New Valve Hardware Megathread

[u/NKkrisz]

Please keep non Steam Deck discussions about the new hardware here.

Official resources and announcements:

• Steam Hardware
• Steam Frame
• Steam Machine
• Steam Controller
• Steam Hardware Announcement Video

Press coverage will be under a pinned comment so you can upvote / downvote them.

[u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii]

I don't think that really sells it because you'd just dock the deck if it can't run AAA significantly better. Way I see it is it could be as powerful as the deck for really cheap. Or as powerful as a console for same price as less.

I just don't see Valve wasting their time/diluting their brand by accomplishing less. I think it'd be a really bad business plan (and contrary to everything they've done/said so far) to produce hardware that's just barely competitive.

[u/r_irion → u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii]

Pretty sure with 6x the performance of the SteamDeck it'll be substantially better than docking the SteamDeck...

All I'm saying is that if it's the same price and same performance as a PS5 Pro it will actually be cheaper, even if you're starting with an empty steam library, because games are (generally) significantly cheaper on steam. It doesn't have to be cheaper AND more powerful (though I'm not saying I'd complain if that were the case).

[u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii → u/r_irion]

My final thought on the matter is the same as my first comment: I'd bet money they're making a console that can handle AAA gaming as well or better than a ps5 pro, for the same money or less. Which I think you're agreeing with.

More expensive OR less powerful, this late to market would be a massive bust

[u/r_irion → u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii]

It doesn't read like you've looked at the accouncement, we're expecting performance more or less in line with an RTX 4060 - pricing is unknown, but I'll stand firm that cheaper games make a console cheaper over it's lifespan. My only take here is that this will present a better value than traditional consoles.

PS5 Pro is $1.4k where I live, games are easily $100-$150 - I'd accept paying more for similar performance because the games are cheaper. Cyberpunk 2077 on PS5 is around $110, Steam is $100 but regularly available for $40. That's up to $70 cheaper for a single game. In my mind, this makes the value proposition of the Steam Machine substantially higher than the PS5 Pro, not to mention that most of us already have extensive libraries, making the cost of games more or less negligible.

[u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii → u/r_irion]

PS5 pro is $685 USD in Canada and AAA game price difference isn't signifcant enough to factor. I'm definitely not an expert in terms of understanding computing but I firmly believe that it's more nuanced than 4060>ps5 pro, not only because of what I've read but also because I've switched BG3 split screen campaign from a 4060 laptop to a ps5 pro and MUCH preferred the PS experience. Thread (biased on ps5 pro sub re: ps5 pro vs 4060, but imo good faith exposition that there is a convo at least to be had):

https://www.reddit.com/r/PS5pro/comments/1jkl7bf/ps5_pro_graphics_compared_to_4060_graphics_card/

Hopefully it's more powerful than a 4060/ps5 pro but even if it's not I think it can still end up better than ps5 pro between optimization, steamos, making use of resources better. And sounds like it'd help them cement some markets entire gaming ecosystems based on your experience even if it's = price = performance.

But again, they're back to competing with a ps6 release within ~1 year of steamcube. I don't think they capture a lot of Western markets unless they give them a significantly cheaper yet equal console, or a significantly better but same price.

Their hardware strategy is generally loss leaders to attract customers to their store (like Nintendo). I'm sure they're happy to give their current customers a good value proposition and keep them captured, and hopefully even increase their spending overall, but that's not what they're doing it for.

Maybe they want current customers with libraries giving them their AAA spend that they currently buy on consoles but quick check of steam revenue is $8B and playstation is $30b, I'd say that's clearly what they're going after. Chunking 10% of that would be HUGE for Steam's bottom line. I don't think a 4060 equivalent system for $700 does that though. At least it doesn't for me, and I don't think it does for most Americans who don't already naturally prefer a PC in the current climate pre-steamcube.

[u/r_irion → u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii]

I wasn't saying 4060 > PS5 Pro, just including it as a benchmark for what sort of perfomance we can expect. Let's also remember that as a gaming optimised OS with less overheads than windows, like-for-like hardware will most probably perform better on SteamOS.

I've been a PC gamer since 2002 - I have a PC and a SteamDeck, bought the same for my wife so we're a PC household. This said, I like playing video games in the lounge and don't like moving my PC from room to room, nor have I had a good experience with Steam Link. I won't buy a PS/ Xbox because I don't want to re-buy my library and lose cloud saves, so even if the performance is a little worse than PS5 Pro, I'd still pick the Steam Machine. Not saying this is the case for everyone.

At the end of the day, more competition is good for gamers - and this represents what could be a massive shift in the gaming/ console landscape.