For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
The explanation from this article made more sense to me: Sam Altman’s Dirty DRAM Deal, than DRAM manufacturers colluding to decommoditize PC computing.
That is not to say they did not willingly take advantage of the situation, they definitely did.
I also agree with GN that micron taking public money and then doing something against the public interest is a bad thing.
I love GN for what they do, but I just can't get into the video format for tech hardware news or reviews.
For some topics, I totally understand the strength of the video format, but for others it just doesn't make sense to me. A review is much quicker to process with commentary text and relevant charts for benchmarking. I would argue the same for less in-depth news and analysis.
I also wish GN had a peetrube channel!
Yeah I agree. I love GN for what they do but I never watch their videos because I find the formats quite bad. Too long, boring, and designed so you can’t just skip to the end like HUB for example.
They also have a website with a written report for most videos, like this one for the Linux benchmarking video: https://gamersnexus.net/gpus/rip-windows-linux-gpu-gaming-benchmarks-bazzite
Is there an actual incentive for any for-profit channel to have a peertube channel? It seems like it would just reduce engagement that they actually get paid for.
You could still do sponsorships and Patreon, which for quite a few YouTubers are the main revenue sources. But of course if viewers don't demand it there is no incentive to switch either.
Couldn't they do both YouTube and another means of distribution?
It would most likely still mean less engagement overall. YouTube recommendations are strongly based on interactions and momentum. If part of your core fanbase watches & interacts on other platforms, you're recommended to fewer people outside your fanbase, so over time your viewership shrinks.
Unless they're getting paid directly, like through something like Nebula or their own service like a Dropout or Viva sort of thing, why wouldn't they want their views to be somewhere that drives more meaningful numbers? Peertube isn't going to bring them new users, and from what I've seen a lot of what's on peertube seems to just be unauthorized reposts that pull away views.
Like, if I enjoy a creator who's on YouTube, I'm not going to watch their stuff somewhere that doesn't give them any meaningful recognition. Something like Patreon is great, but driving up their numbers on Peertube isn't going to bring them to a wider audience the way driving up their engagement on YouTube would, and those numbers bring more people to their Patreon.
Why do work for free. Are you willing to pay for it? Or do you work for free?
Remember how graphics card prices tripled several years ago, and never came back to sane prices?
Sigh.
Yeah, but that affected only gamers, now it's all computer nerds (corpos can switch to thin clients).
Only? That makes it seem as though gaming were a negligible fraction of the world's entertainment time. It wouldn't surprise me if it surpassed movies before long, if it hasn't already.
I think I see your point though: RAM prices affect even more people than that.
I thought it surpassed it a long time ago, but I was surprised by how much:
The gaming industry has quietly become the world’s most dominant entertainment force, generating $184 billion annually — nearly double the combined revenue of movies ($33.9 billion) and music ($28.6 billion).
PC gaming is about ¼ of that:
Mobile gaming is the largest segment by far – mobile games generated about $92 billion in revenue in 2024, 49% of the total market. Console games make up roughly 28% ($51B), and PC games about 23% (~$43B). (Newzoo, 2025).
But $43B is almost ⅓ more than the entire film industry. Wild.
A lot of PC gaming is happening on low-powered devices, though. About 1 in 8 PCs that participate in the Steam hardware survey have under 16GB of RAM, and the most common videocard is the laptop 4060.
(Granted, there are a lot of problems with making grand statements based on the Steam hardware survey.)
So I doubt RAM prices will impact PC games revenue too much—tonnes of games run on modest hardware, including some of the highest grossing (like Fortnite). So many amazing indie games run on a potato. Most will just use their old computer for a bit longer, or game on a laptop/console/Deck/whatever.
I'm totally happy with the Steam Deck, and play on it about 20× more than my PC (with an i5 12400, 6650XT 8GB, 1440p, and 32GB RAM—hardly beastly, but a fairly recent midrange build). 90%+ of my play time is small indie games, fwiw.
Thin clients still require ram and storage at the terminals and lots of both at the server. If a thin client deployment is not already in place, it will be a huge financial burden for corporations from hardware deployment as well as time lost to employees learning process changes. This is the exact reason large organizations slow roll deployments instead of making fast changes.
If it stays high it well affect everything that uses RAM.
Oh no, my fridge!!!!!
I feel your pain :(
I remember somebody stole like a whole truck of graphics cards. Stealing shit gonna be a very lucrative business as everything gets more expensive and most law enforcement are busy tackling us citizen nurses on their way to work.
OPEC : 1973 :: JEDEC : 2025
If building a PC does in fact get too expensive for individuals, I wonder what that will do for the sale of the Steam Machine which should (theoretically) get people into PC gaming for much cheaper. Maybe all-in-one pre-built PC's like the steam machine become the norm...idk
I wouldn't mind if this led to devs stopping the constant push for heavier graphics in games and instead moved to making sure they run well with how upgrading is looking to be less and less feasible for more people.
I think economics would basically push things that way. If most people cannot or will not buy the latest hardware, the investment of 600 million dollars or more into a AAAA game that hardly anyone can run won't happen.
I also think this would be positive honestly
I wonder what that will do for the sale of the Steam Machine which should (theoretically) get people into PC gaming for much cheaper.
Valve said they won't subsidise the cost of the Steam Machine, it will be roughly the same price as a regular PC.
I think that quote says it would be cost competitive with equivalent PC parts, which is cheaper than buying a prebuilt computer, fwiw. (And you'll get a compact GabeCube instead of a big tower).
I expect GabeCubes might be my kiddos first desktops. CachyOS should run like a dream on 'em, so they'll work great as both computers and entry-level gaming rigs.
Why is the steam machine not going to be subject to the same costs? Why then would we believe that valve will just eat that?
Your intuition is correct that the steam machine will go up in price but I think It'll still have an edge over building your own PC for a couple of reasons:
Valve has economies of scale and can make contracts directly with Dram manufacturers/distributers
The Steam Machine is just already cheaper to make than a pre-built because it has a custom APU (rather than a standalone graphics card). Not to mention running Linux means not having to pay for a windows licence
The Steam Machine only has 16 GB of RAM. Most everyone I know building gaming PCs with DDR5 are using 32 GB
The steam machine is not a cutting edge device, but its lower end capabilities may become normalised if building a new PC becomes cost prohibitive. It may force the whole gaming industry to take a step back for a few years. And I mean, the steam Machine can play Cyberpunk 2077 at 4k 60 fps with FSR upscaling so its got enough performance for lots of consumers
The assumption is that Valve made their procurement deals before the sudden price hikes, in which case the costs might actually be sane until the deal runs out and they need to renegotiate prices.
Same as consoles. Sell at a loss to increase game sales and earn more on the backend.
Consoles are completely locked down so there is only one store you can buy from. Consoles are a safer bet that lost hardware sales would lead to making it up on games.
But, Steam Machine is a PC. Not only can you install games from outside the Steam store. You are able to completely replace the OS. You can have a completely Steamless experience on it.
Its not happening. Selling a PC just isn't the same as selling a console that can basically "just" play games.
Steam already rakes in cash due to being in a dominant market position on pc. Selling at a loss doesn't get them much.
It's an interesting scenario.
I'd posit that the possibility mostly depends on the aquisition of RAM by Valve before the memory market implosion.
If Valve is able to successfully sell Steam Machines then other SIs and manufacturers might revisit the gaming market.
Based on Micron's action of exiting the consumer market (by killing off their Crucial division) I'd imagine that most manufaturers are considering doing the same as the demand from AI hyperscalers has become obnoxiously enticing for most corporate entities.
"corrupt industry" is a bit redundant, isn't it?
Show me an industry that isn't built, from foundation to the tip of the pyramid, out of blocks of condensed corruption. Show me one that has not perpetrated unimaginable horrors on uncountable numbers of humans for generations.
Thank you for including the YouTube link so that my phone will properly open in libretube
