Alienware Alpha is a $550 Steam Machine

Scorpus

Posts: 2,156   +238
Staff member

Even though Valve has delayed the Steam Machines project to 2015, Alienware is pushing ahead with their custom gaming PC offering, revealing the Alpha at E3 2014.

The Alienware Alpha base model will be available for $550, which is very affordable for a full PC positioned against the Xbox One and PlayStation 4, both of which sell for $399. The base model will pack a Haswell-based Intel Core i3 processor, 4 GB of 1600 MHz DDR3 memory, and a custom-built Maxwell-based Nvidia GPU with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory.

The use of a custom graphics core in the Alpha is interesting, as it's unclear whether this is just a typical implementation of an existing Maxwell GPU such as GM107 (found in the GeForce GTX 750 Ti), or whether Nvidia has collaborated to produce something entirely new for this system.

Either way, it appears the GPU is soldered onto the motherboard, as Alienware notes it's not upgradeable. Several components are upgradeable though, including the CPU, memory, and storage, which is a 500 GB hard drive in the base model system.

Like the Xbox One you'll find HDMI in for direct pass-through, plus HDMI out supporting 4K, four USB ports, Ethernet and optical audio out. Custom configurations from Alienware will allow you to add in Wi-Fi 802.11ac, swap out the Core i3 CPU for an i5 or i7, and upgrade to 8 GB of RAM and a 2 TB hard drive.

Software-wise the Alpha will come with Windows 8.1 pre-loaded, as Valve's SteamOS isn't quite ready, with a custom user interface on top similar to Steam's Big Picture mode. It'll also ship with a wireless Xbox 360 controller with a receiver, due to the delay of the Steam Controller.

The Alienware Alpha will be available sometime in the holiday season.

Permalink to story.

 
Seems strange to me why they would solder the GPU but make everything else (cpu, ram,etc) able to be upgraded.
 
Seems strange to me why they would solder the GPU but make everything else (cpu, ram,etc) able to be upgraded.
Whats so strange about making the main feature in the unit a permanent fixture? They know if the main feature goes wonky, you will be buying another unit.
 
They had me interested until "custom built GPU"

I've had too many bad experiences with proprietary custom hardware in the past. No wish to repeat a hellish history for me.
 
Why a 750TI? Might as well have stuck a 760Ti in it... atleast that can play games at a reasonable frame rate
 
I wonder what the heat difference would be, between those two cards in such a small case?

The motherboard will take a lot of the heat due to it being soldered onto that bad boy but im sure they would have stuffed a fan similar to the F16's in there just to make sure its cool enough to play ;D
 
Care to explain more rather than just stating something without adding any facts?
Perhaps because ALL the games are already ON Windows? Perhaps its cheaper for all these studios to just offer a Windows device rather than spend millions porting all those games to a less than ideal platform (read that as simple to use). A very small percentage of gamers actually enjoy having to fiddle with something to get it exactly how you want it, by installing this or configuring that. Windows just works straight out the box, no mess, no fuss, and despite what you may think, It works well enough for most situations.
 
I'm really not sure who this is being marketed for because pc gamers build their own rigs and console gamers...own consoles...soo....? That soldered gpu tho, they cant be serious, but then again, they have to make it so that you have to buy a new steam machine when the graphics is out of date, and we know how that goes.
 
Buy a new one every 2 years, better ones, and you will still save money.
 
Don't sound as if you think, it is not worth walking through a door because it is not open. Open the door or allow others to open the door, but don't be guilty of thinking the door can't be opened.
Windows just works straight out the box, no mess, no fuss, and despite what you may think, It works well enough for most situations.
And in 10 years Steam OS could do the same. If every game within the next 10 years supports Windows and Linux, I'm fairly certain no one would really care about the older games that don't support Linux. Windows works, because people chose to walk through that door 20 years ago. Linux will work, if people choose to walk through that door as well.

As soon as Steam OS releases, I will for the first time choose to use Linux. If I knew anything about Linux, I would all ready be using Steam OS. I had already made a decision to use Linux. But with the announcement of Steam OS, my plan was slightly delayed.
 
As soon as Steam OS releases, I will for the first time choose to use Linux. If I knew anything about Linux, I would all ready be using Steam OS. I had already made a decision to use Linux. But with the announcement of Steam OS, my plan was slightly delayed.
But my question is why would you want to use Linux? There is inherently nothing special about it, meaning everything it does Windows does, if not better. Now if you try to feed me that line of crap about it being "free", then that is where this conversation ends, and I no longer pay any attention to you. Windows is not expensive by any account, and just like the CPU is a working part that a pc that it cannot do without, so too can it not function without an OS. Perhaps Windows is a paid for option, but at least I know what I get with it when I buy it, I don't have to jump through hoops to get it to work. Granted Linux distributions have gotten better in this regard over the years, but its still a far cry from the ease of use it needs to be at. Following on from my CPU analogy, even if I was given a completely open source CPU for free (not that's actually possible), I would seriously question its stability for one, and its reliability amongst a host of other issues that come to mind. I am not so poor as to try and claim that Windows is expensive, because it is not. Perhaps for a student still living on mommy and daddy's pocket money, or a part timer that may be the case, but that scenario is rejected as a valid concern for that very reason. Windows used to be expensive, not anymore. This revelation of price had nothing to do with Linux per say, but the increased competition that Microsoft is experiencing, which is a good thing. However, Linux is an open source project, and like all open source projects, they remain in the realm of the minority as only a few will keep up with its rapid developments. Not a business, nor an average user, nor even an advanced user would put up with that for very long before growing tired of it. Linux is thus unsupported, and by that very nature, will remain in the minority. This is unless a large enough company decides to create its own paid for build and provide support and maintenance. Perhaps that will be Valve, but lets not forget that Steam OS is intended as a gaming platform, first and foremost, and while it may run applications beyond that, its main focus of development will be games.
No, think of that door you mentioned. Its not only closed, the hinges are rusted thus creating even more resistance in trying to open it. Linux in its current open source form will never be a mainstream product, because even if a company does come along and release a custom version, it will be sure to make it so different as to make it as hard as possible for people to easily port applications to another free distribution to protect its investments in its product. A company wont support Linux if there is no profit in it for them. Also, I for one as a software developer shudder to think of the nightmare of compatibility problems that would emerge if there is no single standard to follow concerning an OS, if there are so many to support. That's why Linux has issues with compatibility even amongst its own distributions, whereas Windows is fairly forgiving amongst its various versions. Windows for the time being is the perfect gaming platform due to its versatility ad it doesn't hurt that its got basically every game and application going for it. So as long as Windows remains as affordable as it is, and Microsoft doesn't mess too much with the formula (The start screen is not a concern of mine) then I can see no reason to jump ship, but if that which I just mentioned were to change too drastically as to be unpleasant (I doubt Microsoft will do anything really major to harm its support base) then who knows...
 
But my question is why would you want to use Linux?
Because I'm growing tired of MS, end of story. I came to this thread to talk about Steam OS, not throw rocks at Microsoft. I won't be itemizing all the things I hate about MS in this thread. I've already stated I have no experience with Linux, so I can not answer your question as to why I would use Linux. I can only mention reasons why I want to try.

Ohh and as for the cost, I would pay the same price as Windows for a Linux distribution when the time comes. It has nothing to do with Linux being free, and everything to do with wanting to move away from MS.
 
Calling it now. SteamOS will not help PC gaming... at all. A windows version would though.
The very nature of steamos suggests otherwise.
Windows is an added barrier to entry - it costs money. Steamos is free.
The investment for a gaming PC then becomes the cost of the hardware.
With commoditized hardware (somewhat common, if fragmented) being mass produced to make steam machines, economics of scale kick in. I'm seeing this leading to PC hardware at similar costs to console hardware.
Throw in the fact that its a full blown computer rather than just a toy, and you have major market shaping forces at play. A steam machine is very likely to be a far better value proposition than a proprietary console.
So, no...this would only help PC gaming.
 
Back