If you want to plug an external USB hard drive or SSD at full speed, you'll need to plug it at the front? Or use up the only USB-C port...
I suspect most joysticks sold today come with a USB-C to USB-C cable, so if you want to charge your controller you either need to plug on the back, use an adapter, or get a USB-A to USB-C cable?
Also the single USB-C port isn't Thunderbolt/USB4, and they're only including gigabit ethernet, which is disappointing but perhaps understandable if they're trying to keep it at a low price.
Valve / Steam presumably has good data on what controllers and peripherals people are using, so I'd imagine their port choices are based around that. Here's a June 2024 post talking about Steam Input and controller market share: https://steamcommunity.com/games/593110/announcements/detail... . At the time of the post they say "59% of sessions are using Xbox controllers, 26% are using PlayStation controllers, 10% are on Steam Decks"
Steam input controller says nothing about the interface being used (USB A vs USB C). A single USB C (with DP support, I hope) port in 2026 sounds like a bad design.
Because think they need to be backward compatible with decade old peripheral controllers. People tend to get grumpy about this. Yet nobody flinched when XBox ditched KinectV2 with Series S/X.
For PC's people are used to adapters. And USB-C is superior in every way.
A self declared general compute device should have a least two USB-C outs that can drive displays.
For 2026 (12 years into USB-C spec) I would expect a minimum of 2 3.2 capable fully wired USB-C ports.
Even better something newer that could do near 40GBpS or better.
Like USB Gen 3×2
(Written on usb keyboard connected to 4k monitor that also charges the MBP it's plugged in)
For controllers you can use any cable you want. The Xbox controller will charge just fine on a C-C cable. I don't think they should have gone all in on USB-C like laptops have, but there should have been more than one USB-C and one should have been on the front. Pretty much the only thing you need USB-A for these days is mice/keyboard with non removable cables. Which are becoming increasingly rare.
What do you expect to do with the steam machine that will take more than a gigabit? I mean, it's cool when things are faster, but if you can saturate the link, downloads are still bottlenecked by the drives. And even 4k streaming is under 100Mbit normally.
there is almost no one who has multigigabit internet and even for people that do, you spend significantly less than 1 percent of your time on that device downloading. its a complete non issue. this device is a midrange at best pc, so having a gigabit connection is exactly where it should be. if you want to have the best of the best build a pc.
That's an exaggeration. Affordable multi-gigabit fiber is widely available in plenty of metropolitan areas in the US and Europe and mid-range motherboards have included 2.5 GbE for years now and the NICs themselves are dirt cheap. I don't think it's irrational to be disappointed.
That's why I specified that it's widely available in plenty of metropolitan areas, not a large part of the country. Internet service absolutely is abysmal in the US as a whole, but many large cities do have affordable access to fiber.
This is not true, at least around where I live. Gigabit ethernet(which is gigabit for only the downloads, and <50 mbps for upload) is 110$ per month. Comcast is the only internet service provider who offers speeds over 50 mbps.
So I make due. If I want to download a 40gb game, I take a break. I read a book, or eat dinner. It works itself out, and I can play my game.
My point was that 1 Gbps+ internet is available in enough select metropolitan areas that saying "almost no one has it" is inaccurate, not that it's widely available everywhere to the average user.
Obviously the subset of users with multi-gig fiber is relatively small, but not practically zero like the comment suggested. Anecdotally, 3 Gbps fiber is widely available in my medium sized US city of about ~500k for as low as $110. I paid the same for asymmetrical gigabit cable internet in the last city I lived. It just depends.
2.5Gbit via PON fiber is getting common, but you won't get that from Comcast. US isn't great at internet speeds anyway. I've had symmetric 1gbit for ages here in EU and you can even get 10g in some places.
So you can theoretically download an AAA title like the new kingdom come at 84GB in just under 5 minutes instead of 11 min. That's cool and all, but does it actually matter? I mean, with games of those sizes you're going to spend hundreds of hours in the game most likely. It's an extremely first world problem that takes minutes, maybe once a month.
It's more so the fact that 2.5 GbE NICs are really cheap and already fairly common in consumer devices. And game downloads aren't the only use case, file transfers could benefit from the extra headroom
Are you talking "4k streaming" as the current streaming providers do it, with trash bitrate, or "4k streaming" as you would do it if you had ripped your own blu-ray disks and you want to stream it from a NAS somewhere else in your house to your living room?
"the average bitrate for a 4K Blu-ray DVD can range between 48Mbps to 75Mbps. Some discs can also carry around 100Mbps or even 128Mbps, but these are more rare."
Even on the high seas the large Blu-ray releases require only about 40-50Mbit, maybe you can get even larger releases (requiring ~100Mbit for streaming) but then a single movie would take up 100GB+ of space and it is such an overkill, no one really needs it.
Games are super large nowadays. IIRC Steam uses P2P for the update downloads, so you should be able to saturate whatever link you have, and the SSD should be substantially faster than 1Gbps. So anyone that has a > 1Gbps internet connection should benefit from something higher than Gigabit.
You'd be wrong C to A is still pretty standard for controllers in my experience.
As for gigabit fewer and fewer people have ethernet routed to their office/TV area much less >1gig networking to take advantage of anything better than a 1 gig.
I agree that gigabit Ethernet is adequate for the type of product this is. But I do find it funny that the Wifi chip on this is very likely capable of 2Gbit. We somehow entered a world where WiFi is typically faster than Ethernet.
Cat 5e is rated for 2.5 Gbps at the full 100 m. Practically, I've not gotten any frame errors on a 30 m Cat 5e link up for 100 days @ 10 Gbps - but 2.5G is where the cheap consumer products are anyways.
Wi-Fi for gaming is usually plenty fine though, especially if you're not in a very dense area.
For pretty much all computing history wired has been faster than wireless. And it seems reasonable that high speed wired should be simpler and easier than wireless. It's only just in the last few years the speed of wifi in devices has overtaken wired.
It almost seems silly to even include a wired port when the wifi chip is faster.
Wired networking is faster than wireless, just not in the consumer space.
Most data center networking is 10s of gigabits on the lower end. People are throwing out 10/40gb hardware at this point. There just isnt any pressure in the consumer space. Most people don't even have 1gb internet connection and that is where they access most of their data.
It always has been faster in the consumer space too. It's really only just now with MIMO and 160Mhz wifi bands that wifi is faster on most devices than ethernet.
I wired my whole place with 10Gb - couldn't do it in the wall (as in, hidden) so I have flat cables around the door frame and wall corners. I was willing to accept the cables, just to get 10Gb.
Not sure what we're disagreeing about, I'm not saying it's not a useful thing to have just that most people don't have it and don't intend to have it so it's not a useful spec bump for Valve to spend money on.
I'm personally planning on going through the pain to get ethernet run (luckily I have both a basement and an attic so it should be fairly easy) in my house and if I ever build new there will be whatever is the best standard at the time in the walls (and maybe some dark fiber but I'm less sure on that) but I also know I'm a vast minority of users at the same time. I'm also in a pretty big minority having a >1 gig symmetrical pipe into my house to make a 10 gig connection to my devices actually worth while.
My setup is far from my ideal one so I'm on wifi for a lot of things but I was just pointing out the business reasons they probably went with the 1 gig port, there's just not that many people who are looking for or could take advantage of a 1 gig port.
Personally I'd never go for 10g copper, just run some fibre back to your cupboard.
For APs sure, do copper for POE, but not for computers. I doubt APs will need >1G in practical places for the next decade, and I don't think 10g does poe anyway (maybe 2.5g does)
The steam controller also revealed has a USB-C, as does Hori's official steam controller.
However, you can charge it from things that aren't USB ports. Charging bricks are cheap and most people have one for their phone now, except some unfortunate old iPhone users
Yes but the cord it comes with will likely be a C to A cable. A lot of controllers have come with USB-C ports on them now but ship with C to A cables. Microsoft, Sony, 8Bitdo; all controllers I've gotten that have a C port but came with the usb-a for the PC/charger end.
I feel like part of the problem with going beyond gigabit Ethernet is that copper beyond 1 gigabit is expensive with limited adoption. SFP+ fiber is superior and not even expensive any more, but there's no consumer adoption.
Most controller/headphone dongles come with USB-A, so 2.0 in the back makes sense. Radio for new steam controller is integrated.
I have a Y-splitter for my PS5 controllers and if I didn't, I would have had some sort of controller dock. I assume I would do the same for this. Either way, TV is too far from my couch for a cable, so I wanted to keep playing and charging I'd use a powerbank from my coffee table.
Gigabit Ethernet...that's sad, I'd take 2.5G, so I can better stream my legally ripped Blu-rays. I assume most people don't care because they would use Wi-Fi or their switch only goes to 1G. Better than JBL making android TV sound bar with 100mpbs.
I think it purposely designed, so you don't try to build a NAS on it.
I think the decision of usb2-a at the rear is for wireless keyboard and mouse adapters. Those ones can behave abnormally on usb3-a, plus it’s nice to have those ugly adapters out of sight.
Also just old wired mice and keyboards. The desktop use scenarios. If you use both ports for those at back. Any temporary faster devices make more sense at front.
A lot of devices that you commonly plug and unplug like flash drives and passkeys still make sense as USB-A for a lot of people because of the specifics of the USB spec.
C to A converters for devices are technically verboten since they would allow an enduser to make a A to A cable, which can fry hosts if you plug them into eachother if they don't support USB OTG. You can lose certification if you try to ship a device with a C to A converter.
Because of that, USB-A devices with an optional A to C converter (or neater devices that have both plugs on them natively) are what makes a lot of sense for a lot of people for the kinds of devices that live on a key chain. So it makes sense for that to be the default on the front of a desktop, IMO.
I imagine this has decent Bluetooth support out of the box even if not mentioned? Its hard to find a WiFi chipset these days that doesn't have some kind of Bluetooth support.
Maybe proprietary headset dongles, but if its just bluetooth its probably not needed.
> I suspect most joysticks sold today come with a USB-C to USB-C cable
while things can be charged with USB-C cables, the only thing I've ever received A C-to-C cable is... a USB-C wall charger. Granted I haven't gotten a USB-C iPhhone yet and I gotta imagine that one is C-to-C.
Generally lots of pack-in cables I've seen in the wild for charging devices continue to be USB-A-to-C. Switch 2 ports are USB-A, PS5 front port is USB-A... we're still getting there.
The steam machine has a bespoke wireless connector for the (new steam) controller so it doesn't pollute the Bluetooth network and cause lag.
Yes, the controller is charged through usb-c, but you can just use any charger around to charge that. I mean, the battery should last for 30+ hours so you only need to charge it on a weekly or biweekly basis with heavy usage.
Could it be a synergy with the Steam Frame's dual band wireless dongle? I'm guessing they would really want users to plug that into the front of the device.
Adapting A ports to C is much more convenient than going the other way. I have a whole sack of passive A to C dongles that stick out less than 1cm from the port.
- 2 USB3-A on the front
- 2 USB2-A on the back
- 1 USB-C on the back
If you want to plug an external USB hard drive or SSD at full speed, you'll need to plug it at the front? Or use up the only USB-C port...
I suspect most joysticks sold today come with a USB-C to USB-C cable, so if you want to charge your controller you either need to plug on the back, use an adapter, or get a USB-A to USB-C cable?
Also the single USB-C port isn't Thunderbolt/USB4, and they're only including gigabit ethernet, which is disappointing but perhaps understandable if they're trying to keep it at a low price.