Posted on October 16th, 2008 by David Bayon
Technological progress: lost on the masses
I loaded up Steam for the first time in a while last night and was promptly asked to participate in Valve’s ongoing hardware survey. I’ve done this before, and the results are always fascinating, so I jumped right in. A few clicks later, and a quick scan of my cobbled-together PC, and I got to see the breakdown of nearly 1.8million gamers’ systems – with some surprises.
Just 41% of polled users have made the much-needed step to a dual or quad-core processor – the norm in pretty much all new PC systems sold today – and 38% have shelled out on 2GB or more of RAM. Assuming a correllation between the two, that leaves a huge proportion of PC players who are still trundling along on 1GB of RAM or less and a single-core CPU.
Monitors are also an interesting point. Despite the fact that we almost never review them any more, and few manufacturers are even pushing new models today, a startling 75% of polled users are still playing on 4:3 monitors. Of those that have moved to widescreen, nearly 35% have opted for screens sized 24in or larger, while nearly 70% are at 20in or larger – if you’re going to upgrade, you may as well aim big.
The graphics card section is out of date, with no entries for ATI’s HD cards or Nvidia’s 9-series or faster, so can be ignored, but there are still more interesting stats to be gleaned from the survey:
- Intel leads AMD roughly 60-40
- An awful lot of people don’t upgrade their graphics drivers
- 1,396 polled gamers have less than 10GB of total hard disk space in their PC
- Nearly 3% of polled users still don’t have a DVD drive
- 8,105 Steam users speak a language called ‘Simplified Chinese’
And then there’s the old Vista issue. How many gamers do you think have upgraded to Microsoft’s flagship – with DirectX 10 it’s surely a gamer’s paradise, right? Wrong. Of the 1.8million Steam users polled, more than 80% are still running trusty old Windows XP. Ouch.
Admittedly, this Steam survey has been running for nearly a year now, and some of the categories and entries could certainly do with updating and starting afresh, but as a snapshot of a community made up almost entirely of gaming PC users it’s fascinating.
Journalists like us can sometimes get carried away in the constant hunt for bigger, faster, better, forgetting the fact that the vast majority of users don’t want to spend money on their PCs every five minutes, and that for many, running Crysis at Low settings is good enough to get enjoyment out of it (strange people).
But mostly a survey like this just highlights the problem that will always exist for PC and component manufacturers: that consumer inertia is just as powerful as technology in determining their bottom lines.
Tags: cpu, gamers, graphics, Hardware, pc, ram, Steam, survey, Valve
Posted in: Hardware, View from the Labs
Follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
4 Responses to “ Technological progress: lost on the masses ”
Leave a Reply
Categories
- About the bloggers
- Green
- Hardware
- How To
- Just in
- Microsoft Office 2010
- Newsdesk
- Online business
- Random
- Rant
- Real World Computing
- Software
- View from the Labs
- Windows 7
Authors
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
advertisement
Printed from www.pcpro.co.uk
































October 16th, 2008 at 10:52 am
Hardly a big surprise, that only 20% use Vista…
Given that 40% only have single core and/or <2GB RAM, it isn’t surprising that their userbase isn’t exactly at the cutting edge when it comes to OS either.
October 17th, 2008 at 11:08 am
I’m surprised anyone’s using vista (pronounced waster in some parts of europe).
Ok, my last upgrade was a much larger monitor 24″ with a FullHD resolution.
I suppose I will eventually move to multi-core technology but I don’t really need it as yet, Though if the prices fall down I might be in the market for one – but then when I do – I’ll need the works, new mobo & memory and no doubt while I’m at it I’ll fit in a new graphcs card too.
But I’m not in any hurry and don’t see myself rushing into buying anything in the next 3-4 months.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
I’m not surprised by this. I used to be a gamer back when I lived with my parents and I could afford to be. Now I am three years out of College with a Computer Science degree and I can barely afford to pay rent let alone upgrade my computer. The technological advances of the past 8 years are not lost to me (My computer is literally about 8 years old), but I have no money. I read magazines like Pc-Pro and CPU Power and my mouth waters. I have tried many times to save up funding but every time I get close to filling that wish list on Newegg my car breaks down, I need new glasses, or I get sick. I do not think that I am alone. I know that many in the PC industry are afraid that catering to the markets demand for low cost stripped down computers like the e-machine will stifle technological innovation. I share their concern, but right now if I can get my computer to run Visual Studio and some productivity apps for work that’s good enough for me. High end games and costly diversions are not in the budget. Most of friends many of whom in high school always had the latest and greatest now settle for the nostalgia of an old Sega Genesis from the thrift store. Just look at what has happened with the new console systems. Play Station 3 and Xbox 360 clearly have the technological edge but Wii is cheep and enjoyable. It’s mopping the floor. No one I know can afford Play Station 3 or the latest Nvidia card for their system and most of my friends have college degrees.
October 20th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
80% of people are totaly unaware how much they can improve their PC’s, just by looking into the cheapest 20% of todays modern hardware.
Intel needs (must?) to make people aware about the leap that the cheapest dual core CPU makes vs a single core one. Not an easy task at all.