The quad-core is dead! Long live the hex-core!

[tim0901]

The latest edition of the Steam Hardware Survey is out and with it comes some interesting news: the quad-core has been dethroned at long last. 6-core CPUs are now listed as the most popular amongst Steam users - at least for Windows.

 

 

The quad-core has held a steady position as the most popular CPU configuration amongst Steam users for many years, but thanks to the popularity of higher core count CPUs in recent years things have finally been beginning to change. March 2022 marks the first time that quad-cores have not been the most common CPU configuration amongst Windows users, likely as more and more users upgrade their aging Ivy Bridge/Haswell/Skylake/Kaby Lake CPUs.

 

Interestingly, however, more users are shifting to 8-core CPUs rather than 6-core CPUs. Over the last 18 months 6-core CPUs have gone from 25% marketshare to 33% - an 8% gain - while 8-core CPU marketshare has increased by 9% in the same time.

 

 

Also, the marketshare change for AMD has not changed much in that time, only increasing by 5% to 31% overall marketshare, suggesting that many of these higher core count CPU owners are still buying team blue, even before the release of Alder Lake.

The spike in December 2020 is believed to be related to the overcounting of gaming cafes in China. There's also a spike in 6-core CPUs, Nvidia GPUs and pre-Win10 OS usage at that time - a common combination in these environments.

 

While this trend in CPUs is the case for Windows users, the same is not true for MacOS or Linux users. Linux still has plenty of dual and quad-core systems at the low end, but also has far more 12 or 16 core systems than Windows. Seems like most Linux users are either building balls-to-the-walls compute monsters, or are trying to squeeze some extra performance out of an old system. The Steam Deck will also be helping to bolster quad-core numbers on LInux, but the release of the team deck hasn't caused a massive influx in quad-core systems either... Which does raise an interesting question: How many Steam Decks has Valve actually been shipping?

 

MacOS also paints a very interesting story. Dual core systems are especially common here - even more so than quad cores - but it is the 8-core CPU that is dominant here. This makes sense to me - the M1 is an 8-core chip and the last of the Intel Macbook Pros were 8-cores as well (or at least the ones worth gaming on were).

 

I would expect the 6-core CPU to overtake the quad-core in overall rankings within a month or two, however I wouldn't expect its reign to last as long as the quad core.

 

In GPU land the 1060 remains king, with marketshare continuing to increase. The 3060 is the most popular 30-series card, with marketshare increasing by 25% (0.55% overall) this month, suggesting Nvidia really are shipping a lot of them these days. AMD on the other hand is not... The 6700XT is the most popular - and only - RDNA 2 card on the survey, accounting for only 0.22% of Steam users. The 3090, for comparison, is at 0.44%. Average VRAM remains at 8GB, while the average system has 16GB of RAM - a marketshare of 51.5%. 32GB is on the up, but it's going to take some time.

 

Windows 11's marketshare has risen to ~17%, which isn't bad for what is basically still a beta product. Windows 7, meanwhile, continues to be more popular than it should be given its age and lack of support. It's marketshare is still more than 4x that of Linux... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Speaking of the penguin OS, Linux marketshare decreased this month, with neither SteamOS or Debian (the distro that SteamOS is based upon) not even making the charts. nope SteamOS is now Arch based (Valuve needs to update their website!) Arch adoption still decreased this month though so again, how many Steam Decks is Valve actually shipping?

 

My thoughts

How long will the 6-core sit on the throne before the 8-core overthrows it?

How long will it be before AMD actually starts shipping GPUs?

Could this year be the year of the Linux desktop? ^/s

And this also means that my PC is no longer the average Steam User's PC. I guess that means it's time for an upgrade?

 

Also, if anyone knows where you can find long-term Steam Hardware Survey data please let me know. Unfortunately you can't see any further back than 18 months on Steam's site.

 

Sources

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

[Zastonish]

4 minutes ago, tim0901 said:

The latest edition of the Steam Hardware Survey is out and with it comes some interesting news: the quad-core has been dethroned at long last. 6-core CPUs are now listed as the most popular amongst Steam users - at least for Windows.

 

 

The quad-core has held a steady position as the most popular CPU configuration amongst Steam users for many years, but thanks to the popularity of higher core count CPUs in recent years things have finally been beginning to change. March 2022 marks the first time that quad-cores have not been the most common CPU configuration amongst Windows users, likely as more and more users upgrade their aging Ivy Bridge/Haswell/Skylake/Kaby Lake CPUs.

 

Interestingly, however, more users are shifting to 8-core CPUs rather than 6-core CPUs. Over the last 18 months 6-core CPUs have gone from 25% marketshare to 33% - an 8% gain - while 8-core CPU marketshare has increased by 9% in the same time.

 

 

Also, the marketshare change for AMD has not changed much in that time, only increasing by 5% to 31% overall marketshare, suggesting that many of these higher core count CPU owners are still buying team blue, even before the release of Alder Lake.

The spike in December 2020 is believed to be related to the overcounting of gaming cafes in China. There's also a spike in 6-core CPUs, Nvidia GPUs and pre-Win10 OS usage at that time - a common combination in these environments.

 

While this trend in CPUs is the case for Windows users, the same is not true for MacOS or Linux users. Linux still has plenty of dual and quad-core systems at the low end, but also has far more 12 or 16 core systems than Windows. Seems like most Linux users are either building balls-to-the-walls compute monsters, or are trying to squeeze some extra performance out of an old system. The Steam Deck will also be helping to bolster quad-core numbers on LInux, but the release of the team deck hasn't caused a massive influx in quad-core systems either... Which does raise an interesting question: How many Steam Decks has Valve actually been shipping?

 

MacOS also paints a very interesting story. Dual core systems are especially common here - even more so than quad cores - but it is the 8-core CPU that is dominant here. This makes sense to me - the M1 is an 8-core chip and the last of the Intel Macbook Pros were 8-cores as well (or at least the ones worth gaming on were).

 

I would expect the 6-core CPU to overtake the quad-core in overall rankings within a month or two, however I wouldn't expect its reign to last as long as the quad core.

 

In GPU land the 1060 remains king, with marketshare continuing to increase. The 3060 is the most popular 30-series card, with marketshare increasing by 25% (0.55% overall) this month, suggesting Nvidia really are shipping a lot of them these days. AMD on the other hand is not... The 6700XT is the most popular - and only - RDNA 2 card on the survey, accounting for only 0.22% of Steam users. The 3090, for comparison, is at 0.44%. Average VRAM remains at 8GB, while the average system has 16GB of RAM - a marketshare of 51.5%. 32GB is on the up, but it's going to take some time.

 

Windows 11's marketshare has risen to ~17%, which isn't bad for what is basically still a beta product. Windows 7, meanwhile, continues to be more popular than it should be given its age and lack of support. It's marketshare is still more than 4x that of Linux... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Speaking of the penguin OS, Linux marketshare decreased this month, with neither SteamOS or Debian (the distro that SteamOS is based upon) not even making the charts. Again, how many Steam Decks is Valve actually shipping?

 

My thoughts

How long will the 6-core sit on the throne before the 8-core overthrows it?

How long will it be before AMD actually starts shipping GPUs?

Could this year be the year of the Linux desktop? ^/s

 

Also, if anyone knows where you can find long-term Steam Hardware Survey data please let me know. Unfortunately you can't see any further back than 18 months on Steam's site.

 

Sources

https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/

add Microsoft's new limitation on hardware and bloatware Linux surely will rise since it has no bloatware and Linux gaming is rising as well

[KaitouX]

37 minutes ago, tim0901 said:

Speaking of the penguin OS, Linux marketshare decreased this month, with neither SteamOS or Debian (the distro that SteamOS is based upon) not even making the charts. Again, how many Steam Decks is Valve actually shipping?

Pretty sure that the SteamOS on the Steam Deck is Arch based.

[tim0901]

4 minutes ago, KaitouX said:

The SteamOS on the SteamDeck is Arch based.

That's what I get for trusting Valve's own website for information about their products...

Quote

SteamOS is a public release of our Linux-based operating system. The base system draws from Debian 8, code named Debian Jessie.

Someone should really update that... That's really bad. Thanks for correcting me.

[Zodiark1593]

Definitely cool to see. Will be awhile longer before I jump in to the >4 core bandwagon myself. I tend to keep my hardware in service for absurdly long periods of time before I upgrade. I'd like to pick up a new GPU at some point to replace the aging decrepit GTX 960 2 GB I currently have, and a decent PSU. Can't believe my desktop is about 7 years old already. In between jobs at the moment though, so I can't be spending money unnecessarily at this time.

[RejZoR]

AMD did that with Ryzen 1600, 2600, 3600 and 5600. They were hugely popular because of great price and core count. And they also had huge IPC uplift.

[igormp]

3 hours ago, tim0901 said:

Seems like most Linux users are either building balls-to-the-walls compute monsters, or are trying to squeeze some extra performance out of an old system.

Hi, I'm both cases.

3 hours ago, tim0901 said:

Could this year be the year of the Linux desktop? ^/s

Sure_{ly not}

[Arika]

Quote

The quad-core is dead! Long live the hex-core

what a very weird conclusion to come to...

 

0.5% in any other field is known as margin of error.

[RejZoR]

18 minutes ago, Arika S said:

what a very weird conclusion to come to...

 

0.5% in any other field is known as margin of error.

The fact numbers are at least equalized means quad cores are in decline and only reason they are around are because people still have them. This number will never increase again if hexa cores reached that point, meaning they are more accessible and more popular.

[LAwLz]

4 hours ago, KaitouX said:

Pretty sure that the SteamOS on the Steam Deck is Arch based.

4 hours ago, tim0901 said:

That's what I get for trusting Valve's own website for information about their products...

SteamOS, the OS that you can download and install on your own machine, or get by buying a "Steam Machine", is/was Debian based.

The OS that comes installed on the SteamDeck, which for some reason Valve decided to also call "SteamOS", is Arch based.

 

It's a bit confusing but essentially Valve has released two different OSes and both of them are called "SteamOS".

[RejZoR]

I mean, that's not much different than MacOS for x86 and MacOS for ARM (M1). They are not making any distinction in name like Windows 10 ARM or whatever.

 

In a way, Debian is a bit better since it's most widely used distro in general. Arch is pretty niche and out of that niche only Manjaro is like the most popular and only because its maintainers made sure it has all the right tools packed in the package. Otherwise it would be pain in the butt to use.

[LAwLz]

4 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I mean, that's not much different than MacOS for x86 and MacOS for ARM (M1). They are not making any distinction in name like Windows 10 ARM or whatever.

 

In a way, Debian is a bit better since it's most widely used distro in general. Arch is pretty niche and out of that niche only Manjaro is like the most popular and only because its maintainers made sure it has all the right tools packed in the package. Otherwise it would be pain in the butt to use.

MacOS for x86 and MacOS for the M1 are essentially the same OS though.

With SteamOS, they have the same name but are completely different in core aspects. 

 

I don't think it matters that much since the original SteamOS was a flop, but calling the Arch-based SteamOS for "SteamOS 2" would have cleaned up some confusion.

[porina]

Playing with stats:

Median: 6 cores

Mode: 4 cores

Mean (average): 5.2 cores

Dual and quads add up to 45% only, and even if all of the "others" were single/tri core, that could only bring it to 49%. Average cores I make 5.2 excluding the "others" since I can't know what is in there.

 

Ryzen was released 5 years ago (April 2017), and up to that point was the quad core era. We could argue how often the average gamer upgrades, keeping in mind those visiting this forum are more likely to be at fast cycle than average.

 

1st gen ryzen wasn't the best for gaming performance of the time. As such I think the more important driver for 6 core high end gaming era was Coffee Lake later that year which didn't have the limitations of early Ryzen. Ryzen started the beyond 4 core mainstream, but Intel drove the gaming performance end at least up to Zen 2 in mid 2019.

 

For a new build now, if you're going higher end, the price difference isn't that great going from a 6 to 8. However for more budget concious performance, 6 cores still has a load of value. Quads for gaming might remain for those on the tightest budgets.

 

Core inflation might be interesting with Intel's hybrid CPUs. It will take time since only a limited selection have E cores, but if they move in as standard through more of the range then simple core counts will inflate faster in near future generations.

 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

6 hours ago, LAwLz said:

SteamOS, the OS that you can download and install on your own machine, or get by buying a "Steam Machine", is/was Debian based.

The OS that comes installed on the SteamDeck, which for some reason Valve decided to also call "SteamOS", is Arch based.

 

It's a bit confusing but essentially Valve has released two different OSes and both of them are called "SteamOS".

I believe steam os is being replaced by steam os (on the steam deck) pretty soon iirc

[da na]

Oh no... is the Core 2 Quad finally irrelevant? 

[Guest]

6 cores are getting more and more mainstream because they are priced as the mainstream options in desktop and laptop parts. But that doesn't mean that 4 cores are bad. Intel showed with the i3-12100 how a great performing quad core can look like, outperforming last gen six cores in many games. But both companies don't focus on making very high performing quad cores anymore, keeping their frequencies lower than the six core parts and Intel not releasing any K-variants for years now.

So while 4 cores can still perform very well, 6 core CPUs are just the safer mainstream option nowadays

[Helpful Tech Witch]

9 minutes ago, Medicate said:

6 cores are getting more and more mainstream because they are priced as the mainstream options in desktop and laptop parts. But that doesn't mean that 4 cores are bad. Intel showed with the i3-12100 how a great performing quad core can look like, outperforming last gen six cores in many games. But both companies don't focus on making very high performing quad cores anymore, keeping their frequencies lower than the six core parts and Intel not releasing any K-variants for years now.

So while 4 cores can still perform very well, 6 core CPUs are just the safer mainstream option nowadays

Well games are being more multi core oriented. For example halo infinite pegs all cores at 100% on my 4 core. It’s probably different for a 4/8 cpu but still, it’s not the age where a game would use 2c max still

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Helpful Tech Wiard said:

Well games are being more multi core oriented. For example halo infinite pegs all cores at 100% on my 4 core. It’s probably different for a 4/8 cpu but still, it’s not the age where a game would use 2c max still

Games don't really care about on how many cores they run, they mostly care about how fast the overall CPU package is. A 12100f pegged at 100% will always be as fast as a 10400f at 100%, and faster than any 6 core that's older than that. Obviously it would run better on a new 6/12 CPU but not because the game doesn't run well on 4 cores, but because a 6 core CPU of the same generation just has more overall performance than a 4 core. 

There will be a point where the 12100 is not strong enough to run games anymore, but at that point any older 6 core will also not run those games anymore.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 minute ago, Medicate said:

Games don't really care about on how many cores they run, they mostly care about how fast the overall CPU package is. A 12100f pegged at 100% will always be as fast as a 10400f at 100%, and faster than any 6 core that's older than that. Obviously it would run better on a new 6/12 CPU but not because the game doesn't run well on 4 cores, but because a 6 core CPU of the same generation just has more overall performance than a 4 core. 

There will be a point where the 12100 is not strong enough to run games anymore, but at that point any older 6 core will also not run those games anymore.

thats just not true. some games literally will not run on more than x cores at once. untill recently, that number was 4, because unless you when hedt thats all you could get. its something that only really started changing in like 2018 when ryzen made more cores cheeper

[tim0901]

4 hours ago, porina said:

Core inflation might be interesting with Intel's hybrid CPUs. It will take time since only a limited selection have E cores, but if they move in as standard through more of the range then simple core counts will inflate faster in near future generations.

For sure. I suspect this is why 10-core adoption has grown (comparatively) quickly over the last 5 months - that would be the 12600K. Unless people are suddenly manic buying old 10900Ks?

[KaitouX]

6 hours ago, LAwLz said:

MacOS for x86 and MacOS for the M1 are essentially the same OS though.

With SteamOS, they have the same name but are completely different in core aspects. 

 

I don't think it matters that much since the original SteamOS was a flop, but calling the Arch-based SteamOS for "SteamOS 2" would have cleaned up some confusion.

The SteamOS on the Steam Deck is the 3.0. So calling it SteamOS 3 would be the easiest way to differentiate.

[Deadpool2onBlu-Ray]

2 hours ago, tim0901 said:

For sure. I suspect this is why 10-core adoption has grown (comparatively) quickly over the last 5 months - that would be the 12600K. Unless people are suddenly manic buying old 10900Ks?

The 12600k is godly that's why. $250 bucks for a cpu that largely outperforms even the 5900x? Like what? Even if I was a bigger enthusiast than I am and could afford the 12900k/12700k, I wouldn't. The 12-6 is just THAT good for the price. So is the 12-7. But not the 12700k, the 12700f. 

[Deadpool2onBlu-Ray]

2 hours ago, Helpful Tech Wiard said:

thats just not true. some games literally will not run on more than x cores at once. untill recently, that number was 4, because unless you when hedt thats all you could get. its something that only really started changing in like 2018 when ryzen made more cores cheeper

That's really why I don't typically recommend the 12100f. If you are a 12100f budget esque builder, you might as well get an xbox series x/ps5 at that point in my opionon. If you are getting a 12100f I doubt you are grabbing anything higher than a 3050/6600, cards that just aren't worth it in my opinion. 

 

I am going to be recommending, in this order,

 

12400f/B660

12700f/B660

12600k/cheap z690.

 

If I had to do it over, I'd definitely get a 12700f most likely. I mean I am lucky and have a microcenter nearby so I grabbed the 12-6 for $250. But the 12700f has two more performance cores and for the vast majority of people is only ~$34   more (312-278). Also, at the time, I didn't realize Alder lake OC'd so poorly 

[Helpful Tech Witch]

1 minute ago, Ryan829 said:

That's really why I don't typically recommend the 12100f. If you are a 12100f budget esque builder, you might as well get an xbox series x/ps5 at that point in my opionon. If you are getting a 12100f I doubt you are grabbing anything higher than a 3050/6600, cards that just aren't worth it in my opinion. 

 

I am going to be recommending, in this order,

 

12400f/B660

12700f/B660

12600k/cheap z690.

 

If I had to do it over, I'd definitely get a 12700f most likely. I mean I am lucky and have a microcenter nearby so I grabbed the 12-6 for $250. But the 12700f has two more performance cores and for the vast majority of people is only ~$34   more (312-278). Also, at the time, I didn't realize Alder lake OC'd so poorly 

i disagree suggesting to go console if you looking to build a pc at that budget. If you want to build a pc, theres probably a reason. Say you want to play a pc only game, like cs, league, or val. Or you want to have more options like full kb/m support.
I think that the 3050 and 6600 are decent cards if you can get them for there supposed pricess. The only new card thats not worth it even for at msrp (which it is at) is the 6500xt. That cards slower than mine sometimes.

[Deadpool2onBlu-Ray]

4 minutes ago, Helpful Tech Wiard said:

i disagree suggesting to go console if you looking to build a pc at that budget. If you want to build a pc, theres probably a reason. Say you want to play a pc only game, like cs, league, or val. Or you want to have more options like full kb/m support.
I think that the 3050 and 6600 are decent cards if you can get them for there supposed pricess. The only new card thats not worth it even for at msrp (which it is at) is the 6500xt. That cards slower than mine sometimes.

Eh, the 3050 is decent so is the 6600. I just don't like AMD cards. Not even fanboy reasons. Every AMD card I've ever had has had issues. The 3050 should be $199 then it would be a great value. The 3060 is a scam at $329 when the 3060ti is $399 for 40% more performance almost. I guess a 3050/12100f system would be around a series x price in theory if you mega cheaped out on everything else. I just personally think the lowest "cost of entry" into decent pc gaming in 2022 is around a 1k system, which is double the price of the consoles, and even then you'd have to get a 3060ti at MSRP. 

 

This build I just came up with is $1000 on the nose and is the point of entry in my opinion for it to be worth it over a console. 

 

PCPartPicker Part List: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/b9tHzf

CPU: Intel Core i5-12400F 2.5 GHz 6-Core Processor  ($187.99 @ Amazon) 
Motherboard: MSI PRO B660M-A DDR4 Micro ATX LGA1700 Motherboard  ($139.99 @ Amazon) 
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LPX 16 GB (2 x 8 GB) DDR4-3200 CL16 Memory  ($69.98 @ Amazon) 
Storage: Samsung 980 500 GB M.2-2280 NVME Solid State Drive  ($61.99 @ Adorama) 
Video Card: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti 8 GB Founders Edition Video Card  ($399.00) 
Case: Phanteks Eclipse P300A Mesh ATX Mid Tower Case  ($72.98 @ Newegg) 
Power Supply: Corsair CXM 650 W 80+ Bronze Certified Semi-modular ATX Power Supply  ($59.99 @ Best Buy) 
Total: $991.92
Prices include shipping, taxes, and discounts when available
Generated by PCPartPicker 2022-04-07 14:48 EDT-0400