© ROOT-NATION.com - Use of content is permitted with a backlink.
I’ve written more than one analysis of hardware I haven’t personally tested, often with support from Goodram. But when I have something worth saying and believe there are important points to highlight, I’d rather contribute to the discussion than stay silent. Steam Machine has certainly generated plenty of attention – and not all of it positive. This article will probably add even more fuel to the debate because, for perhaps the first time in ages, I’m actually going to praise Apple. Specifically, for decisions that are often – and in many cases justifiably – criticized. The interesting part is that we rarely see this approach elsewhere. Or rather, we have seen it before – but, ironically enough, it also came from Valve, just in a very different form.
TABLE OF CONTENTS:
Video about the Valve Steam Machine
Why Goodram?
Before diving in, I’d like to thank Goodram for supporting this piece. Without companies like Goodram, there’s a good chance devices such as the Steam Machine would have faced an even tougher path to retail. As Europe’s only manufacturer of memory chips, the company plays an important role in strengthening the regional supply chain and helping to keep memory pricing competitive. They also deserve credit for the Move Ridge SSD, which stores the game library I use for benchmarking. If a Steam Machine eventually makes its way to my desk, chances are those same games will be used for testing it as well. I’m not counting on that happening – but I’ve learned not to rule anything out.
It’s also worth noting that the Steam Machine is surprisingly difficult to get hold of. Even after its price increased from $800 to $1,100, demand has remained strong. That is despite performance falling short of the originally implied 4K/60 FPS gaming target – a claim that has quietly disappeared from the marketing. At the $1,100 price point, however, the competition becomes much tougher. Some alternatives are more of an internet meme than a serious contender, while others are genuinely compelling products. Several of them also offer higher gaming performance, particularly models equipped with dual-channel memory. The so-called “GabeCube,” by comparison, does not.
Fundamental Misunderstanding
At first glance, the Steam Machine may seem like one of Valve’s least convincing hardware efforts to date, at least from the perspective of the average gamer. In fact, it is easy to argue that this is the company’s most controversial product in years. And yes, before anyone points it out, Hunt Down the Freeman was not actually developed by Valve – but the comparison still illustrates the point.
So where’s the catch, and what does Apple have to do with any of this? The key point is that the Steam Machine is best understood as an ultra-compact, whisper-quiet gaming console – not as a gaming PC. It simply happens to inherit many of the advantages traditionally associated with PCs. And I’m not just talking about the fact that both the SSD and memory are user-replaceable. It also includes USB Type-C, a microSD card reader, and other conveniences you would normally expect from a desktop platform rather than a conventional console.
Yes, the SoC is soldered, but that is also one of its advantages. This is where Apple provides a useful point of comparison. Have you ever wondered why Apple devices tend to deliver a more consistent experience? Applications that run on the platform generally behave more predictably. In terms of day-to-day stability, macOS has traditionally offered a more consistent user experience than either Windows or Linux in comparable everyday workloads.
Optimization
The reason is straightforward: Apple typically releases only three or four processor variants per generation. Since these SoCs are integrated into the hardware, their specifications can be provided directly to software optimization teams – for example, the developers of DaVinci Resolve – allowing them to optimize for just a handful of processor configurations. By contrast, the Windows ecosystem includes hundreds of different SoCs, not to mention the enormous number of possible combinations of discrete GPUs and CPUs.
In a typical Windows laptop, you have a CPU, one or even two GPUs, and an unknown amount of RAM running at different speeds with different timings, depending on the configuration. Gaming is no different. Minimum system requirements are not an exact guarantee – they are only rough guidelines. Apple, on the other hand, has a much more standardized hardware platform. That is why titles such as Resident Evil 4 can run on an iPhone 15 Pro. Whether you would actually want to play it there is another question, but the capability is there.
Steam Machines follow the same philosophy. A growing number of games now include a dedicated Steam Machine preset, which is often selected by default – much like on the Steam Deck. The result is a well-balanced combination of image quality and performance, closely resembling the experience offered by modern game consoles.
This is an important distinction because what primarily separates a console from a gaming PC is its simplicity of use. Much of that experience is enabled by SteamOS. There is no Windows to manage, no constant system updates, telemetry, AI-driven features, or preinstalled bloatware. At the same time, Proton provides near-seamless compatibility with a vast library of Windows games.
So, imagine a compact box on your desk that’s about half the size of an Xbox. It runs quietly, is highly optimized, and is always ready to use thanks to its virtually instant wake-from-sleep capability – a far cry from the typical Windows experience. And then there is the Steam Controller. I cannot overstate how much I want one. I really, really want a Steam Controller.
I would want the Steam Controller even without a Steam Machine. As someone who is firmly committed to Windows, Steam Machines themselves are not particularly appealing to me. But that is not really the point, is it?
Conclusion
If you think Steam Machines have been a failure, it may be worth reconsidering that view. Valve has become – and remains – a serious competitor to both Xbox and PlayStation, and not solely because of the Steam Deck. Optimized hardware does not necessarily deliver the highest possible performance, but it does provide a quieter, more streamlined user experience. That is something Sony has had to take seriously, as its competitor is not constrained by the traditional model of platform-exclusive titles. Microsoft, meanwhile, faces a different challenge: Valve has demonstrated just how much of the Windows gaming experience can be replaced with a leaner, more user-focused alternative.
Who came out on top? Valve did. And, in many ways, so did we – just not necessarily in the way some people expected.
That wraps up my thoughts. Let me know in the comments whether you agree that this release represents a genuinely significant milestone. And before I go, I’d like to once again thank Goodram for its continued support. There will be plenty more coverage of the company’s products, as a substantial number of new releases are on the way. In the meantime, feel free to share your thoughts – I look forward to reading them.