Steam Machines are being announced

[RussianSensation]

At current prices this works out to $337.31 (which includes shipping).

You need something at least as fast as an R7 265/750Ti to match the GPU inside a PS4, and actually more than that due to the extra optimization on the consoles.
http://www.computerbase.de/2014-10/nvidia-geforce-gtx-970m-sli-notebook-test/3/

I think Valve should launch a $500 Steam Machine with solid specs and advertise it directly against PS4/XB1. The $100 premium over PS4 will be easily made up with free online game and Steam game prices. The problem is the console gamers don't understand hardware or what's required to run what games at 1080P. There has to be a more streamlined process for choosing a Steam machine. Also, by having so many options, it becomes too confusing for the type of typical console gamers who are intimidated by PC specs.

The other possible problem with Steam Machines is lack of solid upgradeability.

I think for the DIY market, the Silverstone Raven RVZ02 comes to the closest to providing the best of the PC upgradeability (will easily support GPUs like the Titan X and CPUs as fast as a 4790K), while at the same time being smaller than the Xbox 1. If I were building a small form factor Steam Machine, it's the one I'd go for because it's a case that can be used for 5-10 years and survive 2-3 GPU/CPU upgrades with ease!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U51eaWWCJkM

For these to take off though, there needs to be more standardization so that console gamers have 1-2 particular Steam boxes instead of 100s. Also, I think Windows 10 adoption due to DX12 is a must. The major issue is that consoles will continue to get cheaper and get more exclusives. That means to lure in console games to the PC, a Steam box should be upgradeable so that once the console gamer moves to the PC, they have the option to stick with the existing case, PSU and just change the internals.

 

[NTMBK]

Will the final version of the RVZ02 have that ugly perspex panel, or is that just there for demo purposes?

 

[Qwertilot]

If they wanted to really go after the consoles now then yes they'd have to shrink, standardise, likely subsidise a bit etc.

They're trying to do it more slowly though, so various people mostly using relatively established designs to establish/test the ecosystem, demand etc. Less exciting but this way round does of course mean that no one is risking losing a really substantial amount of money.

If it works well then someone might try something 'serious' in a year or two or if really badly then they'll wither and die. Most likely you'd think it'll find a profitable enough niche to bump along

 

[Spawne32]

I just don't see these taking off...why use it? What does steambox offer over Windows, other than an alternative to the open source people?

Agreed, its a poor attempt at bringing console style gaming to the PC market. From the video reviews ive seen of the beta thus far, FPS is terrible compared to using steam on windows, and its crazy buggy. More power to them though, if the concept brings more games back to the PC then we are all better for it, past 10 years have been a gradual decline in game design quality to standardize things for the ancient budget technology powering consoles, the ones that do offer PC versions as of late, are just backwards ports from the console, rather then the other way around.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Unfortunately, I dont see steam machines/steam OS bringing more games to PC, unless Valves develops/ subsidizes Steam OS exclusives. I think games will always be designed for consoles first, and Steam OS just means even more work porting to Steam OS as well as DX.

 

[Racan]

Will the final version of the RVZ02 have that ugly perspex panel, or is that just there for demo purposes?

I hope Silverstone brings out the FTZ02 variant like they did for the RVZ01

 

[erunion]

extremetech just ran an excellent article on steamos, dx12, and vulkan. Definitely worth a read.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/2...valves-killer-advantage-in-battling-microsoft

 

[cbn]

The other possible problem with Steam Machines is lack of solid upgradeability.

I think for the DIY market, the Silverstone Raven RVZ02 comes to the closest to providing the best of the PC upgradeability (will easily support GPUs like the Titan X and CPUs as fast as a 4790K), while at the same time being smaller than the Xbox 1. If I were building a small form factor Steam Machine, it's the one I'd go for because it's a case that can be used for 5-10 years and survive 2-3 GPU/CPU upgrades with ease!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U51eaWWCJkM

For these to take off though, there needs to be more standardization so that console gamers have 1-2 particular Steam boxes instead of 100s. Also, I think Windows 10 adoption due to DX12 is a must. The major issue is that consoles will continue to get cheaper and get more exclusives. That means to lure in console games to the PC, a Steam box should be upgradeable so that once the console gamer moves to the PC, they have the option to stick with the existing case, PSU and just change the internals.

I like the current Silverstone Slim cases with riser, but I feel there should also be a slim case that can also accommodate a Micro-ATX or ATX motherboard and full size video card. (This especially as there are so many capable used uATX and ATX DIY boards floating around out there)

For example, just looking at various full size Video cards and my ATX board, if a riser were used the Video card (now positioned parallel to the plane of the motherboard) would extend only to the bottom point of the motherboard's edge. So I think a Slim case with Riser (for ATX, Micro-ATX and Mini-ITX) could actually be pretty small.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Interesting article.

I still see the danger of splitting the market. What about Ubisoft and EA, who do not use Steam? Will all games be designed for DX and then ported to SteamOS? If so, that just seems like a lot of extra work for devs. Or can you run a DX game on SteamOS?

I see a lot of potential for better games here, but also a very real danger of fragmenting the market. Everybody seems to hate the MS "monopoly", but there is something to be said for a uniform OS to run everything. I definitely can see how competition can help force MS to advance, but I am not sure having 2 competing OS's at the same time is going to be the answer. Will DX12 games play on SteamOS? Will there be SteamOS exclusive games that will not play on DX? Will a gamer be forced to run both OS's to be able to play all games? Despite all the hype, I think there are a lot of unanswered questions here.

 

[cbn]

Interesting article.

I still see the danger of splitting the market. What about Ubisoft and EA, who do not use Steam? Will all games be designed for DX and then ported to SteamOS? If so, that just seems like a lot of extra work for devs. Or can you run a DX game on SteamOS?

For an Origin exclusive game like Battlefield 4 (that already runs on Mantle) it could be development of future Battlefield games occurs on Vulkan with DX12 only used if there is a appreciable performance gain relative to extra work involved.

Remember that games based on Vulkan are cross-platform, but DX12 of course would not be.

If that happens, I wonder if future Battlefield games become available on Steam or does Origin launch its own Linux client? I'm thinking the latter would be a greater possibility.

 

[RampantAndroid]

For an Origin exclusive game like Battlefield 4 (that already runs on Mantle) it could be development of future Battlefield games occurs on Vulkan with DX12 only used if there is a appreciable performance gain relative to extra work involved.

Remember that games based on Vulkan are cross-platform, but DX12 of course would not be.

If that happens, I wonder if future Battlefield games become available on Steam or does Origin launch its own Linux client? I'm thinking the latter would be a greater possibility.

I don't see why they'd do that. Mantle support was done at AMD's behest. Vulkan is owned by Khronos, right? DX11 was the primary renderer on BF4 (and likely, the most popular too) and with DX12 showing great improvements already despite not being released yet...I don't see why EA would support Vulkan over DX12...or why they should care much about Steam OS.

The only people who will give two craps about SteamOS are PC gamers....who would probably rather have the $50 streaming device, over a brand new gaming PC less capable than their current gaming PC. Plus, Steam OS doesn't bring the advantage of consoles with it: No settings needed. Your game has this LOD, this draw distance, this AA level, this resolution. On SteamOS games with varying hardware (and age of hardware) you'll still need to muck around with settings to get good performance. Console gamers aren't going to see that as a good thing.

 

[erunion]

Interesting article.

I still see the danger of splitting the market. What about Ubisoft and EA, who do not use Steam? Will all games be designed for DX and then ported to SteamOS? If so, that just seems like a lot of extra work for devs. Or can you run a DX game on SteamOS?

I see a lot of potential for better games here, but also a very real danger of fragmenting the market. Everybody seems to hate the MS "monopoly", but there is something to be said for a uniform OS to run everything. I definitely can see how competition can help force MS to advance, but I am not sure having 2 competing OS's at the same time is going to be the answer. Will DX12 games play on SteamOS? Will there be SteamOS exclusive games that will not play on DX? Will a gamer be forced to run both OS's to be able to play all games? Despite all the hype, I think there are a lot of unanswered questions here.

Valve is giving Source2 away completely free, but all games must be released non-exclusively on steam. DX wont play outside of windows, so the idea would be to make engines that support DX and Vulkan(openGL), allowing games to run across OSes.

 

[cbn]

I don't see why they'd do that. Mantle support was done at AMD's behest. Vulkan is owned by Khronos, right? DX11 was the primary renderer on BF4 (and likely, the most popular too) and with DX12 showing great improvements already despite not being released yet...I don't see why EA would support Vulkan over DX12...or why they should care much about Steam OS.

The original render for BF4 was DX11 (I presume this was because Mantle came too late in the development cycle).

However, if DICE feels comfortable with the performance of Vulkan they might choose it over DX12 due to greater compatibility.

However, with the Xbox One using DX12 (eventually) I don't see DICE/EA being able to escape programming for DX12 entirely.

Ultimately I think it will depend on the performance of Vulkan and what kind of machines Valve's OEM partners and DIYers can put together vs. what price/performance MS is able to achieve with Xbox One. (Current price is $349.99 for a bundle with controller and two Assassin's Creed games at Gamestop)

 

[cbn]

The only people who will give two craps about SteamOS are PC gamers....who would probably rather have the $50 streaming device, over a brand new gaming PC less capable than their current gaming PC.

Not everyone owns a Windows gaming PC though.

For some folks, the primary Windows machine is a non-gaming laptop or AIO.

In these situations, Steam machine will compete with new ($349.99 for Xbox One/$399.99 for PS4) or used ($100 for used Xbox 360 with controller and lego game) consoles*

*Some additional competition might also come from refurbished SFF Windows pre-built desktops using added low profile video cards.

 

[RampantAndroid]

The original render for BF4 was DX11 (I presume this was because Mantle came too late in the development cycle).

However, if DICE feels comfortable with the performance of Vulkan they might choose it over DX12 due to greater compatibility.

However, with the Xbox One using DX12 (eventually) I don't see DICE/EA being able to escape programming for DX12 entirely.

Ultimately it will depend on what kind of machines Valve's OEM partners and DIYers can put together vs. what price/performance MS is able to achieve with Xbox One. (Current price is $349.99 for a bundle with controller and two Assassin's Creed games at Gamestop)

DX12 is more or less already on the XBox, since the Xbox has a very custom version of DX with many of the DX12 improvements already in it. DX11 was the main renderer because AMD's market share is pretty bad, and the percentage of AMD GPUs capable of Mantle at that time was pretty low...oh, and well...you make Mantle the primary renderer and you're ignoring the bigger market share of Nvidia.

Not everyone owns a Windows gaming PC though.

For some folks, the primary Windows machine is a non-gaming laptop or AIO.

In these situations, Steam machine will have to compete with new ($349.99 for Xbox One/$399.99 for PS4) or used ($100 for used Xbox 360 with controller and lego game) consoles.

And for those people I contend that a steambox is still a terrible option. Pay more, and in a year your hardware is outdated. How often will you be forced to upgrade? Why not instead have a SFF PC running Windows with a larger library? Will the Steambox have good cheating measures on it?

I see no reason to buy a steambox. It's overpriced, and is a new platform at that.

 

[cbn]

And for those people I contend that a steambox is still a terrible option. Pay more, and in a year your hardware is outdated.

I don't think the CPU hardware would necessarily become outdated (at least not so quickly). Even TitanFall released in 2014 and based on Source engine lists Core 2 quad as recommended CPU ---> http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=8045&game=Titanfall

And far as TCO goes, Steam Box would not have those Xbox Live fees for multiplayer.

How often will you be forced to upgrade?

The Linux Mint 17.1 Core 2 machine I mentioned earlier in the thread plays the entire Valve Collection on Linux smoothly at 1080p low (using the Nvidia proprietary driver.) This with just a Xeon X3323 (equivalent to Q9300 Core 2 quad) and GT 630.

Now granted I can't play some of the more demanding Steam Linux games like Metro 2033 Redux and Metro Last light Redux, but the number of non-Valve Linux titles I can play on Steam is actually pretty high.

However, with Source 2 coming out soon, I am not sure how much Video card (or CPU) I will need to play the newest Valve Linux games on 1080p low in the future?

Why not instead have a SFF PC running Windows with a larger library?

Yes, a cheap Windows SFF Pre-built with added low profile card is possibility. To compete against this I think Slim Steam Box DIY enclosures should be able to use full size video cards.

Will the Steambox have good cheating measures on it?

I'd imagine it would be the same as the Steam Client running Windows.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Not everyone owns a Windows gaming PC though.

For some folks, the primary Windows machine is a non-gaming laptop or AIO.
snip

That may be true, but that probably means they are not interested in pc gaming anyway. I am not sure the availability of steamboxes will change that. In any case, why spend the money for a steambox when for a bit more you can have a pc with full windows support that can game too, and not be limited to Steam OS games? At most, what can you save, 100.00 for the windows license if you build yourself? And the prices I am seeing for pre-built Steam machines seem outrageous.

To me, the real competition for Steamboxes is still gaming PCs. A steambox is in the final analysis, a PC. It does not have the standardized hardware and ease of use of a console, and one capable of gaming at console levels will still be more expensive. So I dont really see a flood of console gamers coming to PCs simply because they have shrunk to console size and run Steam OS, which does nothing windows cannot do.

 

[cbn]

At most, what can you save, 100.00 for the windows license if you build yourself?

(snip)

So I dont really see a flood of console gamers coming to PCs simply because they have shrunk to console size and run Steam OS, which does nothing windows cannot do.

On really cheap hardware, $100 (or $85 for a sale priced OEM Windows OS) really does matter though.

For example, a sale priced G3258/uATX motherboard combo, Sale priced GT 740 (rebranded 650 GTX) , 4GB RAM can be had for $170 or lower. If the person upgraded their laptop 2.5" HDD to 2.5" SSD they will already have the storage too.

All that is needed at this point is a slim case (that takes uATX motherboard and full size video card) and PSU.

And that is the situation for new CPU, motherboard, RAM, Video card.

If buying used DIY hardware, the price can be even lower, in some cases much lower.

 

[erunion]

Dont forget that consoles are fixed hardware. The steamboxes wont launch until late 15. And by holiday 2016 gpus will have advanced well beyond what the consoles have, even at a much lower price.

I see steamOS and steammachines as different products for different purposes.

SteamOS is valve's backup plan in case Microsoft upsets the status quo.

Steam machines, combined with valve controller and big picture mode, are valves attempt to move PC gaming in the living room. A place where much gaming takes place but where PC gaming basically doesnt exist. Microsoft doesn't want PC gaming in the living room, so they weren't going to make it happen. In addition to building market share for SteamOS, of course.

 

[cbn]

Regarding competition from SFF Pre-builts (with Windows), one thing I have been waiting for is the arrival of small Maxwell. (Of course, small Maxwell will also benefit our SFF Linux boxes as well).

I am expecting something like 384 Maxwell CUDA cores (also available in 256 CUDA core config) and 64 bit interface. With 7 Gbps GDDR5 that might turn out to be a pretty good card , replacing GK208 based GT730 64 bit GDDR5:

With that mentioned, these low profile cards are usually a lesser value than full size cards.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Dont forget that consoles are fixed hardware. The steamboxes wont launch until late 15. And by holiday 2016 gpus will have advanced well beyond what the consoles have, even at a much lower price.

I see steamOS and steammachines as different products for different purposes.

SteamOS is valve's backup plan in case Microsoft upsets the status quo.

Steam machines, combined with valve controller and big picture mode, are valves attempt to move PC gaming in the living room. A place where much gaming takes place but where PC gaming basically doesnt exist. Microsoft doesn't want PC gaming in the living room, so they weren't going to make it happen. In addition to building market share for SteamOS, of course.

Actually, if valve wanted to move the pc into the living room, something really great would be to give steam os games the ability to play split screen head to head or co-op on the same computer. It has always irritated me that so few PC games allow this. That would be the kind of killer app that could really drive adoption of steam os.

 

[RampantAndroid]

Now granted I can't play some of the more demanding Steam Linux games like Metro 2033 Redux and Metro Last light Redux, but the number of non-Valve Linux titles I can play on Steam is actually pretty high.

Except that isn't the point of a steambox right? Playing Metro 2033 will be expected (and games like it.) Else, you're just selling a indie game device. Maybe that appeals to some...

Also, don't forget that 4k TVs are getting cheaper. I'm thinking of selling my Panasonic Plasma and grabbing a Samsung LCD TV. FOr ~1000 I can get a 4K TV.

 

[cbn]

Except that isn't the point of a steambox right? Playing Metro 2033 will be expected (and games like it.) Else, you're just selling a indie game device. Maybe that appeals to some...

That performance I quoted was for a Linux desktop that would cost $100 or less using sale priced parts.

More expensive (but still cheap) DIY hardware (running SteamOS or Linux 17.1 with Steam Client) would be able to handle Metro though. In fact, I noticed Metro 2033 lists E8400 as the recommended CPU: http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=857&game=Metro 2033 (So it must be my GT 630 that is holding back the game)

 

[tviceman]

I think Valve should launch a $500 Steam Machine with solid specs and advertise it directly against PS4/XB1. The $100 premium over PS4 will be easily made up with free online game and Steam game prices.

100% agreed. I think Valve should take it a step further than your suggestion and have 3 tiers - a $300-350 "720p class" gaming machine, $500-650 "1080p class" gaming machine, and then $900+ >1080p machine. That way they cover all the bases and potential customers.

The fact that they aren't, though, is mind boggling. I know they don't want to compete with their partners and piss anyone off by aggressively pricing hardware, but like you said the wild west of computer hardware is what keeps so many console gamers away.

 

[RampantAndroid]

100% agreed. I think Valve should take it a step further than your suggestion and have 3 tiers - a $300-350 "720p class" gaming machine, $500-650 "1080p class" gaming machine, and then $900+ >1080p machine. That way they cover all the bases and potential customers.

The fact that they aren't, though, is mind boggling. I know they don't want to compete with their partners and piss anyone off by aggressively pricing hardware, but like you said the wild west of computer hardware is what keeps so many console gamers away.

This. So much this. My question is one further though: what happens in two years time - the people who have the 720p class devices, will they suddenly be "unsupported"? Will the 1080p devices become 720p devices? How would they handle the creep of system requirements?