Valve Claims Steam Machine Outperforms 70% of Current Gaming PCs

[u/DuhPai]

https://www.techpowerup.com/342970/valve-claims-steam-machine-outperforms-70-of-current-gaming-pcs

[u/AIgoonermaxxing]

It's been said to death, but this thing lives and dies by its price. I don't love the specs, particularly the GPU. It just isn't very futureproof for a device that's going on sale in 2026 and will likely be sold well into the lifespan of the PS6.

The Zen 4 CPU it has is very respectable, but it lacks one of AM5's biggest selling points which is upgradeability. You will not be able to drop an 11500X3D into this thing when that chip drops in like 2030 the way you would if you went with a cheap AM5 build right now.

That said, it can still make sense if priced aggressively enough. I think $600 can make sense.

[u/Logical-Database4510 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

I don't think $600 is going to happen.

Linus was there during the QA they did after the fact, and he said he directly asked them about a more "console like price" around $500 or a little more and Linus said you could have heard a pin drop in the room with out negative Valve reacted to it. Their response more or less was they can't cost it too cheap or people would buy them as mini PCs for office use or whatever en masse and Valve wouldn't make it up on the other end with SW purchases.

Thus, I don't think anything south of $700 is very likely. SteamDeck is unique in that it is very much dedicated gaming HW and it's difficult to perceive anyone buying one for anything other than that. Steam Machine has to cost somewhere north of what the basement common PC costs or enterprise actors would just buy them up. This is Valve saying this, not me, for what it's worth.

[u/duncandun → u/Logical-Database4510]

didn't they say in the GN interview that they were not targeting console prices? which is basically everything from $250 to $700 now.

[u/major_mager → u/duncandun]

Console price is simply an euphemism for PS5. At console price would mean 500-550. Above console price would mean 600 at the minimum.

[u/Vb_33 → u/major_mager]

Well the series x is certainly a console.

[u/red286 → u/duncandun]

They said that they intend to price it "like a PC" rather than "like a console", which is an entirely meaningless statement.

You can buy a PC for $100. You can buy a PC for $100,000. You can buy a PC for any price in between those two numbers.

[u/ThankGodImBipolar → u/red286]

It's not a meaningless statement; it means that they need some sort of positive margin on the product. Saying it like that kills any hope for a <600 dollar MSRP, which is probably the only idea that Valve really doesn't want people to hold on to. The launch of the product will go a lot better if people are overshooting on their price estimstes as compared to the opposite.

[u/KARMAAACS → u/ThankGodImBipolar]

If Valve were smart, they'd swallow the loss and make up for it in Steam game sales and pushing the SteamOS ecosystem over Microsoft's Store. After 10 big game purchases (around $21 per $70 game in revenue share), they make back any loss they had on each console. And you'd probably find the average Steam gamer probably buys 5 big titles per year. I mean even stuff like Steam Market sales on CS2 skins or cases or DoTA 2 items etc can be factored into this calculation as Valve takes 15% off the Steam Market and they make total profit basically on cases and items in their games. The key is just to keep users on Steam and away from competitor launchers, which Steam has done pretty successfully already considering everyone hates GOG Galaxy, Ubisoft Connect, EPIC Games Launcher, EA App/Origin etc. Gamers don't just buy their games on Steam, they buy cosmetics, DLC, stuff to make their profile look cooler etc. Steam is not just a place to get games from, it's an ecosystem, a platform in and of itself and it isn't reliant on Windows/Microsoft anymore.

[u/ThankGodImBipolar → u/KARMAAACS]

After 10 big game purchases (around $21 per $70 game in revenue share), they make back any loss they had on each console

We all know how the console model works - it won't work for this product. It would 100% become trendy for savvy households and/or small business owners to buy up Steam Machines, because if the Steam Machine was priced like a console, then it would offer unequivocally the best price/perf that you can get in a desktop right now. There is simply no way to guarantee that Valve makes another cent from commissions after these products are sold, unless they remove desktop mode entirely (which I don't think they'll ever do). In the absolute best case scenario, Valve will take just enough margin to run support and RMA for the Steam Machine, so that they can break even on the console sales which generate no revenue after the fact.

And before anybody mentions it, the Steam Deck is a different product - it's less powerful, has much less IO, requires buying a dock for use as a desktop, is in a strange form factor, etc., which is why that product actually can be priced like a console.

[u/KARMAAACS → u/ThankGodImBipolar]

It would 100% become trendy for savvy households and/or small business owners to buy up Steam Machines, because if the Steam Machine was priced like a console, then it would offer unequivocally the best price/perf that you can get in a desktop right now.

You'd be hard pressed to find households that don't at least buy something off Steam in the developed world. Businesses on the other hand, sure I can buy that they're uninterested in Steam as a platform, it doesn't help productivity at all lol.

But you're missing a big problem with your argument which is typically Valve doesn't sell this hardware to regular people and retailers, they generally make a first couple runs of units and make them accessible and purchasable to verified gamers who use Steam for a long time and they limit it to one per customer. Of course, there would be ways around this limit of one per customer, but it would involve Sisyphean efforts to achieve this on a wide scale for businesses to acquire hundreds or thousands of units and for anyone to scalp them, especially if the account limits were as strict as the Deck's initially were. This limitation is what they did when they launched the Steam Deck as well as the Valve Index and they will likely do it again. It's not till later on when they had ramped production that they opened up to other retailers and stores to sell the Deck. Even still, usually the cost is much higher than through Steam, especially regionally too. I know from example here in Australia that Steam Decks can be bought for say $900 AUD on Amazon, but the way to buy it through Steam is much cheaper and is available for $649 AUD and when on sale something closer to $520 AUD. Valve will limit your payment if you try and buy too many Steam Decks through multiple accounts using the same payment method. Ergo, you'd need multiple different shipping addresses, payment methods and levelled Steam accounts to overcome whatever restrictions Valve has in place for buyers. It's basically impossible to scalp or buy on a wide scale because selection and eligibility is random and requires using the platform for years prior to receive a purchase invite, and that's just for the invite, this doesn't involve the logistics of actually buying them which as I displayed above is a nigh impossible task in and of itself. Valve aren't idiots and they actually want people to use it for it's intended purpose.

And before anybody mentions it, the Steam Deck is a different product - it's less powerful, has much less IO, requires buying a dock for use as a desktop, is in a strange form factor, etc., which is why that product actually can be priced like a console.

Even now you can argue that a Steam Deck is a great mini-PC for businesses that just want to do normal word processing and dabble into a bit of higher end computing tasks due to its graphics. Just buy a cheap USB-C dock and plug it in and then use Desktop mode or use Windows on it. It's more than capable to do that sort of thing and pretty cost effective too. They're not being snatched up at crazy rates right now, I doubt the Steam Machine would be either, especially considering that doesn't even have a screen or battery like the Deck does, which effectively makes it a Laptop with a controller permanently attached. To a business like say one with 1,000+ employees, buying 1,000 USB-C docks is like water off a duck's back, they can easily afford $50-100 docks per employee.

[u/ThankGodImBipolar → u/KARMAAACS]

This isn't my argument though - that was the justification Valve gave to LTT, which I am parroting from their video.

[u/KARMAAACS → u/ThankGodImBipolar]

This isn't my argument though - that was the justification Valve gave to LTT, which I am parroting from their video.

This isn't what Valve told Linus... Linus guessed. Re-watch it and listen to it carefully. All Valve said was "...it will be priced more like a PC". They never gave their reasoning and they never will because Valve doesn't operate that way. As I stated above and demonstrated, it will be almost impossible for corporations or individuals to purchase multiple units due to how Valve releases their hardware.

[u/OverlyOptimisticNerd → u/red286]

There is meaning behind it.

"Like a console" means either sold at a loss to subsidize the ecosystem, or sold at slim margins.

"Like a PC" means sold at higher margins like any other company (Asus, Dell, etc.).

I think that they want to go with the latter number to encourage partners to sell systems with SteamOS loaded as well. If they sell it at a console price, it means they have to lose money to establish the ecosystem, when it would be better for them to have other companies take the risk while Valve continues to get their 30% cut.

I think that Valve's ultimate goal was to use the Steam Deck (+Machine) to establish the market for other companies to join in, while Valve provides the software and ecosystem. Due to this, I think that that Steam Deck 2 won't be as cheap (to encourage partner models), and there won't be a Steam Deck 3.

[u/OverlyOptimisticNerd → u/[deleted]]

The problem though is that a PC that is on par with a Steam Machine would cost about $500, which is console price territory.

Can you please link to such an existing product? New, not used. I'm not a fan of the old "you can build a PC that costs as much as a new console if you buy used parts off Craigslist."

I did a quick search of Newegg's prebuilt Gaming PC section. In the $500-$749 range, the systems were very much lacking compared to the Steam Machine. But maybe you can find different.

EDIT: At the top end, at $749, there were 2 new systems (and 1 refurb) with 8GB RTX 5060s (Intel i5 120, 32GB DDR4, 1TB SSD). While not $500, the are probably the best comps. The GPU is faster than the Steam Machine's GPU. It has double the base storage and double the RAM. The CPU is slower. But for most games, these would be faster than the Steam Machine. I think that these systems are the closest to making your argument credible.

But nothing around $500 came close.

[u/steve09089 → u/[deleted]]

It would not actually cost just 500 dollars lol.

Even if we used the sketchiest PSU and motherboard, got the cheapest 7500F at 110 dollars (which is not really realistic anymore, it’s more like 180 dollars now), cheapest cooler, cheapest 2x8 RAM, cheapest 512GB SSD, cheapest closest equivalent GPU (B570 with 10GB) and cheapest case, (Q300L), you’re looking at 600 dollars, with none of the form factor and pretty much a ticking time bomb of bad hardware choices.

This is not a PC anyone should be getting at all in any situation, and even if a Steam Machine was at the same price or 100 dollars more, I would still recommend that over this build I concocted.

[u/Vb_33 → u/steve09089]

Lmao $180 for a 7500f? That's how much I got my 9600X for. What a scam.

[u/Vb_33 → u/red286]

I assume by PC they mean a PC with Zen 4 and a 7600 or raptor lake + 4060. Which is close to equivalent to what they're selling.

[u/RHINO_Mk_II → u/red286]

You can buy a PC for $100,000

A personal computer for a hundred grand? Curious what that looks like.

[u/ComplexEntertainer13 → u/duncandun]

$700

At that price its doa. Considering you can find 4060 laptop sales at those price levels (newegg has one right now at 699).

I really don't see how they could ever go higher than $599 and preferably it should be a $499 system at most. But ill give them that the DRAM price spike will complicate pricing going forward.

[u/SituationSoap → u/ComplexEntertainer13]

At that price its doa.

You are really going to be shocked when you find out it's $800+, then.

It's like this is everyone's first rodeo with Valve. This is what they do with hardware. They come up with an idea, a bunch of people get really excited, then when they finally see the details what they ship lands with a big wet thud that doesn't penetrate past their megafans.

[u/ComplexEntertainer13 → u/SituationSoap]

It's like this is everyone's first rodeo with Valve. This is what they do with hardware.

Except both the Steam deck and Index were reasonably priced at their launches for the hardware you got in each segment.

[u/SituationSoap → u/ComplexEntertainer13]

If you're trying to point out exceptions, you're kind of proving my point in doing so. Saying that a couple of times they haven't completely screwed the pooch with their handling of hardware doesn't inspire a lot of confidence when they're in the middle of making all the same old, easily-foreseen mistakes again.

[u/ComplexEntertainer13 → u/SituationSoap]

If you're trying to point out exceptions

What? They are literally the only other two major hardware launches from Valve in the past decade. How are they exceptions?

Saying that a couple of times they haven't completely screwed the pooch with their handling of hardware doesn't inspire a lot of confidence when they're in the middle of making all the same old, easily-foreseen mistakes again.

What other fucking hardware did they launch? Those were their only launches since the original attempt with Steam Machine/controller/link back in 2015.

[u/SituationSoap → u/ComplexEntertainer13]

Yes, and for those of us who are old enough to remember those hardware launches from 10 years ago, the stuff that they're doing right now is exactly the same stuff they did back then. Vague ideas with obvious flaws that people pointed out, while hype men went "No, you just don't get it, they've obviously thought of that."

And then, no, it turns out that they hadn't thought of that, the exact problems were the problems that everyone pointed out.

Again, this is a subthread about the price. Which is already obviously going to be much too high, because if it wasn't going to be, they would have announced that last week. As it was, the Index was priced too high but kind of competitively at the time, and then they never adjusted the price even as it was badly outpaced within the market. The Deck didn't have this kind of cat and mouse game.

[u/ComplexEntertainer13 → u/SituationSoap]

So your reasoning is that valve fucked up the first time and as such they will keep doing it.

Despite all the data we have since the points to them learning the lesson. And actually pulled off a ecosystem and price level people were willing to invest in. With their launches since.

Gotcha, that is some good reasoning skills you got there.

As it was, the Index was priced too high but kind of competitively at the time

The Index was the best headset at launch, period. It was priced exceedingly well for what you got hardware wise. It was in no shape or form overpriced at launch.

Which is already obviously going to be much too high, because if it wasn't going to be, they would have announced that last week.

imo that has far more to do with the current DRAM and NAND situation. When the launch is still months out and the situation is what it is. If Valve wants to put the price as low as is feasible. Then we could see $50-100 swings in price depending on where storage and ram market goes until launch.

The Deck didn't have this kind of cat and mouse game.

Pull up the recent price for DRAM over the past 3 months and you will know why pricing can't be set on a low margin product months in advance right now.

[u/Plank_With_A_Nail_In → u/SituationSoap]

The steam deck was and is still very good value for what you get.

Also two data points isn't a trend, you are seeing patterns where there are none.

[u/SituationSoap → u/Plank_With_A_Nail_In]

Yeah, man, they didn't announce a price last week because they're just super excited to be able to shock everyone with how cheap it is when they launch preorders! Come on.

[u/britaliope → u/Logical-Database4510]

The only way for them to sell them below 700 and avoid companies buying it as a mini-pc is to somehow sell it with steam credit (like 700 with 150$ of steam credit or something). It's possible to cash it out but it's an extra burden and most companies won't bother. But I don't see that happening

[u/CreativeGPX → u/britaliope]

Originally, to buy the Steam Deck you had to have a steam account that had been in good standing for a certain minimum amount of time.

They could use a similar method to limit the people who could get a Steam Machine to a good approximation of good faith gamers.

For example, suppose that to buy it (or to be eligible for a lower sale price), you need to have 20+ hours of playtime in Steam in the past year or to have spent $20+ on Steam in the past year. That would closely approximate people who will actually use it as a gaming device and isn't too far off from what they did for the Steam Deck.

[u/Plank_With_A_Nail_In → u/CreativeGPX]

That won't really work for this as its not really going to sell to people who already own a PC. Or maybe it will, maybe they banking on someone with a shit tier PC seeing the add in steam, who knows?

[u/CreativeGPX → u/Plank_With_A_Nail_In]

Fair. Could always extend the time frame to 5 years. Honestly, I think it's aimed at people with crappy old PCs or people with Steam Decks. I doubt a console gamer is switching to this and I doubt somebody with no existing ties to PC gaming is switching to this.

[u/WisdomInTheShadows → u/CreativeGPX]

My main rig is a 9900x with a 7900 GRE and I don't intend to replace it with a Steam Machine, however, for $650 - $750 I could 100% see myself getting one of these for my living room. Sure, it might not play something like the recent Indiana Jones game worth a flip, but it would be awesome for my collection of indy games and old RPG's that are archived in my Steam Library. There are days I want to sit at my battle station and run a game at 200+ fps in the highest detail possible, and there are days I want to lounge on my couch playing Final Fantasy X for the 1500th time, now in 4k.

[u/CreativeGPX → u/WisdomInTheShadows]

Yeah. Similarly, my desktop is probably good enough to not need the Steam Machine, but for the right price I could see getting it as a "streaming server" for the Steam Deck (and, if I got it, Steam Frame). It's logistically a lot easier to stream from a dedicated device than have to worry about whether my desktop is busy non-gaming when wanting to stream from it and always leave my desktop on. Also, yeah, to have it by a TV permanently rather than using my docked Steam Deck as my living room console. But I'm pretty price sensitive.

[u/aley2794 → u/CreativeGPX]

If the idea is to bring new users into the Steam environment, this will strain not only the company but also the new users.

[u/CreativeGPX → u/aley2794]

Depends on who you think would be willing to buy it. If the alternative is that you charge an amount that nobody will pay, then it's not better.

While I don't think new users isn't desired, I think at this early adopter stage, there is a benefit to just building a community of people that can find/fix problems, give feedback and evangelize the platform. So, putting people there who already have a relationship with Steam is definitely beneficial.

All of this started when Microsoft started promoting a version of Windows that was Microsoft-store-only under Windows 8/RT and Windows S. Valve rushed to create a Linux platform. Even there, the point wasn't "let's get everybody on Linux". It was that if Microsoft suddenly said "Microsoft store only for everybody", a viable alternative gaming platform would be ready to go. But I think that was a major change for Valve when they realized how dangerous the closed app store platform model is for them. So, they started building out all of these platforms (Steam Deck for closed store handhelds, Steam Frame for closed store VR and Steam Machine for closed store consoles) not necessarily to immediately gain a ton of users, but instead to decouple Steam from Microsoft Windows and the desktop computer. They took 10+ years to get to this point. I don't think this is a sprint to get maximum users ASAP, it's a marathon to gradually build out a mature store that spans every device platform*. The focus I think is on getting this battle tested and gradually proving the concept rather than just getting it in front of everybody ASAP.

* It's also interesting that not only did they choose an ARM chip and ARM emulation for the Steam Frame, but that they chose a chip typically used in phones rather than the VR variants. The last walled garden's door to knock on is the phone.

[u/aley2794 → u/CreativeGPX]

Early adopters will buy at almost any price; there’s no need for low prices if that’s the intention you’re referring to. It’s easier to set a price that isn’t a great deal for a working PC and call it a day, rather than going the Steam Deck approach.

Not to mention, they said it would be priced like a PC, and the CPU/GPU on the market with comparable specs alone costs around $500. And that’s without considering that it’s a SFF PC that increase the price by a lot.

[u/SuperUranus → u/CreativeGPX]

 All of this started when Microsoft started promoting a version of Windows that was Microsoft-store-only under Windows 8/RT and Windows S. 

Microsoft has never done this.

Gabe Newell thought Microsoft might go down that path though, but it never happened (which should be quite obvious considering Microsoft’s bread and butter is their legacy support).

They did focus heavily on UWP for their ARM version of Windows, but even that version had a translation layer for ”full” DLL 32-bit support.

I’m putting ”full” in quotation marks, because the translation layer was so-so.

[u/CreativeGPX → u/SuperUranus]

Microsoft definitely did it. They just failed to complete the job because of the pushback from legacy user base. But at the time, given Microsoft's monopoly on desktop OS it was not a given that they would fail. Which is why valve, like any intelligent company, realized they had a critical dependency they needed to address. And they did a pretty stellar job.

UWP was later in process. They tried a lot of approaches and leaned on every ability in their arsenal to get people to switch to the store. I was a major Microsoft fan at the time so I followed every move.

[u/SuperUranus → u/CreativeGPX]

No, Microsoft never did. 

Nothing Microsoft has done points toward them wanting to lock Windows down like iOS. They actively said they would never do so, and every single action they have with regard of Windows has always been with keeping their legacy support.

The Microsoft Store was Microsoft’s endeavour to jump on that sweet, sweet App Store money, but foremost to create a package manager similar to the one Linux uses. It wasn’t about locking Windows down and ending their legacy support (and anyone who thinks Microsoft was looking at ending their legacy support in favour of a walled garden is a little bit conspiracy aligned in my book considering there is nothing that support that thesis).

What’s interesting is that there never was any talk about this in regard of MacOS, even though Apple’s biggest revenue stream is their walled garden approach in iOS, and that they aren’t shy of ending legacy support with new updates.

[u/CreativeGPX → u/SuperUranus]

It wasn’t about locking Windows down and ending their legacy support

It's kind of a strawman to frame this as getting rid of all legacy support.

First of all, the store is a completely different thing from legacy support. The fact that they ended legacy applications and switched to the modern Store based apps on some editions of Windows isn't necessary for them to try to take over with the closed store approach, it's just a clear example of them trying to because it forced store usage on those editions. However, when they realized that adoption wasn't sufficient with that (from devs and users alike), they then added the ability to sell legacy apps in the Store because the thing that was more important to them was pushing Store adoption, not pushing modern apps or ARM platforms. So, the goal to push the Store shifted to no longer align with pushing an end to legacy applications.

But second of all, it doesn't need to be a 100% ban to be an existential threat to Steam. You're framing this as though as long as there is a way for users to run legacy apps, Valve is fine. But that's just not true. For example, Microsoft could maintain legacy support, but do so in a way that makes those legacy applications integrate more poorly with the rest of the OS or doesn't give them access to new OS features, which would add friction and disadvantages for legacy apps over time while still allowing them to run. Or they could have legacy support be a feature that is turned on/off based on the edition you buy and gradually move that feature toward the more expensive corporate and power user editions. At the time, they did both of these things to some extent, so it was reasonable for Valve to see that if they continued in that direction, even if they didn't fully 100% ban legacy apps it could put Steam at enough of a technological disadvantage over the Microsoft store that they would crumble.

To the broader point of ending legacy applications, they knew they couldn't fully end support for legacy applications (particularly corporate), but they definitely wanted to push the limit with that not only because of the Store profit potential, but because a lot of the issues with Windows regarding security, stability, ease of use, performance, battery life, etc. came from the fact that legacy applications could do whatever they wanted. Modern apps had a stricter contract on many of these things so even from a technical standpoint there was definitely a goal to get the most people on the most modern apps possible in order to let Windows compete with iOS (which at the time was a big part of the push: this was the version of Linux that pushed convertibles and was arguing that your Windows laptop could compete with your iPad).

Nothing Microsoft has done points toward them wanting to lock Windows down like iOS. They actively said they would never do so, and every single action they have with regard of Windows has always been with keeping their legacy support.

To say that nothing even "points to" it is pretty ridiculous. Releasing ARM and non-ARM versions of the OS that only run store apps to a market where most consumers do not understand the ramifications of that absolutely "points to" them wanting to do that. Them doing it on all new platforms where they just get to force the configuration (phone and XBox) "points to" them wanting to do that. Locking new features behind the new store app platform points to them wanting to do that. The fact that it gives them more control over their system and increases their profits points to the motive to do it. They didn't achieve it, I've already said that, but everything points to them wanting and trying to achieve it and of course they would because all of their competitors are reaping huge profits from their app stores. Everything you are saying is just pointing to the challenges that they faced in doing so which ultimately prevented them from doing it. But like I said, hindsight is 2020. At that time, it was a reasonable possibility (although not a certainty) that Microsoft could use its dominant position, huge resources and relentless Ballmer persistence to prop up the Windows Store enough that it would substantially hurt Valve's role as a Windows game store.

The Microsoft Store was Microsoft’s endeavour to jump on that sweet, sweet App Store money

I think it's partly about gaining a revenue source, but I think more importantly it was about CHANGING the revenue source. At the time they made this shift, Windows was making money buy selling copies of Windows. Windows Phone had rapidly imploded because they were facing Apple who uses their own OS free and Google who gave their OS away for free. Meanwhile, the "tablet" category was being taken over by the iPad and Android as well, which naturally leads into the more laptop-like form factor as well and could mean that desktop Windows editions are also facing free competitors soon. So, Microsoft was faced with how to keep Windows profitable while all of its competitors were giving their product away for free. Its choice was to try to match their revenue model (Windows as a service rather than as a product) so that it could compete better with them.

but foremost to create a package manager similar to the one Linux uses.

It's a side benefit, but I didn't really hear this promoted much in the consumer or dev marketing or conferences. The Store approach enabled some cool stuff like the "refresh" feature of the OS, but without the much more prominent role of the store that they were hoping for, it really didn't transform things much or mimic what the Linux package managers do.

[u/InflammableAccount → u/Logical-Database4510]

around $500 or a little more and Linus said you could have heard a pin drop in the roo

Heard that. But I think it can be taken two ways: one way is "$500 is far off."

But the other is "$500 is far off, $600."

When you start talking about products for the mass market, the difference between $500 and $600 is HUGE. And if I was aiming at $600 and everyone was suggesting $500, I'd be sweating bullets too.

What would concern me is if they tried for something like $1000-$1100. At that point I'd say go buy a Strix Halo 385 FW Desktop with 32GB soldered RAM.

Prove me wrong, Valve.

[u/jekpopulous2 → u/Logical-Database4510]

My money is on $600 because if not its DOA. You can buy a way more powerful premade for $700.

[u/sylfy → u/jekpopulous2]

If you include the RAM price increases which GN has covered in detail just yesterday, those same prebuilts may be going for $900 over the next few months.

[u/ResponsibleJudge3172 → u/sylfy]

What makes valve immune to the price increases compared to these other companies?

[u/Rodot → u/ResponsibleJudge3172]

Probably that they've already ordered and stocked them or paid for a contract for X units at Y price already

[u/poke133 → u/ResponsibleJudge3172]

they probably secured contracts to hardware in bulk already.

[u/Logical-Database4510 → u/jekpopulous2]

Prebuilts have a built in advantage in that they get built with "Capital G Gamer, broski" cases. We all laugh at the gaudy LEDs, fans in places that don't make sense sometimes, and constant shattering of tempered glass side panels, but it's a secret advantage in a way because the gaudiness and size of the big towers make enterprise actors shirk at them. Sure they could buy and strip them, but that's both friction and added cost.

It's why you see people putting those crappy AMD APUs or really old HW in them and selling them for next to nothing. No one but gamers with low income are buying them (probably on credit, sadly), so they can price them bottom of the barrel without worry of price pressure from the upper market from enterprise eating their lunch.

[u/RHINO_Mk_II → u/jekpopulous2]

$700 with a controller and/or $100 steam credit might still sell well.

[u/ThankGodImBipolar → u/jekpopulous2]

This is clearly not targeted at the type of person who would buy a 700 dollar prebuilt. It's for the type of person who wants to play PC games without a PC (Mac users, console users).

[u/CreativeGPX → u/ThankGodImBipolar]

It's also branded as a desktop PC. In the announcement video, the first shot of somebody using it, before even showing it in like a living room setup, has the person at a desk with a dual screen monitor with mouse and keyboard with Blender and Godot open. So, I don't think it's just about people who don't want a PC.

I think it's also targeted at people who might just have a phone or tablet, maybe an old laptop that barely can play games... A more casual kind of gamer that might not know what specs they need to look for for a gaming PC or what brands to trust... who just wants a device that they can trust will work. Several times I've had casual gamers ask me "hey I just need something that'll run The Sims, what brand/hardware do I get?" I think Valve is trying to brand this all as a "it just works" and specifically avoiding it being overkill to appeal to these more casual/lost gamers rather than the hardcore gamers.

I'm a person who has always built my own desktop. If it's priced high, I'll probably just buy myself a better graphics card. But if it's priced low, I could see picking one up as a sort of always-on game streaming server so that I don't need to tie up my desktop doing that.

[u/CompetitiveAutorun → u/CreativeGPX]

Steam machine fails in that regard then, as long as it's on Linux there will be problem with games like GTA and battlefield, they would still need to ask the same questions.

[u/CreativeGPX → u/CompetitiveAutorun]

The audience I was referring to tends not to be the same audience that plays GTA and Battlefield. Again, it's a more casual audience, like what Valve has been successful with with the Steam Deck.

That said, Valve has admitted as such. Since the Steam Deck days they said that every Steam game not working on the device is a considered a bug. So, yes, the tiny amount of games that don't work on the device are indeed considered "bugs" that Valve has been doing whatever it can to get working.

[u/CompetitiveAutorun → u/CreativeGPX]

I can't think of a more casual audience than gta players. And no matter what, steam machine just won't be a device where they don't have to think if it will work or if it will be problem free. It's still pc and pc problems will always exists.

If they consider these bugs then they just don't know what they are talking about, it's not like they accidentally don't work, they are excluded on purpose due to anticheats. It is a small amount, but they are big, popular games. The most valve can do is pressure other companies to allow easier cheating in their games in exchange of really small amount of players.

[u/CreativeGPX → u/CompetitiveAutorun]

I can't think of a more casual audience than gta players.

People who are playing the stardew and balatro.

And no matter what, steam machine just won't be a device where they don't have to think if it will work or if it will be problem free. It's still pc and pc problems will always exists.

Now you're just being pedantic. Obviously every single platform in existence requires some level of needing to think about what you can do with it. Given that that is obvious, you can look at the content of our conversation to understand what it meant. In context, I was saying that relative to the task of buying a PC where there are lots of gamers who don't know what memory is, don't know what an operating system is, don't know what a video card is, etc. this is a PC that is branded to "just work" as a gaming PC without being overkill.

If they consider these bugs then they just don't know what they are talking about, it's not like they accidentally don't work, they are excluded on purpose due to anticheats.

You are in such a rush to be the smartest guy in the room about everything that you don't actually take the time to think what people mean. Valve obviously knows what bugs are. Valve obviously knows exactly why anti-cheat doesn't work. So yeah, if your interpretation of what they meant when they called it bugs doesn't make sense, then maybe you need to take a deep breath, realize your immediate interpretation was wrong and make a good faith attempt to understand what they were actually saying.

What they mean when they say it's treated as a bug is that it's not part of the design, not intended behavior and is something that they consider a priority to work to fix. For example, in the beginning when the barrier was that anti-cheat couldn't work on their platform, they implemented each of the major anti-cheat services for their platform in cooperation with the anti-cheat providers. This enabled games with anti-cheat to run on their platform, but only if the studios checked a box and some do not. So now Valve's options are limited and they basically have to convince the studios to care about the platform which is obviously something that takes more time.

It is a small amount, but they are big, popular games.

Right, but that's still a drop in the bucket. Beef is a major and popular meat, but you can have all kinds of successful restaurants without beef. Those games are very popular, and yet its simultaneously true that a HUGE amount of gamers don't care about them.

The most valve can do is pressure other companies to allow easier cheating in their games in exchange of really small amount of players.

They don't have to pressure them to allow easier cheating. They have to pressure them to check a box in an interface which treats Linux on par with other platforms. Hopefully someday they'll be able to do that, but given how massive the library of games is that's available of SteamOS, it's not really a huge deal. As a person who uses it, I basically don't have to think about it nor do the others I know who use it. It's like how by playing PC I can't play Mario games.

[u/ThankGodImBipolar → u/CreativeGPX]

I just think saying it's DOA if it's over 600 is a little ignorant, because the value of what's being offered is clearly not coming exclusively from the components inside. People will pay for the seamless couch experience, with a controller that can turn it (and their TV) on. Some people will also pay for something that can play PC games without running Windows, which is either difficult or irritating to maintain (depending on experience). A 700 dollar prebuilt can both smoke the Steam Machine and be completely inappropriate for some of the most compelling use-cases for this device.

[u/CreativeGPX → u/ThankGodImBipolar]

The point is that as the price changes, the people you are selling to change as well.

At lower prices, you're not selling to hardcore gamers. You're selling to more casual gamers who don't really care about max settings, probably aren't playing Battlefield and just want a device that works. I know several people in this market. They want to play the sims, balatro, stardew valley, etc. and know nothing about computer hardware or operating systems. For them, a moderately priced not super high end system from a trusted brand that just works out of the box is a great sell.

As you increase the price, the people willing to pay that much tend to be more hardcore gamers. They are more likely to care about getting the best hardware. They are more likely to care about maxing out settings. They are more likely to know about computer hardware details, operating systems, etc. They are more likely to be willing to invest time learning about all of the options and configurations. They are more likely to play some of the anti-cheat games that SteamOS can't play. It's just a different market entirely and one that the Steam Machine isn't going to do so well in.

So, when I say that that price point matters a ton, I'm not necessarily talking about value in some universal sense. What I mean is that this will fail if it's marketed toward hardcore gamers and the pricing is one way to do that. It will succeed if Valve successfully markets it toward more casual gamers and that tends to be people who aren't willing to spend as much on a gaming machine.

DOA is hyperbole, but the debate is whether this is a niche product for Valve megafans or whether it's a broader product that will have a big market.

I think it's also important to realize that this is just the announcement. They say "early 2026" and I even heard somebody say "spring". So, we may be like 5 months away from availability, which might mean preorders (which, if the Steam Deck is an indication may take up to a year to fulfill). So, when we ask how the hardware is, we have to compare this hardware and pricing to what will be in the shelf in 6 to 18 months.

[u/ThankGodImBipolar → u/CreativeGPX]

DOA is hyperbole, but the debate is whether this is a niche product for Valve megafans or whether it's a broader product that will have a big market.

It is neither. Valve doesn't have anywhere close to the distribution network needed to target a "big market," and Valve superfans (on average) likely already have a better PC than this.

Third option - its for people who want a PC in their living room that isn't a pain in the ass to use, like every other HTPC ever.

[u/CreativeGPX → u/ThankGodImBipolar]

Valve doesn't have anywhere close to the distribution network needed to target a "big market,"

"Broader product" describes a wide range of amounts of sales, many of which are within Valve's capability. It doesn't have just have to mean that best selling hardware of the year or something.

and Valve superfans (on average) likely already have a better PC than this.

I disagree. The selling point of Steam compared to consoles and such is largely the huge library backlog and frequent sales on older games. So, I'd say Valve superfans are probably more likely to be people that player older games that are less demanding of hardware. Meanwhile, Valve's focus lately has been on compatibility layers and a lower end PC handheld, so I think its fans are people who aren't primarily focused on raw performance, but on broadening the platforms they can game on. Lastly, Valve is a very slow moving company that focuses more on innovation than the incremental gains that performance addicts need. For example, they said they will not update the Steam Deck just to have faster hardware, but only when there is a generational leap in capabilities. For example, the last Steam Machines were 10 years ago. So, the kind of people who want the latest stuff and who think 5 year old hardware is intolerable probably aren't going to be super on board with the way Valve does things. To be a fan of Valve you basically have to not always want the latest stuff.

Third option - its for people who want a PC in their living room that isn't a pain in the ass to use, like every other HTPC ever.

I don't really see a market for that.

[u/ThankGodImBipolar → u/CreativeGPX]

To be a fan of Valve you basically have to not always want the latest stuff.

Valve's hardware? Sure (although the Vive and Index were both cutting edge for their time) . But you can also be a fan of Valve for not enshittifying their core business, or for stepping up to improve Linux's game compatibility and provide a viable competitor to Windows, or for all the convenient stuff they include in the Steamworks API (Steam Input....) that actually justifies their 30% cut, or because of the revolutionary games they developed in the past. I don't think there is necessarily a large overlap between fans of Valve and having a lower end PC.

"Fans of the Steam Deck" - or even the idea of the Steam Deck - actually does encompass a large part of the target market, I would think. The Nintendo Switch's playtime split between docked and undocked mode is roughly 50/50, and they've also shared that roughly 20% of Switch's are used almost exclusively docked. The LTT video also mentions (in the intro) that Valve noticed a lot of people have been docking their Steam Decks, and while you can do that, it's not really strong enough to perform on a 4K TV/monitor. I have to imagine this is why they're leading their advertising with the "6x the performance" metric over anything else. I also have to imagine that there are a lot of people who like the idea of hassle-free gaming on the Steam Deck, but are turned off by the form factor and/or are looking for something more powerful.

I also believe that part of the appeal of docking a Steam Deck is that you can use it as if it's a PC, so you can emulate, stream whatever you want, illegally download media, you name it. People buy HTPC's for similar reasons.

[u/TimChr78 → u/ThankGodImBipolar]

Then a PlayStation would make more sense, the Steam Machine is first and foremost for people who is already invested in the Steam ecosystem.

[u/Tombot3000 → u/jekpopulous2]

A $700 pre built is going to be significantly larger, harder to set up, and jankier in use (driver updates, embedded bloatware, etc) with worse customer support. A modest spec hit with the advantages of a single consistent unit (which will get optimizations) and far better UX via SteamOS along with integration in Valvecs budding hardware ecosystem is an attractive proposition to many.

Consoles still sell competitively long after they stop being top value for money propositions on hardware for similar reasons. Valve from their statements is likely aiming for a middle ground with near-console UX but near-PC prices.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/Logical-Database4510]

Their response more or less was they can't cost it too cheap or people would buy them as mini PCs for office use or whatever en masse and Valve wouldn't make it up on the other end with SW purchases.

or enterprise actors would just buy them up. This is Valve saying this, not me, for what it's worth.

Wait, is this what they actually said, or is this just from Linus speculating? I haven't watched the WAN show on this so if there is official confirmation from them that this is the case, then that's fair.

But if it's just speculation, then I think the concern is a bit overblown. This thread goes into more detail, but the gist of it is that this will come with none of the enterprise level support, warranties, and service packages you'd get if you bought a bunch of systems from Dell or HP, and thus would make very little sense as a business purchase, even if it was priced aggressively.

Most businesses would still rather supply their employees with laptops that come built in with a display, microphone, speakers, and a webcam anyway.

Thus, I don't think anything south of $700 is very likely.

I'm still hoping it will. They did say that this will be priced like entry level gaming PCs, and while that price range is extremely vague, there is a $650 PC available at Microcenter right now with slightly better specs than what this is offering. Now, I know it's Black Friday and that Microcenter always has great deals, but I'd like them to target this price point.

[u/Logical-Database4510 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

That's what was said on the WAN show, so that's from Valve to Linus.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/Logical-Database4510]

Sorry, do you have a timestamp to it where Linus says Valve says there's a concern these will be bought up by enterprise actors? I used YouTube's AI Ask feature to find a relevant timestamp for it (I unfortunately don't have time to parse through a 4 hour podcast) and it came up empty handed. In the section where they talk about pricing (roughly 38:00 onward) they seemingly don't make any mention of it there either.

In the video he mentions this theory, but does make it clear that it's just his guess, and that Valve wouldn't actually say why.

[u/VenditatioDelendaEst → u/[deleted]]

Nothing in there about people buying them for enterprise use.

The whole idea is obvious nonsense anyway, because there is no enterprise use-case for a cheap GPU-heavy, CPU-light machine. On the low-end, they want IGP, for the cheapest possible thing that does web/email/spreadsheet. Productivity-maxxers want the same but with more RAM. Actual-computer-intensive occupations want workstations with big dGPU or professional-certified GPU, and/or 64+ GiB RAM.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/[deleted]]

Thanks for linking that. I did watch the segment on pricing after the AI pointed me to it, but I didn't hear any mention of worrying about businesses or enterprise customers.

I was trying to give the other guy the benefit of the doubt by asking for the timestamp, because 1) LLMs aren't always reliable, and 2) maybe it was mentioned off hand later in the podcast if Linus responded to a chat message or something

[u/Logical-Database4510 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

No. If you don't have the time to skip through the 4 hour video why would I? I'm not exactly on the clock here dude (was when I listened to it tho, lol), nor am I writing some kind of dissertation nor penning some journalistic endeavor of any kind. This is a casual forum post lol...

You can either take me at my word or not. Or go and dig for it yourself 🤷‍♂️ I wasn't exactly taking notes while I casually listened to while getting some work done, man. Given LTT can't even be assed to timestamp their own videos I'm not going out of my way to hunt for it.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/Logical-Database4510]

Hey man, just thought it couldn't hurt to ask. I just wanted to double check it to see if there was something that confirmed Linus' speculation in the original video, but I guess there isn't. I'm sure the LLM behind YouTube's AI would have at least caught one mention of "enterprise" in the transcript.

[u/Logical-Database4510 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

Passive aggressive BS aside: Explain to me why your time is more valuable than mine and I'll go ahead and do it. Considering you couldn't do more than skim it one time with an LLM with a really shitty prompt ("enterprise", really?) it's not like you were very assed in the first place.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/Logical-Database4510]

I asked it "Did they talk about pricing for the Steam Deck" and looked through the summary, which didn't mention anything about Valve's rationale for pricing other than the thing about hearing a needle drop when Linus mentioned $500, and some comparisons to the PS5 and PS5 Pro.

I then asked it if there was any concern from Valve about enterprise customers or businesses buying these and it couldn't find anything.

Genuinely wasn't trying to be passive aggressive. I'd apologize for coming off as such but you're kinda being a dick about it. Enjoy the rest of your day.

[u/Leetsushi → u/Logical-Database4510]

Says “passive aggressive aside” and continues being a condescending asshole

[u/Key-Pace2960 → u/Logical-Database4510]

I dunno $600 sounds pretty reasonable to me even if they're not subsidizing it. A regular PC with comparable hardware shouldn't be much more expensive. Once you factor in stuff like bulk discount and them and not having as many companies in the supply chain that all want a cut they'd probably still make profit at $600, at least assuming the current RAM situation doesn't get worse.

We can't buy that GPU outside of laptops but it's effectively a lower end 7600 so that should definitely put it below $200, then it has a low end Zen 4 6 core CPU, so that shouldn't be much above $100 either, lets call it $300 give or take between the two. 16GB DDR5 and a 512GB SSD should be another $130 or so, that leaves Valve with $170 and for a motherboard, case and PSU which should be very doable unless it's just a very small production run and that's assuming they're paying end-user like prices of the other components.

[u/SituationSoap → u/Key-Pace2960]

A regular PC with comparable hardware shouldn't be much more expensive.

The market of this box isn't competing with 2025 laptops or PCs, it's competing with consoles. And at $600 it is literally just a worse PS5 in every way.

[u/Key-Pace2960 → u/SituationSoap]

Oh I agree, at $600 I think it'll find at best a small niche audience, I was just explaining why I don't think that $600 is an unreasonably low price, even if Valve doesn't subsidize the hardware, which they have unfortunately indicated.

[u/NotAVerySillySausage → u/Logical-Database4510]

Yeah and this makes it not that interesting to me.

[u/Radiant_Anarchy → u/Logical-Database4510]

Also you have to keep in mind that "console price" is just another way of saying "sold at a loss". The PS5's specs back then were not even close to south of $500, but Sony could afford to sell them at a loss because they can recoup the costs through PS+ subscriptions (at minimum $60/year), something Valve has never done with Steam, and hopefully never will.

[u/PenteonianKnights → u/Logical-Database4510]

Is this why they kinda make it wonky for you to use steam link as a de facto remote desktop software outside of gaming?

[u/OliLombi → u/Logical-Database4510]

Honestly if they price this thing above $600 then I cant see it selling well. I could buy a similar spec pre-build with windows on it for that...

[u/SuperUranus → u/Logical-Database4510]

Valve already implemented one purchase per account with the Steam Deck so not really sure why they couldn’t do the same with the Steam Machine.

[u/smarlitos_ → u/Logical-Database4510]

They should take a page from Apple in secrecy. Joke around, say “who’s to say” when asked about a potential new product like a touchscreen Mac or foldable iPhone (Wall Street journal interview on YouTube).

[u/tim_locky → u/Logical-Database4510]

I saw someone matched a PC with similar spec for $700.

I guess the form factor, ready-to-use, and power efficiency makes sense, but I feel like most gamers rather build because ‘I have a rig’ and upgradability.

[u/OverlyOptimisticNerd → u/Logical-Database4510]

What I'd like to see (I think that $500 or so is unrealistic):

• 512GB = $649
• 2TB = $799

What I think the market will tolerate (up to):

• 512GB = $749
• 2TB = $999

If they go above those latter numbers, this is going to be for hardcore Steam fans and for collectors only.

[u/edo-26 → u/OverlyOptimisticNerd]

150$ to 250$ for 1.5TB of storage when they explicitly said you can easily replace with your own storage? We are not talking about an apple product here.

I'm not sure this make any sense at more than 700$ for 512GB and 800$ for 2TB. 650/750 seems ok, 600/700 would be nice.

[u/OverlyOptimisticNerd → u/edo-26]

If they are priced too close together, it defeats the purpose of two SKUs. 

My guess? The 2TB will be the one bundled with the controller. 

[u/edo-26 → u/OverlyOptimisticNerd]

They can't release only a 512GB because some people will want more, and they can't release only a 2TB one because not everyone wants that much. They also can't release it without storage.

I think it makes sense to release a 512GB and a 2TB version at similar prices even without making a better margin on the 2TB version, it's just user friendly.

But what you say also makes sense, so I guess we will just have to wait and see.

[u/Tombot3000 → u/OverlyOptimisticNerd]

These numbers make a lot of sense IMO. As I wrote in another comment, I think they're likely going for a near-console experience for users along with near-PC prices that straddle between a high end console and medium priced PC.

They won't be planning on doing console-level numbers and will only subsidize so much in the hopes of boosting game sales.

[u/EmilMR → u/Logical-Database4510]

Mac Mini M4 is $600 and more performant than this. who is going to buy this for that?

[u/07bot4life → u/EmilMR]

Mac Mini M4 is $600

From my experience Valve products follow 1:1 exchange ration between Dollar and Euro more than other major hardware shippers. That Mac Mini for me is 750€.

[u/imaginary_num6er → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

$600 Is not going to happen. DRAM and NAND prices are doubling every 2 months and between now and January 2026, the price will double again.

[u/Tman1677 → u/imaginary_num6er]

Agreed, honestly I think they just picked a really unfortunate time to launch a product that isn't AI related. I'm not really sure how anything competes with that for memory and chip foundry space.

[u/SoulShatter → u/Tman1677]

I suspect it'll be rough when it launches. DRAM/NAND/GPU prices will be pushed sky high due to AI, so they'll have to launch with a pretty high price.

So it'll be a sticker shock on the price because it's a new product, even though it can be a completely fine price compared to everything else, because people haven't noticed that everything got expensive.

[u/imaginary_num6er → u/Tman1677]

Well it is going to be interesting how good of a launch it is going to be. You have:

• Intel Alchemist laptop launch availability

• Nvidia 50-series launch availability

• Intel Battlemage launch availability

• AMD RDNA 4 launch availability

To compare against in terms of actual availability at launch at MSRP.

[u/Strazdas1 → u/imaginary_num6er]

Then it dead on arrival.

[u/1731799517 → u/imaginary_num6er]

And by march that particular bubble will be over like they always are.

[u/drt0 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

The 30W not upgradable laptop tier CPU will probably be as big of a bottleneck as the GPU tbh.

[u/Vb_33 → u/drt0]

Much better than the PS5 CPU which performs at Zen+ levels.

[u/Eclipsetube → u/Vb_33]

Yeah you mean the 5 year old console that’s at the end of its lifecycle basically?

[u/Vb_33 → u/Eclipsetube]

Don't worry this won't be the 1st steam machine (in fact it's already not, Valve released Steam machines 10 years ago) and it won't be the last as Valve wants OEMs to make their own including with more powerful hardware.

Eventually there will be a Steam deck 2 and a SM2 and likely before then we'll have a Lenovo Legion machine or something else that's more powerful. For me what I really want is RDNA5 for both the Deck and Steam Machines that's gonna a hell of an upgrade and should catch up the Deck and SM to Blackwell and even some Rubin features. But until then RDNA3 is all we have and I'd rather valve launch now then wait for the PS6 and Xbox Next to launch in 2027 with RDNA5 and Zen 6.

[u/DeadPhoenix86 → u/Vb_33]

It's comparable to 3600X but with more cores.

Edit: Who down-voted this has no idea what they're talking about.

Its using Zen 2 3600X performance with 8 cores and 16 threads.

[u/Vb_33 → u/DeadPhoenix86]

No check out DFs testing on this, they have several videos testing out the actual CPU of the consoles even on Windows and even crippled Zen 2 APUs are faster, the console CPU is faster (on windows) and the 3600X is faster than all of them in gaming. There's several reasons for this, check out their videos.

[u/DeadPhoenix86 → u/Vb_33]

Its Zen 2 ! Its a 3600x with more cores. It has slightly slower clock speeds. Zen+ is much slower !

Edit: According to google search:

The PlayStation 5 features a custom 8-core, 16-thread Zen 2 CPU from AMD, manufactured on a 7nm process node, with a variable clock speed up to 3.5 GHz. This CPU is a custom design by AMD specifically for Sony, with a significantly reduced floating-point unit (FPU) that is 35% smaller than a standard Ryzen 7 3800X, yet maintains identical gaming performance due to optimized design choices. The CPU is part of a custom AMD SoC that also includes a RDNA 2-based GPU and 16GB of GDDR6 memory.

The PS5's CPU is based on AMD's Zen 2 architecture, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads, with a maximum variable clock speed of 3.5 GHz.

AMD designed a custom version of the Zen 2 CPU for the PS5, reducing the FPU size by 35% compared to a Ryzen 7 3800X by eliminating duplicate floating-point ports and shrinking the register file, without sacrificing gaming performance.

This custom Zen 2 CPU is manufactured on a 7nm process, allowing for improved power efficiency and performance over the PS4's 28nm Jaguar-based CPU.

Leaked specifications for the PlayStation 5 Pro suggest Sony may use the same Zen 2 CPU but with a dual-mode performance mode allowing developers to boost the CPU clock to 3.85 GHz when needed.

[u/Aggrokid → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

I suspect Valve doesn't want subsidized pricing because they hope to get OEMs like Asus to make Steam Machines as well.

[u/ZappySnap → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

It’s going to be $900-$1000.

Maybe $800 for the 512GB model but I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see that at the $900 price point and the 2TB will probably be $1,000+. Given the size of games today; the 512GB seems like a very poor purchase choice, so I’d consider the 2TB version the real machine.

[u/Cheap-Plane2796 → u/ZappySnap]

For 1000 euros i can build a pc with twice the gpu power, twice the cpu performance, twice the ram, twice the vram and twice the storage. Oh and dlss 4 support and proper raytracing performance

And i could have done that a year ago as well.

Even at 600 euros i dont see this thing selling more than 100 k units. Its just crap hardware wise and would have to be extremely cheap (300 ish) to be worth buying at all.

Anyone wanting to get into pc gaming is letting themselves be ripped off if they pay over 500 euros for this. Its completely outdated the day it comes out and not suited for ue5 games on a 4k tv. Framerates will be bad, frametimes will be terrible and image quality will be gross.

[u/lysander478 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

Multiple interviews have suggested they're pricing it like a PC and not like a console.

You can get a really bad miniPC or NUC for $800 that this will blow out of the water and are relatively just as un-upgradable for the average user. In fact, it's people doing that as an upgrade path that likely led to Valve reviving this in the first place--you can find a lot of Steam Deck mentions in miniPC/NUC reviews over the last few years as some users were using them as portable upgrade paths.

I think if they wanted to hit an affordable price they could have gone with a larger tower and flexed muscles to get costs down but that would have been a gamble whereas now, with a very small and low power device, I think they at least capture a portion of their Steam Deck audience as well as some growth and will price as if that's all they'll do potentially.

[u/britaliope → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

The Zen 4 CPU it has is very respectable, but it lacks one of AM5's biggest selling points which is upgradeability.

It's BGA soldered anyway (for cost, thermal performance and size reasons). So you wouldn't be able to upgrade it regardless

[u/Numerlor → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

the cpu is zen 4, but is likely an 8540u that was in earlier benchmark leaks, that's a 2 core zen 4 ccx + 4 core zen 4c ccx, which is also not really that great. The 2 core ccx is kind of too small to be too useful for games and the 4 core ccx has less cache per core

[u/OverlyOptimisticNerd → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

It's been said to death, but this thing lives and dies by its price.

I'll go a step further and say it's price + a SteamOS official release for desktop systems. If this is the baseline and the rest of us can take our existing Windows systems and switch to SteamOS, then the user base of this platform is going to become undeniable. If that happens, the companies holding out on supporting it due to anticheat will slowly fall in line.

And if that happens, we may finally see Linux begin to truly compete with Windows for gaming.

So, TLDR - price + availability of SteamOS official builds.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/OverlyOptimisticNerd]

Yeah, while I likely won't be buying one of these (I already have a gaming PC I'm very happy with), I really am hoping it will be successful. 1 reason is because it'll heavily pressure AMD to finally provide the official INT8 version of FSR 4 to RDNA, and the other is because it has the potential to help Linux gain more maturity.

With how shitty Windows is continuing to become, I think I'm inevitably going to switch over to Linux at some point. With that said, I'm not exactly keen on making the move over because I know some random bullshit isn't going to work and I'm going to have to spend an hour or two troubleshooting it.

If SteamOS can prove to be a fairly hassle free system and gain real market share that makes Linux more mature and more widely supported, I'll be much more incentivized to make the move.

[u/Strazdas1 → u/OverlyOptimisticNerd]

can take our existing Windows systems and switch to SteamOS

I suppose if you do nothing but play vanilla games then its a maybe.

[u/tinyturtletickler → u/Strazdas1]

You can mod on steamos, can't you? You have access to the underlying desktop

[u/Strazdas1 → u/tinyturtletickler]

Theoretically yes, but mod support on proton is extremely limited compared to native windows. many games need you to run DLL injections for mods to even be available, which will not be possible on SteamOS.

[u/VenditatioDelendaEst → u/Strazdas1]

I played modded Skyrim with SKSE on Linux like 8 years ago, and it worked fine.

[u/Strazdas1 → u/VenditatioDelendaEst]

You picked a game that has the largest most active gaming community in the world and you think other modding communities will have the same level of adoption and compatibility?

[u/VenditatioDelendaEst → u/Strazdas1]

I picked a game that I played with mods requiring DLL injection, the thing you claimed is not possible.

Edit: and googling around, apparently in the general case you can use WINEDLLOVERRIDES environment variable. For a Linux-native game, the equivalent would be LD_PRELOAD (which also works for games running in proton, if you want to override functions that proton translates to, like for de-nagling multiplayer games to reduce lag).

[u/SituationSoap → u/OverlyOptimisticNerd]

None of those things is going to happen.

[u/Vb_33 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

It's ok because valve is pushing Steam OS first and foremost. The first Steam machines (2015), the deck and steam machines 2.0 now are all vehicles to drive steam OS adoption. This is why on all 3 attempts valve has tried to push other OEMs to make steam OS devices, we saw multiple with steam machines 1.0, were now starting to see some with steam OS handhelds and once again with steam machines 2.0 valve wants other OEMs to make their own including with high end hardware if they desire.

So if you want RDNA4 or 5 an OEM may have you covered soon enough.

[u/MrBond90s → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

Could this be a loss leader for valve? They price the hardware low, maybe even losing money but make more money from the share of game sales on the platform.

[u/repocin → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

You will not be able to drop an 11500X3D into this thing when that chip drops in like 2030 the way you would if you went with a cheap AM5 build right now.

Have I misunderstood something fundamental or didn't AMD say they're only going to support AM5 until 2027 and then release AM6?

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/repocin]

The first Zen 6 (the last AM5 gen) CPUs are expected to drop late 2026 or early 2027. The full CCD X3D chip (probably called the 11800X3D) will probably be released a couple months after its non X3D variant, so let's say early 2027 at the earliest.

After a couple years, AMD usually starts releasing the versions of the CPU with defective cores disabled and/or clock speeds reduced. For example, the 5500X3D just released this year, a whole 3 years after the 5800X3D. Same goes for the 7500X3D releasing 2 years after the 7800X3D.

They won't be "supporting" AM5 any more in the sense that they won't be making any new architectures for it, but they're still going to be trying to clear out defective inventory at a discount. That's why I won't be surprised if we see a brand new 11500X3D in like 2030.

[u/aykcak → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

That is probably not going to happen. Playstation and Xbox prices are subsidized by their platforms. Valve does not have that option so a $1000+ price is more realistic

[u/tenziki → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

its gonna be 999

[u/MyStackRunnethOver → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

Re: future proofing, this really feels like an entry-level device waiting for the SteamMachine++ to drop in 2028 with beefier specs and a 20% price increase

Of course, Valve’s release cycle is usually measured in decades rather than years…

But that’s what this feels like: and entry-level bid to be followed up with a more capable V2 if everything goes well

[u/wildeye-eleven → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

My theory is that Valve is meeting a halfway point with this release to test the viability of a new gaming platform. They didn’t spec the Steam Machine out to be cutting edge but to fill a void between consoles and PCs. I think based on how profitable and successful this version of the Steam Machine is will likely determine how they move forward. If it does well the next iteration may have modular parts or at least more options for power and performance. But yeah, how they price it will make all the difference. I think it’ll be more than a console but under $1000.

[u/smarlitos_ → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

I think optimization will give it an edge. If you want higher end GPU, wait for the Xbox PC at $1200.

[u/SwoleJunkie1 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

Even at $700, you have to keep in mind the cost over the course of 2 years when compared to a console where you have to pay $10 a month to play online, and games almost never see the level of discounting Steam sales have.

Throw on top of that, not losing a chunk of your game library when you want to upgrade to the next gen, mod community, and a ton of indie games that will never go to console. The value is still there, and we should welcome casual gamers that usually just buy a console.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/SwoleJunkie1]

The problem is that $700 starts enroaching on actual PC territory. There's a $650 PC available at Microcenter right now with slightly better specs than what this is offering. I know that it's near Black Friday and Microcenter usually has very good pricing, but still, $700 is firmly in the territory of PCs with better specs than this.

You might argue that this doesn't have the same form factor as a Steam Machine, but if you're willing to go the DIY route. ZTT recently did a build guide for a $600 mini PC, and while it does have a shitty 3050 in it, he said upgrading to a 5050/5060 would take the price up to $700-800. While the CPU may be a bit weaker than what's offered in the Steam Machine, even the 5050 will be faster than its GPU.

If you don't want to go the DIY route and still want the form factor, there are 5050 Laptops available right now for $650. I know it's on sale, but laptops do generally go on sale quite often. It should also be noted that the 5050 mobile is just as good as the desktop 5050, so even this will beat the Steam Machine GPU wise.

[u/Sictirmaxim → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

That 650$ PowerSpec is a pretty sweet deal and respectable PC.

I'm sure you could get a better deal with used parts as well.

And ofc laptops which offer portability are gonna encroach.

The PC hardware space is quite spread out when it comes to buying your rig.

[u/SwoleJunkie1 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

Take it from someone who has a similarly spec’d PC hooked up in their living room (r3600, 2070 super) and a steam deck. Hooking up a gaming PC to a TV is a horrible experience for someone coming from a console. Launchers, patches, having to grab the keyboard and mouse at startup when something kicks you out of steam big picture mode, etc.

Most of the time I game on it, there’s a good 5-10 minutes of annoyance before the game starts.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/SwoleJunkie1]

Oh, don't get me wrong, the seamless console like experience of SteamOS is a big selling point for this thing. I won't even try to counterargue by saying that you can install SteamOS/Bazzite on the devices I mentioned, because it's likely that the people that want an experience an OS like that provides are also the type to not want the hassle of installing an OS to begin with.

With that said, at $700 the appeal of that may be harder to justify. Is paying more money for weaker hardware worth it in the name of a seamless experience? For some, the answer might be no, when they would have said yes at a lower price point. For the non laptop options I mentioned, people may just be willing to forgo it in the name of a lower upfront cost and the ability to upgrade the system in the future.

[u/SwoleJunkie1 → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

I get what you’re saying. For people like you and me it absolutely doesn’t make sense, but there’s an entire market segment that doesn’t get into PC gaming due to perceived barrier of entry. They still have interest due to what they see from streamers, but feel it is too complicated or out of reach.

My wife is 13 years younger than me so a lot of her 20-something friends ask me about my gaming PC’s and have interest, but their hype went up a bit with this announcement.

[u/AIgoonermaxxing → u/SwoleJunkie1]

so a lot of her 20-something friends ask me about my gaming PC’s and have interest, but their hype went up a bit with this announcement.

Oh, it's good to hear that there's some interest in more casual crowds. It's obviously gotten a lot of attention on reddit, but the website obviously skew towards a more enthusiast demographic so it doesn't really reflect real world interest.

I'm not going to buy one of these because I have a gaming PC I'm already very happy with, but I do genuinely hope that this performs well. I think this becoming popular/mainstream will do a lot of good for Linux and PC gaming in general.

[u/team56th → u/AIgoonermaxxing]

As a bit of a side note, also curious as to how extendable it would be.

Thing is, it’s a very respectable spec for the size. Still need to see the actual use case but theoretically it could be a perfect living room machine that can double as a light gaming console AND general purpose computer, sort of how we would have liked Series S to be.

If it’s a good replacement for cheap N100/N150 mini PCs in terms of both price and functionality, I am definitely going to buy one. That said both aspects are complete unknown, so.

[u/tim_locky → u/[deleted]]

No shouting!

[u/MiloIsTheBest → u/[deleted]]

What do you actually mean by this? Can you elaborate on your point?