" matters little - at the time of the introduction of Windows 7, it will still be the dominant PC platform. If you want your product to sell, you pretty damn well need to make sure that it runs well on XP for the foreseeable future. Since Windows 7 won't accellerate the migration, it simply adds yet another platform a developer needs to make sure the product supports.

Your "in theory 2009 games only "have" to support Vista and 7" isn't supported by any migration data whatsoever, and I'd contend, is simply wrong. That is not to say that the situation won't be possible to handle. But "more fragmented" is probably a fair assessment.
 
Actually as these stats go, I was really surprised to see how many DX10 systems there are out there (and even more, how much DX10 hardware). Contrary to the perception, the uptake to me seems quite fast. While 20% may seem low-ish for two years, realize that ~23% of people are using SM2.0 or lower hardware and fully 40% of people are still using single-core CPUs. Hell most people are still running in 1024x768, so the uptake for new video hardware in general has been pretty terrible by that logic ;)

Many recent games require better hardware than that (SM3.0 and dual-core or better CPUs), so it's not going to be unreasonable in a few years to require DX10 support, which is quicker than I expected. I suspect the consoles will hold this back for a while though since ports/cross-platform work will generally end up targeting DX9, or have bad DX10 implementations ;)
 
Steam is interesting though Andrew. There are games on it that don't require modern hardware. There are alot of people playing half life 1 , Doom , and even counter strike.
 
Entropy said:
That XP "will exit mainstream support" matters little - at the time of the introduction of Windows 7, it will still be the dominant PC platform. If you want your product to sell, you pretty damn well need to make sure that it runs well on XP for the foreseeable future.
Click to expand...

Obviously there's nothing actively stopping developers from supporting even MS-DOS 5 right now if they wanted. Under that light, every new Windows release will indeed increase fragmentation. I do find that kind of argumentation very uninteresting because there's no line in the sand. In reality, the line in the sand is there and is dictated by marketshare and support [from MS].

Games are already requiring XP SP3 (see GTA4) even though SP2 is still supported. Once MS stops mainstream XP support there will be less and less incentive to keep releasing games for a dead and potentially support-hell platform. Besides, XP is more than just one OS. It's Home/Pro + Media Centre editions (3 of them) + XP64 which is based on a different OS altogether.

Since Windows 7 won't accellerate the migration, it simply adds yet another platform a developer needs to make sure the product supports.
Click to expand...

I'd dispute that. If the many "Vista sucks, I'll wait for Windows 7" remarks, and "company x sees no value in deploying Vista, waits for W7" reports are any indication, migration [away from XP] will likely accelerate a lot once Windows 7 is released. Besides, MS has stated all Vista apps will run in Windows 7 so technically developers will only have to support Vista to target the last two Win versions, regardless of whether Windows 7 bombs or is the bestest Windows release EVA. Or as it's becoming increasingly obvious, just support DX11.
 
eastmen said:
Steam is interesting though Andrew. There are games on it that don't require modern hardware. There are alot of people playing half life 1 , Doom , and even counter strike.
Click to expand...
Definitely true, but if anything that makes me more surprised that such a reasonable fraction of users have up-to-date hardware and OSes, given the number of $500 Peggle-playing laptops that are probably influencing the statistics ;)
 
Andrew Lauritzen said:
Definitely true, but if anything that makes me more surprised that such a reasonable fraction of users have up-to-date hardware and OSes, given the number of $500 Peggle-playing laptops that are probably influencing the statistics ;)
Click to expand...

I have a p2 300 with 256 megs of ram still on steam playing doom :)
 
Andrew Lauritzen said:
Definitely true, but if anything that makes me more surprised that such a reasonable fraction of users have up-to-date hardware and OSes, given the number of $500 Peggle-playing laptops that are probably influencing the statistics ;)
Click to expand...

I loves me some peggle, that's for sure.
 
December numbers are up. Interesting numbers: XP32 dropping further (was -1.28% in Nov), Vista 64 increasing almost as much as the 32-bit version. Also nice increase for Radeon HD4.
 
Interesting,

Some interesting points in there. I really wish they broke things down farther. But I'm surprised to see that the HD 4800 series already has more share in Steam than the Geforce 9800 series (GT, GTX, GX2).

Also, 4800 series is still slightly outselling combined GTX 260+280 sales (in Steam). +0.46% for 4800 series versus +0.42% for GTX 2xx series. I really was expecting GTX 260 to have a better showing considering the price drops and the new drivers and the flood of reviews with the new drivers.

8800 series is seeing rapidly decreasing numbers but man it has such a huge headstart it should stay number 1 for a long time.

I'd say Nvidia and ATI are basically even in sales right now from the looks of it. Although ATI is probably still a bit better off with better margins.

Similar to the 8800 situation, the decrease of XP share is accelerating (down 1.01% from Aug-Sep and down 1.49% from Nov-Dec). I'll be a happy camper if I ever see all 32 bit systems decreasing and only 64 bit systems increasing. Oddly enough Windows 2000 gained some share. And XP 64 is still getting positive gains.

Then again, who knows how reflective STEAM survey is for the market as a whole. :p
 
Silent_Buddha said:
Some interesting points in there. I really wish they broke things down farther. But I'm surprised to see that the HD 4800 series already has more share in Steam than the Geforce 9800 series (GT, GTX, GX2).
Click to expand...

That's not surprising really. The dominance of the 8800 series set the stage for a poor showing of the 9800's. Many 8800 owners have held onto their still very good cards (including me). Since the 9800's were just a shrink/rename many owners of 8800GT/GTS/GTX did not upgrade.

Also, 4800 series is still slightly outselling combined GTX 260+280 sales (in Steam). +0.46% for 4800 series versus +0.42% for GTX 2xx series. I really was expecting GTX 260 to have a better showing considering the price drops and the new drivers and the flood of reviews with the new drivers.
Click to expand...

The 4800 series includes the much cheaper 4830 and 4850 variants though. The only price point overlap is 4870/GTX 260. AMD has a huge price advantage in the overall comparison and so should be seeing much higher numbers.

Then again, who knows how reflective STEAM survey is for the market as a whole. :p
Click to expand...

Indeed. But they really do need to break down the AMD numbers to make this easier.
 
willardjuice said:
Hmm? .24% (GTX 260) + .07% (GTX 280) = .31% or am I missing something?
Click to expand...

Ooops that's what happens when you try to do basic math at midnight while trying not to fall asleep. :p

In that case, the numbers for the GTX 2xx series look far worse. With a 0.31% increase compared to 0.46% for HD 4800 series.

BTW - didn't the GTX 2xx series launch and go on sale similar to the time HD 4850 went on sale? Actually wasn't it like slightly before 4850 was officially launched?

And yet, GTX 260 doesn't even show up in the charts until Oct. while GTX 280 doesn't even show up until Nov. Was sales for GTX 260 and 280 really THAT slow up until that point that they didn't even register in the survey?

And Triniboy, I totally agree. They really need to break down the numbers for the HD 4800 series. They've done so for all other ATI cards (3870, 3850 for example) and do so for Nvidia cards. Seems a bit odd.

Regards,
SB
 
Blame me on that one. They go by the driver string. There is only one driver string for all 4800 class Device ID's
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top