The latest round of results from Valve's ongoing hardware surveys are now available. As always it is an interesting look at the hardware spread in the PCs that people are using for gaming these days. Some highlights:

- Intel is beating AMD, 58% to 41%
- "2 cpus" (which I think we can assume to mean dual core) is up to 36%
- NVIDIA is winning in video cards
- 74% of users are still running 4:3 video ratio (non-widescreen)
- 81% of users are running Windows XP - ~18% are on Vista.
- Under 10% of users are running DirectX 10

Validates my decision to stay with XP and switch to intel 2 years ago.

Another interesting note is how many people are using old video card drivers.

Validates my decision to stay with XP and switch to intel 2 years ago.

Well, only if more people using it means its actually better

If there was a serious problem with XP or a really important feature I wanted that wasn't available on XP or programs that I needed were only available on vista or core2duos ran significantly better on vista then I would of switched.

Basically weighed all my options up and found XP did everything and anything I wanted and still does. Until that changes I'll be sticking with it:)

- 74% of users are still running 4:3 video ratio (non-widescreen)

I'd dispute this statistic.

In fact, I reckon it'd be more like 55% are running 5:4, and the other 19% running 4:3.

If there was a serious problem with XP or a really important feature I wanted that wasn't available on XP or programs that I needed were only available on vista or core2duos ran significantly better on vista then I would of switched.

That is what validates your choice, not a bunch of random people's hardware/software setups.

In fact, I reckon it'd be more like 55% are running 5:4, and the other 19% running 4:3.

i dispute your dispute... very few non-widescreen lcds have a native ratio of 5:4 & only a real ninny would run 5:4 on a 4:3 monitor. a real ninny. :D

very few non-widescreen lcds have a native ratio of 5:4 & only a real ninny would run 5:4 on a 4:3 monitor.

Right, because there's so many 1280x960 monitors (4:3). 1280x1024, pretty much the only res used on 17-19" LCDs, is 5:4.

That is what validates your choice, not a bunch of random people's hardware/software setups.

Validate can also mean endorse. So yes the survey validates my thoughts on keeping XP and staying with Intel based on the percentage of use by those who participated in the survey.

Right, because there's so many 1280x960 monitors (4:3). 1280x1024, pretty much the only res used on 17-19" LCDs, is 5:4.

They might not be LCDs then, because if you go down the list further to the resolution part there the two leading resolutions are 1024x768 & 1280x960, which are both 4:3.

Though they also don't seem to list 5:4 aspect ratios OR 5:4 resolutions at all so I guess it's possible they're just putting the 1280x1024 users in with the 1280x960 users?


last edited by reso at 14:00:01 16/May/08

Validate can also mean endorse.

An endorsement is useless if it's not from a trustworthy source though!

In this case though its hopefully good news; the massive XP userbase will hopefully mean developers keep churning out PC games with XP in mind, as opposed to Vista.

I don't reckon the survey validates your decision, if your decision was based on what you said it was. It might help you feel better, but it's not really a valid reason to.

Re: the aspect ratio matter, I can tell you I still see many CS players (why is it always CS) rock up to LAN events with CRTs!

I did just move on from my 4:3 CRT (Sony G520) to an LCD (finally) but a lot of these players are using s***ty 17" and 19" fishbowl CRTs with their dual and quad core PCs....

I really, really don't get it.

Validate can also mean endorse. So yes the survey validates my thoughts on keeping XP and staying with Intel based on the percentage of use by those who participated in the survey.

lol f*** up idiot, everything you've said so far is a bunch of ignorant crap.

Did intel get ahead because they had quad core and AMD didn't?

Heh, everyone hatin' on Haklin when really, everyone does the same thing - goes with what is popular thinking that means its probably the best bet

whats wrong with vista ??

doesn't play dune 2 from 1992 or something ? give a f*** ?

Guest operating systems

Virtual PC 2007 can use the following as a guest operating system with full support for Virtual Machine Additions. [1]:

* Windows Vista (All 32-bit editions)
* Windows XP
* Windows Server 2008 (Virtual PC 2007 SP1 onwards)
* Windows 2000 Professional and Server
* Windows 98 Second Edition
* Windows Server 2003 Standard Edition
* Windows NT 4.0 Server
* Certain editions of IBM OS/2

to quote wikipedia... so whats the point of running old s*** coz someones mate who knows someone who cousin f***ed some chick named bob whose computer wouldn't run something on vista....

Heckling Haklin!

whats wrong with vista ??

doesn't play dune 2 from 1992 or something ? give a f*** ?

Well, the issue is that the vast majority of gamers (at least, PC gamers running Steam) see no need to upgrade to it to play their games. Which is weird because gamers tend to be the early adopter types.

I did just move on from my 4:3 CRT (Sony G520) to an LCD (finally) but a lot of these players are using s***ty 17" and 19" fishbowl CRTs with their dual and quad core PCs....

Most likely because the damned things still work :)
Can be hard to justify moving to a new screen if your old one still works. As long as the screen does a high enough res and is bright enough etc it doesn't change how you play, unlike say a faster cpu or video card.

whats wrong with vista ??

Dear Vista, extract/delete/copy my files faster you slow c***.

Dear Vista, extract/delete/copy my files faster you slow c***.

pfft who uses explorer anyway ? use dos. xcopy/s rules all

Well, the issue is that the vast majority of gamers (at least, PC gamers running Steam) see no need to upgrade to it to play their games. Which is weird because gamers tend to be the early adopter types.

sound like typical whiney bitch CS players to me in, they need to move with the times...

pfft who uses explorer anyway ? use dos. xcopy/s rules all

"dos" doesn't mean what you think it means. Also troll harder.

16 bits per pixel 38,441 3.11 %

38000 steam users havent experienced 32-bit desktop?!

Dear Vista, extract/delete/copy my files faster you slow c***.

Already installed SP1? Seems to have helped with that issue, for me.

Already installed SP1? Seems to have helped with that issue, for me.

nah man, i'm running winxp sp27 its the bomb

People no longer have a good reason to not move to Vista, it's just that they like to feel like they belong and the majority of people are really excited at the chance to bag Microsoft that they haven't shut up about Vista being bad. Sure there's no real need to move to it yet either, but 'no real need' hasn't stopped people moving to newer software in the past, so I don't really see how it applies here.
Once you turn off UAC the UI is actually a lot more convenient in a lot of ways, and it irons out a lot of niggling issues that everyone has just learned to live with and ignore in XP. And, alternatively, if you're setting up a computer for a total noob then UAC is great left on!

Aside from the XP/Vista debate, Valve really needs to update their survey groups, as many of the options are out of date, for example RAM only goes up to 2GB+ but this is the biggest group now and it would be more useful to see how many people have 2, 3 or 4 or more than 4. Hopefully they update these for the next release...

vista is better get over it xp fags

evis is cranky tonite

also, vista is cool

sand in his vagina

also, vista is cool

I reckon people have plenty of reasons not to move to vista
why would you if there was no perceived benefit?

Which is weird because gamers tend to be the early adopter types.

Game performance is the top priority for most gamers. Vista got a really bad wrap when it came out performance wise. It is still recovering from that reputation.


I haven't changed to Vista because I don't see it as an upgrade, more like a sideways movement that uses more ram. XP does EVERYTHING I want it to do, the way I want it to. Changing to Vista isn't worth the hassle.

i drive a datsun stanaza (win xp) i don't see a benefit of moving on to drive a bugatti veyron (win vista) even though its more comfy, smoother, nicer, picks up hot sluts, does 0 - 100 in 2 seconds and is sex personified, i'll keep driving my stanza (i'll keep using win xp) because it still gets me to work.

jeh!

I haven't changed to Vista because I don't see it as an upgrade, more like a sideways movement that uses more ram. XP does EVERYTHING I want it to do, the way I want it to. Changing to Vista isn't worth the hassle.

ram costs $25 per gig!!!!

FOOOL!!

its like saying i'm not going to drink water because its costs 0.004c / litre

last edited by cainer at 22:02:32 16/May/08

ram costs $25 per gig!!!!

FOOOL!!

its like saying i'm not going to drink water because its costs 0.004c / litre

You've done nothing but cry and whine continuously in this thread.

The image that comes to mind is you rocking back and forth with your arms around your knees,
sucking on your thumb, trying to convince yourself Vista actually has benefits.

Vigorous debate:)

Well, the issue is that the vast majority of gamers (at least, PC gamers running Steam) see no need to upgrade to it to play their games. Which is weird because gamers tend to be the early adopter types.

In the Pc hardware/OS market gaming enthusiasts have always provided a pretty good map on what to buy and what software to use. I'd say microsoft wouldn't be too be pleased at the extremely slow uptake of vista.

P.S Thread hate turned potentially slow thread into vigorous debate. Good stuff:)

I blame the slow uptake on it being harder for them to pirate so they stick with xp. The uptake of vista has hardly been slow, maybe slow for the people who took this survey however.

Just because someone is a "gaming enthusiast" doesn't mean they know jack f*** about the best hardware to buy fyi.

38000 steam users havent experienced 32-bit desktop?!
haha well spotted. Pretty amazing really


last edited by Mitch at 01:12:25 17/May/08

Just because someone is a "gaming enthusiast" doesn't mean they know jack f*** about the best hardware to buy fyi.

Whats going on here? double negatives are really confusing.

EDIT - wat Kos Said

I thought he was saying that just because they are a gaming enthusiast doesn't mean they have a clue about what is good with regards to hardware?

I suppose I can see people who use Steam not wanting to move to Vista because it is more resource heavy and Steam is already a huge unnecessary waste of resources that runs like s*** and takes 4 hours to load regardless of how good your computer is...

Steam is already a huge unnecessary waste of resources that runs like s*** and takes 4 hours to load regardless of how good your computer is...

my steam runs quite smoothly and very reasonably, infact id say as far as game launching goes its within all normal game launching speeds.

I've resisted purchasing a widescreen lcd monitor - I need a dual monitor setup and dual widescreens is fugly and impractical.

(and one wide and one regular, as a setup is just...wrong)

get a triple head then, 1 boxy one and 2 widescreens either side of it [=][][=]

I need a dual monitor setup and dual widescreens is fugly and impractical.

How is it impractical?

(and one wide and one regular, as a setup is just...wrong)

So just purchase another "regular" one then, they still do sell them...

I thought he was saying that just because they are a gaming enthusiast doesn't mean they have a clue about what is good with regards to hardware?

correct

I blame the slow uptake on it being harder for them to pirate so they stick with xp.

Gamers will spend money, so long as their is a gain in it for them.

And I wouldn't say its harder to pirate, or are you one of those people that thinks wii games can't be pirated ?

Gamers will spend money, so long as their is a gain in it for them.

And I wouldn't say its harder to pirate, or are you one of those people that thinks wii games can't be pirated ?

I know it's not harder to pirate but some might not want to. Of course wii can be pirated - for now anyways from what I hear.

Assuming 100% of those gamers know much about software or hardware is a stretch though. Just because someone uses something frequently doesn't mean they know how it works (eg cars).

38000 steam users havent experienced 32-bit desktop?! haha well spotted. Pretty amazing really

It's not that they haven't experienced 32-bit desktop, it's that they run games in 16bit.

Running CS in 16bit changes the effect of smoke grens.

I know it's not harder to pirate

Then why make a comment stating as such...

I bought a copy of Vista a few weeks ago and uninstalled it after one day. I might go back to it later but for now I'll just stick with XP.

I blame the slow uptake on it being harder for them to pirate so they stick with xp.

Harder to pirate Vista? You're joking right?

I've got a legitimate Vista license but found it much less hassle to just bypass all the activation crap permanently instead of using my own cdkey. Newer "unofficial releases" have SP1 integrated and install without a cdkey, nothing else needed to get it to work.

Fortunately I got rid of Vista long ago. It's the most useless piece of s*** since Windows ME.

last edited by parabol at 10:02:44 17/May/08

i got no issues with vista

havent found one thing that i used to do with xp that i cant do with vista (although the image resizer tool wasnt quite as cool)

as long as you have the hardware for it, i cant see any issues with running vista

also

I blame the slow uptake on it being harder for them to pirate so they stick with xp.

lolz

last edited by Spook at 10:14:40 17/May/08

In my posts I am assuming alot of them are more noob than you fools reading what I said.

In my posts I am assuming alot of them are more noob than you fools reading what I said.

If you read my whole post instead of reverting to pro-Vista mania and quickly hitting Reply to try to get yourself out of the hole you dug, you would have noticed the part where I said that anyone with a pre-cracked version of Vista can install it with no effort whatsoever.

If you are too 'noob' to get yourself such a copy (it is seriously everywhere), then you probably aren't in a position to know how to even install an OS. So your argument then becomes "people too noob to install a new OS stick to XP".

gg

People no longer have a good reason to not move to Vista

1) it costs money to upgrade to an os which performs basically the same functions that xp does

2) it requires much better hardware (see point 1)

i'm no xp fanboi and i'll be upgrading to vista when i get around to buying a new pc but there really is no compelling reason to go vista right now.

i drive a datsun stanaza (win xp) i don't see a benefit of moving on to drive a bugatti veyron (win vista) even though its more comfy, smoother, nicer, picks up hot sluts, does 0 - 100 in 2 seconds and is sex personified, i'll keep driving my stanza (i'll keep using win xp) because it still gets me to work.

you fail at analogies.

taggs my point was that as an environment it is no longer worse than running XP (whereas at release there were many things about running Vista that actually made it undesirable compared to running XP), so now people who are able to (ie. people who can afford it/pirate it and have good enough hardware) don't have a solid reason not to.

I was not saying that anyone running XP is a fool and should have moved to Vista already.

last edited by kos at 14:08:46 17/May/08

i drive a datsun stanaza (win xp) i don't see a benefit of moving on to drive a bugatti veyron (win vista) even though its more comfy, smoother, nicer, picks up hot sluts, does 0 - 100 in 2 seconds and is sex personified, i'll keep driving my stanza (i'll keep using win xp) because it still gets me to work.

I drive a 6 cylinder, early 2000's station wagon. While it's not the newest thing around, it runs very well. It has all the features I need, and I own it outright. It's also quite efficient for what I use it for. Why should I go out and buy a brand new Mack truck that's going to cost me money I don't need to spend, has features I don't want at the moment, is missing other capabilities I will use, is going to chew up resources that could be put to better use and is going to be too big for my pre-existing garage?

I think the underlying issue is that most people who use computers regularly aren't nerds like us. They couldn't care less what OS they have...if their current one allows them to do the things they want to do (read web pages, play games and run business apps)...then why would they go and spend money on upgrading (remember the average person has no idea as to what is involved in changing an OS so would have to employ outside help...and purchase OS).

I think another thing stopping the widespread uptake is business IT departments not wanting to upgrade. I can tell you now I have no plans to upgrade my work to Vista. XP does the things I need our PCs to do nicely. Upgrading the network to Vista will just be a ridiculously huge project (we have things like in-house developed software written in VB6 that won't run on Vista as is). Then there is the whole training users how to use a new OS (applies to business or home users). I really can't see any benefit that outways the massive amount of work (and cost - upgrading older workstations, new OS licenses etc...) involved.

That being said when people ask me for new home computers if they should get Vista or XP, I recommend Vista. I run Vista on one of my PCs at work and...while initially it took a while to get used to, and there certainly is things I prefer about XP...the Vista PC is fine. When I next format my home PC I'll put Vista on. But you gotto remember that most people playing Valve games are normal non-nerd people who couldn't care less about OS's as long as they can use the programs they want.

It's not that they haven't experienced 32-bit desktop, it's that they run games in 16bit.

Actually.. that statistic is for Desktop bitdepth.. So whoever runs 16-bit desktop probably hasnt seen the wonders of 16.7 million colours.