PC Gaming Market breakdown or something *spawn*

[eastmen]

Intresting bit:

''How many PC gamers have PCIe 3.0 drivers or faster? How about PCIe 4.0?

Gamers are typically very quick to adopt new technologies that offer improved performance, so most are probably already using at least a PCIe 3.0 NVMe SSD in their PC, and that's before DirectStorage has really taken off. So we think gamers will move quickly to PCIe 4.0 technology in a similar way.''

Explains why theres over 30 million RTX2060 and faster class sold by now, just for dGPU.

Yea I think it was always a fallacy that pc gaming had a huge tail behind it of crappy units. There are certainly games out there that offered compatibility with older pcs but the majority move forward quickly to adapt to new consoles.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Yea I think it was always a fallacy that pc gaming had a huge tail behind it of crappy units. There are certainly games out there that offered compatibility with older pcs but the majority move forward quickly to adapt to new consoles.

I don't know about "crappy", but the number of PC owners running higher-end hardware is very small. The Steam hardware survey shows less than 0.5% have a 3090 and under 2% a 3080, but almost 20% are running 1050, 1060 or 1650s. When you look at storage and CPUs and RAMs are a similar story. There is a sizeable chunk of people who are several generations behind, but that's just fine for the games they run.

 

[davis.anthony]

I don't know about "crappy", but the number of PC owners running higher-end hardware is very small. The Steam hardware survey shows less than 0.5% have a 3090 and under 2% a 3080, but almost 20% are running 1050, 1060 or 1650s. When you look at storage and CPUs and RAMs are a similar story. There is a sizeable chunk of people who are several generations behind, but that's just fine for the games they run.

I would imagine they're also happy to be several generations behind because most PC gamers don't care about running at high/ultra settings and will happily turn settings down to console quality (Or lower)

 

[Jay]

I would imagine they're also happy to be several generations behind because most PC gamers don't care about running at high/ultra settings and will happily turn settings down to console quality (Or lower)

The PC has the best hardware, and at the same time the worst and everything in between.
Its not contradictory or need some kind of leap of faith to understand either.

The higher end will adopt and upgrade more quickly.
The lower end will use it until it breaks.

 

[PSman1700]

I don't know about "crappy", but the number of PC owners running higher-end hardware is very small. The Steam hardware survey shows less than 0.5% have a 3090 and under 2% a 3080, but almost 20% are running 1050, 1060 or 1650s. When you look at storage and CPUs and RAMs are a similar story. There is a sizeable chunk of people who are several generations behind, but that's just fine for the games they run.

The Steam Survey has many times been under critics for its accuracy. Alex/DF has shared an article awhile ago there are actually more RTX2060S or better out there then there are current generation consoles combined in the same hardware class.
Dont forget either that there are about 100 million PS4's and a huge number OneS out there. Console gamers are generally on older hardware, probably more so than pc gamers.

I would imagine they're also happy to be several generations behind because most PC gamers don't care about running at high/ultra settings and will happily turn settings down to console quality (Or lower)

Dont thinkso, il side with kingston's statement that PC gamers are eager to upgrade and usually dont want to be stuck at console quality in games.

 

[see colon]

I don't know about "crappy", but the number of PC owners running higher-end hardware is very small. The Steam hardware survey shows less than 0.5% have a 3090 and under 2% a 3080, but almost 20% are running 1050, 1060 or 1650s. When you look at storage and CPUs and RAMs are a similar story. There is a sizeable chunk of people who are several generations behind, but that's just fine for the games they run.

About 20% of the steam userbase have an RTX card. Steam has about 120M monthly active users. That means about 24M steam users have an RTX card. PS5 hit 17M units in Feb this year.

Edit - fixed my math

 

[PSman1700]

About 20% of the steam userbase have an RTX card. Steam has about 120M monthly active users. That means about 18M steam users have an RTX card. PS5 hit 17M units in Feb this year.

On top of that, Steam isnt the only platform on pc either. Not every pc gamer uses it or shares the hardware states which is optional. Also, i wont believe RTX users are on low-end CPU's or mechanical hard disks or even SATA disks from 10+ years ago.
Alex's numbers where close to 24m for GPU's sold that were atleast as capable as the PS5's GPU some months ago. Not including gaming laptops which is a large market.

Alexander Battaglia on Twitter: "120 Million monthly active steam users and just around 20% RTX 2060 or better RTX GPUs on there according to the steam Hardware survey. With ~15% being RTX GPUs better than the 2060. So 24 Million DX12 U devices and very many of better or equal to than PS5/XSX RT (18 mil)." / Twitter

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I would imagine they're also happy to be several generations behind because most PC gamers don't care about running at high/ultra settings and will happily turn settings down to console quality (Or lower)

I don't know that there is any data to lean on here. I mean, when your economic situation means you can't necessarily afford what you might want, you make do. Or you go without.

About 20% of the steam userbase have an RTX card. Steam has about 120M monthly active users. That means about 18M steam users have an RTX card. PS5 hit 17M units in Feb this year.

Which is interesting because the 3000RTX series launched a few months before the current generation consoles. And Don't forget the Xbox!

 

[see colon]

Which is interesting because the 3000RTX series launched a few months before the current generation consoles. And Don't forget the Xbox!

Oh, I didn't. I also didn't forget that AMD has powerful GPUs that I didn't count. I simply wanted to show that there are likely a similar number of DX12U GPUs to the install base of a current generation of console. Steams hardware survey's are percentages, so the numbers can be deceptive.

Just like this fact. PSN has between 100-115M active users. Only about 17M PS5's have been sold. That means that 80%+ of Playstation games have a Radeon 7850 equivalent GPU.

 

[davis.anthony]

I don't know that there is any data to lean on here. I mean, when your economic situation means you can't necessarily afford what you might want, you make do. Or you go without.

I think the mid range of PC gamers have generally cared less about high/ultra which is why they never go for the high end.

And there's also an possibility that with there less difference between med/high/ultra these days there's even less of a reason to upgrade.

 

[snc]

Only about 17M PS5's have been sold.

Not that it change your calculations but we had week ago sony update and ps5 sold 19.3m

 

[davis.anthony]

Oh, I didn't. I also didn't forget that AMD has powerful GPUs that I didn't count. I simply wanted to show that there are likely a similar number of DX12U GPUs to the install base of a current generation of console. Steams hardware survey's are percentages, so the numbers can be deceptive.

Just like this fact. PSN has between 100-115M active users. Only about 17M PS5's have been sold. That means that 80%+ of Playstation games have a Radeon 7850 equivalent GPU.

There's 19.47 million PS5's currently and 14.43 million XSX's, so 33.9 million current 'next' gen consoles.

STEAM's survey also doesn't factor in those machines that have STEAM installed but are only used for mining (Yes I know a few like this)

Less than 20% of PC gamers have a PC equal too or slower than PS5 or XSX.

 

[function]

I don't know that there is any data to lean on here. I mean, when your economic situation means you can't necessarily afford what you might want, you make do. Or you go without.

This is me, pretty much. Moved from a GTX 680 2GB to a borrowed RX570 8GB a few months back (from my sample group of 1, AMD drivers drivers still aren't quite as stable as Nvidia). I play what fits the hardware reasonably well, and just queue games up for the future that really deserve better. Sharp textures and mostly solid 60 fps are the two things I really don't like giving up.

Couldn't justify an XSX / PS5 either, btw, as my < 1080p plasma wouldn't do them justice and I couldn't use them for none gaming / media stuff.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I think the mid range of PC gamers have generally cared less about high/ultra which is why they never go for the high end.

It was more the "most PC gamers don't care about running at high/ultra settings" statement. I'm sure there is a wide spectrum of how much people care about their PC's performance running certain games. But there is no information basis on which to generalise. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Silent_Buddha]

It was more the "most PC gamers don't care about running at high/ultra settings" statement. I'm sure there is a wide spectrum of how much people care about their PC's performance running certain games. But there is no information basis on which to generalise. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It not something that we'll ever know, although it would be fascinating if there was any data on it. But there's a percentage of people who will only ever game at the highest settings available and a percentage of those are very vocal whiners whenever a game doesn't run well at the very highest settings that their hardware can't handle.

There's also a percentage of people who will run any and all competitive games at the lowest settings possible in an attempt to gain a competitive edge. I get a kick out of some ultra competitive gamers that buy a 3080 Ti or 3090 Ti in order to run competitive multiplayer games at the lowest settings possible (other than resolution) in game.

Then there are percentages of people who will adjust settings so that their game runs at an acceptable performance level for them whether that be 30 fps, 60 fps, 120 fps, or higher.

Then there's a percentage of people who attempt to get locked framerate and those that don't care. A percentage of people that like VRR, a percentage of people who don't, and a percentage of people who don't have a VRR capable display.

Basically, as you were alluding to, "PC gamers" are a very diverse lot that can't easily be generalized. The list could go on and on about how one PC gamer prefers to do things X way while another PC gamer prefers to do things Y way.

It's also why "one size fits all" console gaming doesn't really impact PC gamers much.

Regards,
SB

 

[davis.anthony]

But there's a percentage of people who will only ever game at the highest settings available and a percentage of those are very vocal whiners whenever a game doesn't run well at the very highest settings that their hardware can't handle.

Regards,
SB

All I thought of when I read that was this:

 

[see colon]

There's 19.47 million PS5's currently and 14.43 million XSX's, so 33.9 million current 'next' gen consoles.

STEAM's survey also doesn't factor in those machines that have STEAM installed but are only used for mining (Yes I know a few like this)

Less than 20% of PC gamers have a PC equal too or slower than PS5 or XSX.

I'm not disagreeing with your numbers, but why are you adding PS5 and Series numbers together? Why do those 2 platforms get a combined total when compared to PC?

There is a general assertion that PC gamers are all running older hardware with Steam Survey used to justify this assertion. The math does not bear this out, because the install base to RTX cards alone (again, not counting equivalent AMD hardware at all) is roughly equal to the better selling current generation console. Adding the sales of Series and PS5 together to make it seam larger than the PC number makes at much sense as adding the Xbox numbers with higher end PC to claim that PS5 hasn't been keeping pace.

Here are some things, though. We know that nVidia has sold more than 20 million RTX cards because they passed that threshold about a year and a half ago. So they are definitely higher than that now. I'm sure some are used for mining. I'm sure some of those mining rigs also have Steam installed. I'm also sure there is a non-zero amount that are used for games but don't have steam installed. Think of the kids who get their first PC and only play Fortnite, Minecraft and Rocket League. But I'm also sure that some people have purchased PS5s or Series consoles and use them mainly to watch Netflix.

And less than 20% of PC gamers have a PC equal than PS5? Yeah, probably. But definitely less than 20% of Playstation gamers have a Playstation as fast as PS5.

 

[davis.anthony]

I'm not disagreeing with your numbers, but why are you adding PS5 and Series numbers together? Why do those 2 platforms get a combined total when compared to PC?

Why not? I have stated consoles in my previous replies, you decided to just use PS5.

You also deemed it fine to combine RTX2000 and 3000 series sales for your numbers.

There is a general assertion that PC gamers are all running older hardware with Steam Survey used to justify this assertion.

The STEAM survey is all we really have to go on and it indicates there are more PC's out there that are closer to the last generation PS4 Pro than they are to the current generation PS5.

The math does not bear this out, because the install base to RTX cards alone (again, not counting equivalent AMD hardware at all) is roughly equal to the better selling current generation console.

We know from DF videos that the low end RTX cards can't match PS5, so do we discount them from your 20% number?

So that rules out the RTX 3050, 2060 and maybe even the 2060s.

Those 3 GPU's alone account for 7.13% of the total on STEAM.

Adding the sales of Series and PS5 together to make it seam larger than the PC number makes at much sense as adding the Xbox numbers with higher end PC to claim that PS5 hasn't been keeping pace.

And yet you found it perfectly acceptable to combine RTX2000 and RTX 3000 cards.

Here are some things, though. We know that nVidia has sold more than 20 million RTX cards because they passed that threshold about a year and a half ago.

That figure also includes RTX GPU's used in laptops which depending on the model get creamed by PS5.

And less than 20% of PC gamers have a PC equal than PS5? Yeah, probably. But definitely less than 20% of Playstation gamers have a Playstation as fast as PS5.

At the rate PS5 is currently outselling PS4 that 20% will only be true for another 14 weeks or so.

I think when you look at all the variables it could be argued only 10-15% of all gaming PC's are as fast or faster than PS5.

Which when you think about the current state of hardware pricing, power and thermal performance is damn impressive.

 

[Dampf]

That figure also includes RTX GPU's used in laptops which depending on the model get creamed by PS5.

From a raw performance standpoint yes, but not with DLSS and Raytracing at the same time. For example, my 2060 laptop is able to achieve 60 FPS at 1440p with DLSS Performance and Raytraced reflections/translucency in Control, while PS5 is capped at 30 FPS with Raytracing and rendering at native 1440p and lower settings. So my laptop is able to get a much better experience compared to the PS5 in this game thanks to better RT acceleration and DLSS.

 

[davis.anthony]

From a raw performance standpoint yes, but not with DLSS and Raytracing at the same time. For example, my 2060 laptop is able to achieve 60 FPS at 1440p with DLSS Performance and Raytraced reflections/translucency in Control, while PS5 is capped at 30 FPS with Raytracing and rendering at native 1440p and lower settings. So my laptop is able to get a much better experience compared to the PS5 in this game thanks to better RT acceleration and DLSS.

You do know consoles have been upscaling for years right?

And is it not native 1440p on PS5 vs native 1080p with DLSS on your laptop?

So it would seem it's not a better experience due to better RT acceleration (DF have shown multiple times PS5 is equivalent to RTX2060/s in regard to RT acceleration and your laptop variant has a decent clock speed drop so would be even slower) and DLSS, but more about developer choice on PS5.

EDIT: Techpowerup has the RTX2060m (I'm assuming this is yours?) being 40% slower than the desktop variant so it's no where near PS5 in terms of RT or raster performance.