A new graphics card tops the Steam survey for the first time since 2018

m3tavision

Posts: 1,106   +939
It's all about needs and preferences. I would get one, if I was in the market for this, since it's a good HTPC option, no separate power needed and low for factor.
That 6500xt is pcie4 x4 and will not work so well in a pcie3 board. That card makes no sense to me now, maybe later when all systems are pcie4+.
You can't blame/judge someone for having different opinion. His money, his choice.
Me I go with the best value for my money no matter the brand. I'm looking for an GPU upgrade and until now no option for me but wait better days.

Correct, your needs are different than Others.

Almost all gamers choose price/performance for their criteria, save a few. That is why I asked who needs 4 year old GTX technology, today..? Specially when a 6600(non-XT) beats the RTX 2070 in modern games.... and cost the same as a GTX 1660ti... Causing one to ask, what specific reason for the low-grade GTX card...?


Captain, I don't think anyone would get beat up, but I do know that people would be having a few good laughs at your expense.
 

msroadkill612

Posts: 112   +43
Am sure it could be better put, but its late ...

The frugal are usually luddites... "u dont need nvme vs sata, or pci4 vs pcie3 e.g."

but pcie4 maybe an exception, in that it allows the dearest (GPU) component to be made much cheaper.

16 lanes vs 8 lanes makes for a higher BOM card, & 8 lanes of pcie3 is getting bandwidth challenged for a gpu nowadays.

the amd rx6600 family scrubs up pretty well for the (sub $200 at last) money on a pcie4 rig, but I am not so sure of its future on a pcie3 rig.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 2,280   +2,857
TechSpot Elite
Am sure it could be better put, but its late ...

The frugal are usually luddites... "u dont need nvme vs sata, or pci4 vs pcie3 e.g."

but pcie4 maybe an exception, in that it allows the dearest (GPU) component to be made much cheaper.

16 lanes vs 8 lanes makes for a higher BOM card, & 8 lanes of pcie3 is getting bandwidth challenged for a gpu nowadays.

the amd rx6600 family scrubs up pretty well for the (sub $200 at last) money on a pcie4 rig, but I am not so sure of its future on a pcie3 rig.

The RX 6600 and 6600XT have a bright future on PCIe 3.0:

average-fps_2560_1440.png


1.2% performance loss, or a single frame. Nothing that anyone will ever notice.
 

msroadkill612

Posts: 112   +43
Our preconceptions about price performance may need an update in the light of rocketing power costs too.

The notion that gamers dont care about power costs may be challenged.

Modern frugal cards like the 6600 may be a better deal than cheaper used ones than they seem.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 2,280   +2,857
TechSpot Elite
IMO, the sweet spot is the 1660 ti. I think it has about 130 more CUDA cores than the stock 1660 or 1660 Super. Assuming, of course you can manage to live your life without ray tracing or 4K gaming. (Or I suppose, the day after tomorrow's AAA titles).

The 1660Ti and 1660 Super get the same frame rates in games as the Super has a significant memory bandwidth advantage over the Ti. Just get whichever of the two is cheaper.
 

msroadkill612

Posts: 112   +43
The RX 6600 and 6600XT have a bright future on PCIe 3.0:

average-fps_2560_1440.png


1.2% performance loss, or a single frame. Nothing that anyone will ever notice.
& on older games probably no difference, but games certainly change - in fact there seems to be a move to use more system resources in games (as do consoles), & that means a greater dependence on the pcie interface.

we see all the fuss about how the 5800x3d cpu has made such a difference - it seems no gpu is an island, so surely a fast link helps?
 

dankbot420

Posts: 13   +10
It seems the 1xxx is still king when playing games on the biggest platform on the planet!

So, where are those top of the line 3xxx and 4xxx and who is playing them and where?? Are they still trying to milk Crapto junk?? Even the 2xxx is very poorly represented!

Top of the line 3xxx and 4xxx seem to be for bragging rights only!!
No it just means most peasants have budget low end cards. Just because the 3xxx are not on the list doesn't mean people aren't using them.
 

m3tavision

Posts: 1,106   +939
The RX 6600 and 6600XT have a bright future on PCIe 3.0:

average-fps_2560_1440.png


1.2% performance loss, or a single frame. Nothing that anyone will ever notice.

Not a single person is worried about PCIe 3.0. It's not even a talking point, just an excuse so people can look away from the facts.


Secondly, 6600xt is faster than the RTX2070 & the RTX2080..! But.. we are not talking about the 6600xt, but the 6600. The Radeon 6600 is $215 at NewEgg... and is faster than the RTX2070 and ties the RTX2070 SUPER in modern games...!

So why would someone buy a GTX 1660ti for $215...?
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,341   +4,346
Why would anyone care about what craptop GPUs are in the list? It's not like most people with craptops actually choose what GPU that a craptop comes with, nor can they ever change it. Thus, I think that it's the desktop discrete cards that are most applicable to tech enthusiasts, not the craptop IGPs. Hell, I don't even think that desktop IGPs should be considered relevant.

There has been talk about nVidia recently being deceptive with their part numbers because of the RTX 4080 12GB being renamed the RTX 4070 Ti but this isn't new. For nVidia, this is a tradition that dates back quite some time. The RTX 3080 12GB had a more potent GPU than the 10GB model (with a HUGE price increase) while the RTX 3060 8GB model is significantly slower than the 12GB model (with NO price decrease). As we can see here though, nVidia offered the GTX 1060 with either the GP104 or the slower GP106 GPU with 7.2 billion and 4.4 billion transistors respectively.

So, how does the GTX 1060 get surpassed by a significantly slower card almost five years after the GTX 1060 dominated the charts? I can think of a couple of ways:
1) The GTX 1650 was a favourite among OEMs for their "gaming" PCs.
2) People are so ignorant that they don't bother looking at performance numbers and just buy the cheapest green gaming card that they can find.

Clearly, the truth that the overwhelming majority of gamers game at 1080p60fps cannot be denied here. People are gaming on Steam with a card that can barely do 1080p60fps in most titles but they're still using them without a problem. The continuing popularity of the GTX 1060 and GTX 1650 only serve to prove that most gamers, even the majority of gamers with nVidia cards, don't give a rat's posterior about ray-tracing or DLSS because GTX cards don't have these. We're also talking about a card that gets just destroyed by the (admittedly laughable) RX 6500 XT with a gigantic 33% performance delta! Not even the RX 6500 XT's loss of performance from using PCI-E 3.0 or older can rectify that. I really have to assume that Dell and/or HP have been putting this joke of a video card in their "home gaming PCs" for noobs.

I think that the Steam survey is intentionally skewed towards Intel and AMD anyway because I have repeatedly tried to get the stupid thing to run on my PC over the past 8 years or so and have NEVER been successful. It installs fine, it loads fine, it says that it's "scanning my PC" (and all of my PC's info pops up on the screen) but then when it says that it's sending the data to Valve, it hangs. This has been a problem over 5 different CPUs (FX-8350, R7-1700, R5-3600X, R7-5700X, R7-5800X3D), 4 different video cards (HD 7970, R9 Fury, RX 5700 XT, RX 6800 XT), three different motherboards (Gigabyte 990FX, ASRock X370, ASRock X570) and two versions of Windows (7 and 10). I've been using PCs since MS-DOS and there's no way that there's a problem with ALL of my Windows-based operating systems. It's like Steam detects an all-AMD build and just stops.

Mine is not an isolated experience as many people have said the same thing. It's even a known issue in the Steam community and Steam has never even bothered to address it no matter how many people have said that it doesn't work. These are the symptoms that I've experienced on every occasion that I've tried to take the hardware survey:
Github shows that it's a problem for Linux, Windows 11 as well and dates back to 2018.

I have tried repeatedly to get Steam to address my issue but they don't even respond. This makes me wonder if the Steam survey results are some kind of propaganda because one would think that they'd have a fix for it after all these years. The fact that they just ignore it sure seems suspicious as if the survey is "Working as intended" which would explain Valve's attitude toward it. As long as it doesn't work on my PC, I have to question the validity because I'm not the only one. How many other AMD CPUs and Radeon video cards are being used that don't show up in the survey list for this reason and make people think that nVidia and Intel have far more market share than they actually do?

BTW, iIf anyone knows a fix for this, I would be grateful if you could share it with me because I've never been able to find anything.
 
Last edited:

Stardude82

Posts: 26   +6
Couple of thoughts:
Lots of 1650 laptops still being sold. Wonder if they are counted there.

There is no replacement for the 1650. It is still the best you can do limited to 75W slot power. It will be around in numbers until there is a good all around replacement.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 3,341   +4,346
Couple of thoughts:
Lots of 1650 laptops still being sold. Wonder if they are counted there.
I don't think that they are because on that chart, craptop GPUs are listed as "mobile".
There is no replacement for the 1650. It is still the best you can do limited to 75W slot power. It will be around in numbers until there is a good all around replacement.
This is true. It is the best that you can use on 75W or less.
 

m3tavision

Posts: 1,106   +939
I think that the Steam survey is intentionally skewed towards Intel and AMD anyway because I have repeatedly tried to get the stupid thing to run on my PC over the past 8 years or so and have NEVER been successful. It installs fine, it loads fine, it says that it's "scanning my PC" (and all of my PC's info pops up on the screen) but then when it says that it's sending the data to Valve, it hangs. This has been a problem over 5 different CPUs (FX-8350, R7-1700, R5-3600X, R7-5700X, R7-5800X3D), 4 different video cards (HD 7970, R9 Fury, RX 5700 XT, RX 6800 XT), three different motherboards (Gigabyte 990FX, ASRock X370, ASRock X570) and two versions of Windows (7 and 10). I've been using PCs since MS-DOS and there's no way that there's a problem with ALL of my Windows-based operating systems. It's like Steam detects an all-AMD build and just stops.

Mine is not an isolated experience as many people have said the same thing. It's even a known issue in the Steam community and Steam has never even bothered to address it no matter how many people have said that it doesn't work. These are the symptoms that I've experienced on every occasion that I've tried to take the hardware survey:
Github shows that it's a problem for Linux, Windows 11 as well and dates back to 2018.

I have tried repeatedly to get Steam to address my issue but they don't even respond. This makes me wonder if the Steam survey results are some kind of propaganda because one would think that they'd have a fix for it after all these years. The fact that they just ignore it sure seems suspicious as if the survey is "Working as intended" which would explain Valve's attitude toward it. As long as it doesn't work on my PC, I have to question the validity because I'm not the only one. How many other AMD CPUs and Radeon video cards are being used that don't show up in the survey list for this reason and make people think that nVidia and Intel have far more market share than they actually do?

BTW, iIf anyone knows a fix for this, I would be grateful if you could share it with me because I've never been able to find anything.

This has been my experience all but once.

I ran a personal 3-rig lan room and am hardware agnostic. And over the past 7 years I have only been asked for a survey twice. (Who in the hell is running their laptop for 12h gaming sessions...?)

But anytime I try to push a survey it hangs... if it's Radeon. I've even had my EVGA card swapped into a rig testing it a game, and decided to push a survey with this GPU in the rig.. and it sent it. People openly talk about this on twitch and Valve is aware of this...

That is why I do not give Valve's "Survey" and credibility... because it isn't a survey.
 

Trapped Nowhere

Posts: 131   +95
Anyone got any recommendation on a fair priced card/combo that can generally play just about anything at 1080p 60fps and performs nicely with modern emulators?
 

msroadkill612

Posts: 112   +43
The RX 6600 and 6600XT have a bright future on PCIe 3.0:

average-fps_2560_1440.png


1.2% performance loss, or a single frame. Nothing that anyone will ever notice.
The basket of games being averaged change over time - become more demanding. Its only a matter of time before 8GB/s of pcie bandwidth becomes a bottleneck in a user's favoured game.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 2,280   +2,857
TechSpot Elite
The basket of games being averaged change over time - become more demanding. Its only a matter of time before 8GB/s of pcie bandwidth becomes a bottleneck in a user's favoured game.
Or will the 2048 cores become the bottleneck first? Or the 128-bit bus? Will that 1.2% reduction increase to 3%?

Which is still a meaningless reduction in performance.