Steam shows massive adoption of Windows 7 by gamers

So, get this: while Windows 7 only accounts for 6% of the global operating system market, 23% of Steam gamers are using Windows 7!

The breakdown shows a lot of statistics, including average processor speed (2.5GHz) and NVIDIA (65%) versus ATI (30%). You can even see the split between 32- and 64-bit versions of Windows 7: if you click 'Windows Versions', all the flavors drop down 64-bit has 15.6% of the total share, while 32-bit has 7.45%. In the past month, the Windows 7 64-bit adoption jumped 2.5%, while Windows XP dropped by 3.2% a sure sign that gamer geeks are finally migrating away from XP (and that Santa brought them shiny new computers!).

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
GamerPS3603407d ago

from vista64, it ain't that much of difference for gamer but It is excellent Operating system. Everyone with vista32 and xp should upgrade to window7.

Traveler3407d ago

Yeah it really is an excellent operating system. That is why the adoption rate has been so high.

mal_tez923407d ago

but 64-bit windows 7 just has a better interface design, more features and runs smoother.

Games also run better

SaiyanFury3407d ago

I've been using Windows 7 64-bit for about 8 months now. Very stable for games and it's extremely well performing. It also runs very fast on my PC and it supports my mouse's functionality. I can use the Aero Glass interface with my mouse and graphically scroll between windows with no trouble. I've also played a crapload of games in it, and I've rarely seen any crash. Games are a lot more stable in Windows 7 than Windows XP. Windows 7 is the best, and most modern OS available on a modern PC. As well, it supports x86 applications extremely well. It really is what Vista should have been from the beginning. I can play pretty much any game, even Fallout 3, and it's very stable. Windows 7 rules. When I come off of my RC version, I'll be getting it happily.

JsonHenry3406d ago

I never had any problems with Vista x64. But I moved on to Win7 x64 and haven't looked back.

wicko3406d ago

Yep been running Win7 64 since the RC1 came out.. was great even before it was out on retail. First time I've actually bought an OS, used to get them for free through my university, but I've graduated since :p

zagibu3406d ago

My flat has only 3 windows. Why need 7? Two on either side would work well enough to create some airflow...

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3406d ago
saint_john_paul_ii3407d ago

because its an OS that actually works.

3407d ago Replies(1)
Dirk Benedict3407d ago

I don't. They're almost like miniature comedians. They bring me the joy of laughter every time I log into N4G.

champ213407d ago

i upgraded to ssds instead of going windows 7.

vista with ssds in raid > windows 7

Load times on games are down to a minimal, windows is usable as soon as it laods(even those load times are cut down). Imo ssd is the way forward.. id never go back to standard hds.

GamerPS3603407d ago (Edited 3407d ago )

I heard that before but I have no idea how you set that up. And, can't you set ssds on Win7? I am just asking if I ever feel the need of SSDS.

chak_3407d ago

hmm vista doesn't have TRIM, so your SSD will be soon facked up.

champ213407d ago (Edited 3407d ago )

sure you can setup ssds on win7.

ultimate version of windows7 costs about 200usd here, i preffered to spend 400usd and go ssds raid instead. since with ssds + vista > windows 7 alone doesnt stand a chance.

Vista is so dam responsive with ssds.


Vista does have trim support(intel released firmware updates few months ago, however those were locked out soon i managed to get those updates). that didnt do any good since ssds in raid are not supported by trim even in windows 7.

Intel recently released new driveres for vista for trim support, for those of you wanting to have ssd(not raid) with vista should be fine.

Also its just the write speed of ssds which goes slower if trim isnt there. However read speed is what is really important to most of us, which remains uneffected. Even for write in raid the ssds are already so fast i dont care if it does become slightly slower.

Faelan3407d ago


If I had 400 bucks to spend and my choice was either Vista + SSD RAID or Win 7 plus a single SSD (assuming we're talking a 2 drive setup with each drive at about $200), I'd take the single drive solution with Win 7 any day of the week.

The reason?

There's more to life than just blazing fast load speeds. I've done RAID setups on traditional HDs in the past and frankly, while I could certainly measure the increase in performance using benchmarks in a big way, in reality it didn't feel like it gave me a whole lot. Maybe SSDs are a bit better since the access times won't kill the whole experience as badly as it does on traditional HDs, but even a single SSD is a huge improvement over a regular HD in this respect.

I suppose it depends on what you're using it for, but loading a game in say... 15 seconds rather than 30 (I'm being generous about the benefit of the RAID setup here)... doesn't mean a whole lot if you play that game for half an hour. I can only see a real use for it if you play games where you're constantly loading new levels or like to hop in and play a game for 5 minutes many times a day... or use some application that really pushes you drive for some reason, like video editing perhaps?

Anyway, congratulations on your setup. I'm sure it's awesome and it sounds like it works for you. I'm just saying that's not how I would have done it if it was me... that's all :)

champ213407d ago (Edited 3407d ago )

well lets look at it another way.. if you had 200usd to spend.. its either getting windows 7 or upgrade to ssd.

after my experience with windows 7 running on standard hdd, and vista running on ssd. id pick vista on ssd anyday.

i went with a raid setup because a single 80gb ssd is just too small. Also ssds are much more reliable then harddrives in raid.

Since i wanted to put my windows on ssd and have space for some game installs, ssd in raid seemed to be the best option.

I do agree however game load times cant be too different between a single ssd and raid. Though the move from hdd is a drastic difference.

When it comes to video editing ssds in raid are just blazing fast.

overall for me leaving out the 5970 gpu on my setup, ssd has been the best performance upgrade. It makes windows so smooth i am considering getting an ssd for my laptop(currently has vista), waiting on the 300gb models.

Faelan3407d ago

Well, if the choice is between a Vista on a single SSD or Win 7 on a regular HD, then it swings a bit more in favor of Vista on a single SSD, I agree.

However, as you point out, 80GB ain't much if you want to put more than just a couple of games on it. Because of that and because the games I play tend to be "frontloaded" and use lots of space, ie. MMOs, flight/space simulators and strategy games, I'd still pick Win 7 on a HD for the time being.

In fact, that's exactly what I did and Win 7 has turned out to be a performance boost in itself (not to mention that I find it more pleasant to work with). Since I've been able to live just fine with 2 x 1TB WD Caviar black (non-RAID, OS on one and games on the other) on Vista for a while, I figured waiting for the SSD technology to mature a bit and drop in price will benefit me more in the long run.

Of course... if I had $400 extra lying around and nothing better to spend it on... I'd get that SSD RAID setup right now and shift Win 7 over to that. It would be hilarious since I can imagine that it would take longer for the BIOS to POST than it would take for Win 7 to boot up :)

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3407d ago
Show all comments (22)