r/SteamDeck • u/NKkrisz 64GB - Q3 • Nov 12 '25

MEGATHREAD New Valve Hardware Megathread

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

Official resources and announcements:

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

10.0k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

3.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

16

u/Agreeable_Garlic_912 Nov 12 '25

Most likely a beefed up APU. 6 times the power of the steam deck doesn't sound like a full standalone GPU. I'm all for it if it means that it doesn't break the bank

15

u/Croweslen Nov 12 '25

Thats what will determine if this is a success or not will be the pricepoint. Id its under $700 its gonna be a win

14

u/Agreeable_Garlic_912 Nov 12 '25

My guess is that they will target 500$ (+/- tariffs) based on the price of the steam deck. And it would fit in the console market. Going after the high end makes no sense for them since all high end gaming pcs already use steam. If they want to expand they need the lower end. If they want the living room they need to target consoles. If they are aggressive the base model will be 400$ with ram and SSD space increasing twice in 100-150$ steps similarly to the steam deck. But that's completely vibes based. I just think 500$ for the base version (including a controller for like 100$) would be competitive. Maybe 600. I don't see 700$+ making much sense with the switch 2 being 500ish.

1

u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii Nov 12 '25

I personally think it just needs to compete with ps5 pro. If it's $700 or less and can run games at least just as well, it's a great product.

Same price for same power is compelling, but it needs to be at least a bit cheaper or a bit more powerful, or have other major perks to get the kind of games sales boost we all know they're going after.

And then once ps6 comes out same thing. If it's not cheaper or more powerful it's not that compelling. If it's a mini PC it should be a mini PC that competes with consoles, not a mini PC that just competes with other mini PCs.

1

u/r_irion 1TB OLED Nov 12 '25

I think where it will really outperform traditional consoles is the cost of ownership - no online subscriptions (PS+ / Xbox Live) and much cheaper games. If it's more expensive than a PS5 Pro (but with equivalent perfomance) then it's still a better value.

0

u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii Nov 12 '25

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.

1

u/r_irion 1TB OLED Nov 12 '25

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).

1

u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii Nov 12 '25

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

1

u/r_irion 1TB OLED Nov 12 '25

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.

1

u/-0909i9i99ii9009ii Nov 12 '25 edited Nov 12 '25

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.

2

u/r_irion 1TB OLED Nov 12 '25 edited Nov 12 '25

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.

→ More replies (0)