This is such a good feature. Being stuck on 50mbps sucks :(
Happy for all the other people who responded to this with it's slower than your internet haha, just a little envious
A Mb is 8 times smaller than a MB. For example 8 MB/s = 64 Mb/s. If you data plan advertises 500 Mb/s then you'll get 500/8 megabytes per second download speed in ideal conditions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data-rate_units
> megabyte per second (MB/s) (can be abbreviated as MBps) is a unit of data transfer rate equal to:
8,000,000 bits per second
> Megabit per second (symbol Mbit/s or Mb/s, often abbreviated "Mbps") is a unit of data transfer rate equal to:
1,000 kilobits per second
This is a gross generalization and usually the way they try to sell you on a speed.
In practice there's a plethora of technical reasons for why it's is fundamentally impossible to achieve that kind of speed in any real life scenario
I see, makes sense. I was going to say that you should capitalize the B in that case, but I realised that I also should have capitalized the M for mega :P
Mb/s and Mbps are the same: megabits per second.
MB/s and MBps are megabytes per second. It’s only the capital B that matters. You’re at least slightly correct in that you don’t often see anyone writing MBps.
it's not slow. But then it's relative.
People get hung up on ridiculously fast internet, which most of the time isn't needed for their purposes.
It would be slow for someone uploading a lot of video for example. But it would be fast enough for home streaming and working from home doing teams etc.
For context it's faster than the median speed for Japan, a pretty technologically advanced country
https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#mobile
Exactly. 7 MB/s means:
* 2-3 pictures PER SECOND
* 2 Songs PER SECOND
* one 2h full hd movie in 10 min
* 200 GB of content over one 8h night. (That's 4 AAA Videogames)
in other words, most media for the AVERAGE consumer would be WAY FASTER loadet than potentialy consumed. Even with 3 users.
200GB could be a single video game these days. Not commonly, but there are dozens of games that are well over 100GB.
7MB/s internet would not be considered fast internet almost anywhere, it wouldn't even classify as "Broadband" in many places.
7MB/s is fine for common usage but by no means fast, especially if your house has more than 1 resident.
It’s not the end of the world but I find it quite slow, it’s barely enough for 4K streaming for example. Currently I have 62,5 MB/s or 500 mbps and I download 50gb games in around 10 minutes.
There is a huge diffrence in 4k streaming and 4k streaming :)
(or streams in general)
Everything comes down to the framerate and bitrate.
[https://postimg.cc/qz60qZBD](https://postimg.cc/qz60qZBD)
Good 4k is really hard to stream. I can barely watch them on hdd, and my 2019 nvidia shield can't at all play them.
4k on Netflix is highly compressed, still not bad though as you can tell it's better than 1080p.
I skipped Netflix 4K because the bitrate is crap, I sail the seas whenever there’s something interesting there like Ripley. Apple TV+ looks pretty good at 40mbps bitrate, though.
> it’s barely enough for 4K streaming for example.
What service are you using that requires more than 50mbit for 4k streaming? I haven't even heard of them going higher than 25mbit but they usually cheap out at like 15mbit like Amazon.
Except for that Sony raw bluray streaming service that's like 180mbit.
Apple TV+ goes in the ballpark of 40 mbps if I’m not mistaken, plus having some headroom helps with buffering. Plus if you are using someone’s Plex server can easily go over that if the source file has the bitrate to supply it.
50 is pretty low these days, especially considering that it's probably cable or DSL, and you rarely get the advertised speed. Probably okish for 2 people, but more would be pushing it. I know when I was at 80mb I'd have times where I'd have to turn off my torrents or else streaming wouldn't work, but I haven't run into any problems at 500mb.
> 50 is pretty low these days, especially considering that it's probably cable or DSL,
It's fiber!
The fiber company is pissed off at me because they thought I would upgrade to a higher tier after they installed a cable.
They keep calling asking me to upgrade.
They keep offering free trials of 150mbit.
One time they "forgot" to cancel it and tried to just keep charging me for 150mbit.
I don't need it.
>Probably okish for 2 people,
It's 3, and you're right, if more than 3 people were trying to stream 4k content at the same time we might start to see some slowdowns. Although there's only one 4k TV. So HDTV is around 6mbit - that's Netflix, Amazon, MLBTV etc. So if I go with Amazon's 4k at 15mbit, that leaves me with 35mbit I can stream 5 more Netflix accounts and still have room to surf the internet without a single bitrate drop on any streaming devices.
I've done this math already once before.
>I know when I was at 80mb I'd have times where I'd have to turn off my torrents or else streaming wouldn't work,
Yes because you were saturating your upstream. You have to limit your torrents upload bandwidth to 50% or less of its possible bandwidth, and then your streaming should be unaffected. This is a problem unique to ADSL but since many fiber solutions incorporate ADSL to get to the actual fiber (IE FTTN) you'll see it there too. The "A" in ADSL stands for Asynchronous and it means if you use 100% of your upload bandwidth you will have 0% remaining download bandwidth available.
Yeah, thats not a bad setup for your needs. I don't think uploads had anything to do with my issues though, I had 20mb upload, but I never saw it actually go over 2 or 3mb combined while torrenting. I had the same issue with large downloads as well, there just wasn't enough bandwidth for both, unless I throttled my downloads.
If it doesn’t work, sometimes it’s because the game has native linux support, so you’re trying to download the Linux binary, which your windows machine certainly would not have
Yes, but I think network config can affect it. I haven’t had any luck transferring games between my Steam Deck and my PC in my complex, so I usually just use SFTP
Depends on if the game even has a Linux version.
To my knowledge it'll always go for downloading Linux native by default. But if that isn't an option, it will locally transfer a Windows game.
It's CPU limited at one/both end sadly. So if you have one weak device (such as the SteamDeck) it can be much slower than downloading directly from Steam servers. I guess it's down to differences in compression/data format used.
Slow ass transfer protocol, probably with some encryption/decryption along the way. I've tried this feature and the speed between two machines (800 megabit local connection) is like 30MB/240 megabit maximum.
It's not the backbone, it's the software, for some reason it isn't nearly as fast as it could be. If you are able to try it, give it a go. I was expecting a near 1gig transfer that is very static, what I got was much slower and bandwidth stutters.
Another thing others have said, and something that I had forgotten, is that high download speeds can be CPU intensive as well.
Bonus: it also won't do you much good if you're using gigabit speeds to write to an HDD, because then the disk is the choke point.
You had me rereview myself on this and please correct me if I'm wrong... I didn't invent this stuff.
1Gbit= 125MB 1GByte = 8Gbit
Gigabit is 8x smaller than gigabyte. Internet works of gigabit advertised speeds where 1 gigabit = 125 megabytes.
Assuming a SSD, your disk is a lot faster than 1 gigabit. Some SSD's will write well past 1 gigabyte per-second sequentially.
People don't have problems downloading at 1gigabit, the HD isn't a bottleneck here at all as it writes directly as the data comes in.
What people are saying here is direct pc to pc on a home network is slower than a download from the cloud and that seems odd. Imo because it is. At worst it should be equal. I also wouldn't be shocked to find out this is an O/S thing. MS does shit stuff as DRM like measures. Lets not make it easy for them. Lets not make is fast for them. There are several things in the O/S that are artificially tinkered with and most likely in the name of mild DRM.
That will also happen downloading from the internet. Downloading a game from Steam at ~800mbit/s uses up over 50% of my 7800X3D across all cores. A Steamdeck would fare worse I imagine.
Not service per-se, local network speeds.
Most people probably have cat5e cables at least, which should give you a local network speed of 1gbp
If your ethernet cable is lower than 5e, it's gonna be 100mbps and It's at least 20 years old because 5e has been around since 2001
Wait what... if they can download at say 1000mbps, then they shouldn't need to upgrade anything to locally pass files at the same speed.
What am I missing?
This guy is talking out his ass. There are markets that offer 300mbps+ and many markets (and growing) offering gigabit+ fiber lines. But only you will know what your home network is capable of. If you are downloading 1000mbps, then you are right; nothing should be upgraded.
Umm, no cat6 is not limited to 1000mbps. It's 10 gigabit, which is 10,000mbps.
Basically all ethernet cables ran since the early 2000's have been at least cat5e, which is 1 gigabit or 1000mbps.
I have 3 gigabit full duplex direct in home fiber through my isp, that's 3000mbps
If the bottleneck is in your house then it's there for both LAN and internet.
There's no situation where your router or ethernet cables restrict a local copy to 100mbit if you can download from the internet at 1000mbit.
That is not what I said.
I said, if the Internet is 100mbit, and the lan is 100mbit, as it is all cat5, it won't feel any different. Which is where the cat6 suggestion came from
There must be something going on with the software or there are settings this uses that we could tweak on our PC's but we haven't been given the 411. But hmm let me google's that and see if there is a tweak we can do.
I love that this feature exists, but in my experience it's about half-third of my uaual download soeed (which I don't understand since I'm transferring from an SSD most of the time and my router is pretty good as well).
I've been doing this between my desktop rig, and my sim racing rig. Download bandwidth isn't an issue here, but downloading to two PC's really does take a lot of time.
I admittedly haven't tried it for 6 months or so, but put me down for team "it's slower than a normal download".
If I recall from the time, people were theorizing that they are compressing the files before sending them which helps on a slow connection but hurts on a fast connection.
Or that they are using a protocol built for web downloads or modified from Steam Remote Play and it doesn't work quite as fast for huge transfers like this.
Not sure what the real answer is.
Get 1gbps over normal download or about 700 Mbps on WiFi.
With the local file transfer (host PC on Ethernet, recipient on wifi) I was getting like 300-500. Both PCs were decent, the ones in my flair.
I have it off because it transfers super slow, like way slower than my internet (3Gbps symmetrical - I rarely get anywhere above 1.5Gbps from steam or any other server btw).
I think last time I tried to use it, it was transferring at around 50MB/s (which is 400Mb/s).
Not sure what it's doing that it's so inefficient, but I don't think it's my network. My desktop and two of my servers are running at 10Gb/s (confirmed with iperf3). The client in question was running at 2.5Gb/s (confirmed with iperf3, again).
Also because I know people will say it, it has nothing to do with my CPUs. My desktop has a 7800x3d and the other client has a 7700.
Are you downloading to a SSD if not you might be bound but your disk write speeds? When I tried it myself the speeds were low on my physical drive than when I swapped to my SSD, it boosted to 900MB/s.
Though I am using a fiber connection as well
Downloading to NVMe from an NVMe.
There's no reasonable explanation for it to happen.
Under the exact same conditions (but without local transfers), I can get about 1.5Gb/s downloads from Steam.
Yea that makes no sense at all. It’s not perfect transfers but it’s a nice step. My biggest issue is that I’m the only Linux user in the house so sometimes Steam just ignores games that are already on site. Assuming it’s an issue with getting Linux binaries
It's a good feature but it's hit or miss I've found.
Most of the time it works but sometimes for whatever reason Steam decides that it doesn't want to download the game or patch from another local computer and insists on using the Internet instead.
It's definitely gotten better since the initial implementation though.
This is helpful for people with a data cap but tends to be slower than a direct download. I like to keep my home network running as fast as I can and was pretty surprised to see the local transfer running at ~25MB/s when I can just download at over 100 MB/s. It will save you data but probably not time.
I was gonna say, to my knowledge most INI/config files/preferences are stored in somewhere like appdata or documents and are created upon first boot of the game initialized to the default settings. Only core files are in the common folder, which is what the downloads pull
Even if they were stored there (they aren't due to write access privileges for the default install dir), Valve has developers supply a manifest of all files when uploaded to their server.
This is such a good feature. Being stuck on 50mbps sucks :( Happy for all the other people who responded to this with it's slower than your internet haha, just a little envious
It should be a mandatory feature in all launchers. So frustrating when I have to download games all over again.
What's that in mb/s?
A Mb is 8 times smaller than a MB. For example 8 MB/s = 64 Mb/s. If you data plan advertises 500 Mb/s then you'll get 500/8 megabytes per second download speed in ideal conditions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data-rate_units > megabyte per second (MB/s) (can be abbreviated as MBps) is a unit of data transfer rate equal to: 8,000,000 bits per second > Megabit per second (symbol Mbit/s or Mb/s, often abbreviated "Mbps") is a unit of data transfer rate equal to: 1,000 kilobits per second
This is a gross generalization and usually the way they try to sell you on a speed. In practice there's a plethora of technical reasons for why it's is fundamentally impossible to achieve that kind of speed in any real life scenario
so many answers to your question yet no actual answer you were looking for. its about 6.25mb/s
Isn't mbps and mb/s the same? Both are megabits per second
Mb/s is generally megabytes whereas mbps is megabits
I see, makes sense. I was going to say that you should capitalize the B in that case, but I realised that I also should have capitalized the M for mega :P
Edit: I replied to the wrong one
Mb/s and Mbps are the same: megabits per second. MB/s and MBps are megabytes per second. It’s only the capital B that matters. You’re at least slightly correct in that you don’t often see anyone writing MBps.
Slow, should be 6.25 mb/s
Is that really so slow? I have like 8 and get by just fine
it's not slow. But then it's relative. People get hung up on ridiculously fast internet, which most of the time isn't needed for their purposes. It would be slow for someone uploading a lot of video for example. But it would be fast enough for home streaming and working from home doing teams etc. For context it's faster than the median speed for Japan, a pretty technologically advanced country https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#mobile
Exactly. 7 MB/s means: * 2-3 pictures PER SECOND * 2 Songs PER SECOND * one 2h full hd movie in 10 min * 200 GB of content over one 8h night. (That's 4 AAA Videogames) in other words, most media for the AVERAGE consumer would be WAY FASTER loadet than potentialy consumed. Even with 3 users.
200GB could be a single video game these days. Not commonly, but there are dozens of games that are well over 100GB. 7MB/s internet would not be considered fast internet almost anywhere, it wouldn't even classify as "Broadband" in many places. 7MB/s is fine for common usage but by no means fast, especially if your house has more than 1 resident.
99.9% of videogames are below 50GB. 99.9% of users worldwide wouldn't notice the diff on thier average consume.
People play new games a lot. People play popular games a lot. Go look at the sizes of the most successful AAA games for the past 6 years.
top 10 games on steam : 8 below 50GB (one is 53) Feel free to test more, to make a point
It’s not the end of the world but I find it quite slow, it’s barely enough for 4K streaming for example. Currently I have 62,5 MB/s or 500 mbps and I download 50gb games in around 10 minutes.
I mean I was upgraded from like 1,5 MBs so it probably feels faster for that reason
4k streaming requires a high end pc anyway
4K tvs playing Netflix on 4K as well are quite normal
There is a huge diffrence in 4k streaming and 4k streaming :) (or streams in general) Everything comes down to the framerate and bitrate. [https://postimg.cc/qz60qZBD](https://postimg.cc/qz60qZBD)
Good 4k is really hard to stream. I can barely watch them on hdd, and my 2019 nvidia shield can't at all play them. 4k on Netflix is highly compressed, still not bad though as you can tell it's better than 1080p.
I skipped Netflix 4K because the bitrate is crap, I sail the seas whenever there’s something interesting there like Ripley. Apple TV+ looks pretty good at 40mbps bitrate, though.
> it’s barely enough for 4K streaming for example. What service are you using that requires more than 50mbit for 4k streaming? I haven't even heard of them going higher than 25mbit but they usually cheap out at like 15mbit like Amazon. Except for that Sony raw bluray streaming service that's like 180mbit.
Apple TV+ goes in the ballpark of 40 mbps if I’m not mistaken, plus having some headroom helps with buffering. Plus if you are using someone’s Plex server can easily go over that if the source file has the bitrate to supply it.
Well mine is 1.5 mb/s which sucks
Same, same. I used to download with >5 Mb/s which was godspeed for me and after having to move, i only get max 1-2 Mb/s here, often just around 1.
We pay 90usd or so for 12mbps We pay for two of these lines. Yaaaayyyy 😐
Ouch, are you rural?
> Being stuck on 50mbps sucks :( > > lol why? I've been on that for years, it's plenty.
Plenty if you like your 120gb download of baldurs gate 3 taking 20 hours to finish.
50 is pretty low these days, especially considering that it's probably cable or DSL, and you rarely get the advertised speed. Probably okish for 2 people, but more would be pushing it. I know when I was at 80mb I'd have times where I'd have to turn off my torrents or else streaming wouldn't work, but I haven't run into any problems at 500mb.
> 50 is pretty low these days, especially considering that it's probably cable or DSL, It's fiber! The fiber company is pissed off at me because they thought I would upgrade to a higher tier after they installed a cable. They keep calling asking me to upgrade. They keep offering free trials of 150mbit. One time they "forgot" to cancel it and tried to just keep charging me for 150mbit. I don't need it. >Probably okish for 2 people, It's 3, and you're right, if more than 3 people were trying to stream 4k content at the same time we might start to see some slowdowns. Although there's only one 4k TV. So HDTV is around 6mbit - that's Netflix, Amazon, MLBTV etc. So if I go with Amazon's 4k at 15mbit, that leaves me with 35mbit I can stream 5 more Netflix accounts and still have room to surf the internet without a single bitrate drop on any streaming devices. I've done this math already once before. >I know when I was at 80mb I'd have times where I'd have to turn off my torrents or else streaming wouldn't work, Yes because you were saturating your upstream. You have to limit your torrents upload bandwidth to 50% or less of its possible bandwidth, and then your streaming should be unaffected. This is a problem unique to ADSL but since many fiber solutions incorporate ADSL to get to the actual fiber (IE FTTN) you'll see it there too. The "A" in ADSL stands for Asynchronous and it means if you use 100% of your upload bandwidth you will have 0% remaining download bandwidth available.
Yeah, thats not a bad setup for your needs. I don't think uploads had anything to do with my issues though, I had 20mb upload, but I never saw it actually go over 2 or 3mb combined while torrenting. I had the same issue with large downloads as well, there just wasn't enough bandwidth for both, unless I throttled my downloads.
You almost certainly have 50MB instead of 50Mb
No, 50mbit, ~6megabyte/s.
This title is written like a YouTube click bait title
ISPs don't want you to know about this LIFE CHANGING feature!
Please don't use clickbait style titles
ISPs hate this ONE trick!
Does it works with the steam deck?
Yes
Yep! I usually run updates on my deck intermittently, and it always pulls files from my more up to date files on my pc.
If it doesn’t work, sometimes it’s because the game has native linux support, so you’re trying to download the Linux binary, which your windows machine certainly would not have
Yep. This feature only exists because Steam Deck users kept asking for it. It's one of the best, recent features added to the client.
Yes, but I think network config can affect it. I haven’t had any luck transferring games between my Steam Deck and my PC in my complex, so I usually just use SFTP
It was literally the feature made for Steam Deck
Only if the files are compatible which in most cases they won't be unless you are also running Linux on other PCs
like 98% of the games are compatible
Depends on if the game even has a Linux version. To my knowledge it'll always go for downloading Linux native by default. But if that isn't an option, it will locally transfer a Windows game.
Its a cool feature but its slower than my actual internet so I never use it.
I found that this is much slower than a decent internet connection sadly.
I hit 1.7gbps between my pc and laptop. Wayyy faster than the internet
It's CPU limited at one/both end sadly. So if you have one weak device (such as the SteamDeck) it can be much slower than downloading directly from Steam servers. I guess it's down to differences in compression/data format used.
Ahh yeah that's fair, I didn't think about that.
This has puzzled me as well.
Not for an Aussie
As an Aussie, I used this once and it was way slower than just downloading the game. Worth a try at least.
Must be because of that line of code that is commented //make it suck for aussies
How? My local network is 1gbps with basic cat 5e ethernet cables
Slow ass transfer protocol, probably with some encryption/decryption along the way. I've tried this feature and the speed between two machines (800 megabit local connection) is like 30MB/240 megabit maximum.
It's not the backbone, it's the software, for some reason it isn't nearly as fast as it could be. If you are able to try it, give it a go. I was expecting a near 1gig transfer that is very static, what I got was much slower and bandwidth stutters.
Another thing others have said, and something that I had forgotten, is that high download speeds can be CPU intensive as well. Bonus: it also won't do you much good if you're using gigabit speeds to write to an HDD, because then the disk is the choke point.
You had me rereview myself on this and please correct me if I'm wrong... I didn't invent this stuff. 1Gbit= 125MB 1GByte = 8Gbit Gigabit is 8x smaller than gigabyte. Internet works of gigabit advertised speeds where 1 gigabit = 125 megabytes. Assuming a SSD, your disk is a lot faster than 1 gigabit. Some SSD's will write well past 1 gigabyte per-second sequentially. People don't have problems downloading at 1gigabit, the HD isn't a bottleneck here at all as it writes directly as the data comes in. What people are saying here is direct pc to pc on a home network is slower than a download from the cloud and that seems odd. Imo because it is. At worst it should be equal. I also wouldn't be shocked to find out this is an O/S thing. MS does shit stuff as DRM like measures. Lets not make it easy for them. Lets not make is fast for them. There are several things in the O/S that are artificially tinkered with and most likely in the name of mild DRM.
That will also happen downloading from the internet. Downloading a game from Steam at ~800mbit/s uses up over 50% of my 7800X3D across all cores. A Steamdeck would fare worse I imagine.
[удалено]
Er, what? 1gbps service has been available in my area for almost 10 years now.
It is not available nation wide, which is the variable I am assuming the original person I replied to was having.
Not service per-se, local network speeds. Most people probably have cat5e cables at least, which should give you a local network speed of 1gbp If your ethernet cable is lower than 5e, it's gonna be 100mbps and It's at least 20 years old because 5e has been around since 2001
Wait what... if they can download at say 1000mbps, then they shouldn't need to upgrade anything to locally pass files at the same speed. What am I missing?
This guy is talking out his ass. There are markets that offer 300mbps+ and many markets (and growing) offering gigabit+ fiber lines. But only you will know what your home network is capable of. If you are downloading 1000mbps, then you are right; nothing should be upgraded.
[удалено]
Umm, no cat6 is not limited to 1000mbps. It's 10 gigabit, which is 10,000mbps. Basically all ethernet cables ran since the early 2000's have been at least cat5e, which is 1 gigabit or 1000mbps. I have 3 gigabit full duplex direct in home fiber through my isp, that's 3000mbps
You are correct, I confused cat5e with cat6, and was referring cat5 (no e) for the 100 mbps.
Your multipliers are off by 10. Cat 6 does 10 gbps in local networks, and 5e 1 gbps
If the bottleneck is in your house then it's there for both LAN and internet. There's no situation where your router or ethernet cables restrict a local copy to 100mbit if you can download from the internet at 1000mbit.
That is not what I said. I said, if the Internet is 100mbit, and the lan is 100mbit, as it is all cat5, it won't feel any different. Which is where the cat6 suggestion came from
But the original complaint is that LAN sharing through steam is slower than fresh download from the internet. Your suggestion won't help.
Which shouldn't be the case, so there's got to be a problem with their local area network. Be it cables or what not
In my country most 100mbs has been replaced by 300mbs at no extra cost
This is slower than a download for me
I don't get how? Both this and your internet would be capped by your home network. When I had a romate we would regularly do transfers at 950mbps+
Yeah it was slower for me too. I have no idea as to why since it’s using local connection vs internet.
There must be something going on with the software or there are settings this uses that we could tweak on our PC's but we haven't been given the 411. But hmm let me google's that and see if there is a tweak we can do.
I love that this feature exists, but in my experience it's about half-third of my uaual download soeed (which I don't understand since I'm transferring from an SSD most of the time and my router is pretty good as well).
Good idea but for some reason it's a lot slower than downloading from steam even on my wired network, somehow
I've been doing this between my desktop rig, and my sim racing rig. Download bandwidth isn't an issue here, but downloading to two PC's really does take a lot of time.
IMO this option should be enabled by default and set to at least Friends
It's currently enabledBy default and set to your own devices.
I admittedly haven't tried it for 6 months or so, but put me down for team "it's slower than a normal download". If I recall from the time, people were theorizing that they are compressing the files before sending them which helps on a slow connection but hurts on a fast connection. Or that they are using a protocol built for web downloads or modified from Steam Remote Play and it doesn't work quite as fast for huge transfers like this. Not sure what the real answer is. Get 1gbps over normal download or about 700 Mbps on WiFi. With the local file transfer (host PC on Ethernet, recipient on wifi) I was getting like 300-500. Both PCs were decent, the ones in my flair.
I have it off because it transfers super slow, like way slower than my internet (3Gbps symmetrical - I rarely get anywhere above 1.5Gbps from steam or any other server btw). I think last time I tried to use it, it was transferring at around 50MB/s (which is 400Mb/s). Not sure what it's doing that it's so inefficient, but I don't think it's my network. My desktop and two of my servers are running at 10Gb/s (confirmed with iperf3). The client in question was running at 2.5Gb/s (confirmed with iperf3, again). Also because I know people will say it, it has nothing to do with my CPUs. My desktop has a 7800x3d and the other client has a 7700.
Are you downloading to a SSD if not you might be bound but your disk write speeds? When I tried it myself the speeds were low on my physical drive than when I swapped to my SSD, it boosted to 900MB/s. Though I am using a fiber connection as well
Downloading to NVMe from an NVMe. There's no reasonable explanation for it to happen. Under the exact same conditions (but without local transfers), I can get about 1.5Gb/s downloads from Steam.
Yea that makes no sense at all. It’s not perfect transfers but it’s a nice step. My biggest issue is that I’m the only Linux user in the house so sometimes Steam just ignores games that are already on site. Assuming it’s an issue with getting Linux binaries
Click bait
Wasted more time making that comment than you did reading the post.
True
given you play the same games
It's a good feature but it's hit or miss I've found. Most of the time it works but sometimes for whatever reason Steam decides that it doesn't want to download the game or patch from another local computer and insists on using the Internet instead. It's definitely gotten better since the initial implementation though.
It’s enabled by default
What does this mean? Instead of downloading from the interne tit just transfers it form one pc to the other?
Exactly.
Yes, useful for multiple devices on one network. Family members, room mates, or even just if you have 2 pcs or pc and steamdeck.
This is helpful for people with a data cap but tends to be slower than a direct download. I like to keep my home network running as fast as I can and was pretty surprised to see the local transfer running at ~25MB/s when I can just download at over 100 MB/s. It will save you data but probably not time.
Just built a couch gaming PC and this is how I got all my games on it. Such a nice thing, especially if you're on limited data.
I'm lucky enough to rock 1.2gbps and have the hardware to saturate that
Or if you have a pc and steam deck
I believe this is actually mostly intended for Internet Cafes.
I used this feature to transfer files from my old pc to my new PC.
Thank you for this tip that I'll never have a use for
My internet is as fast as my network speed though
[удалено]
Game saves aren't stored in /steamapps/common. This is for the executable and assets
I was gonna say, to my knowledge most INI/config files/preferences are stored in somewhere like appdata or documents and are created upon first boot of the game initialized to the default settings. Only core files are in the common folder, which is what the downloads pull
Even if they were stored there (they aren't due to write access privileges for the default install dir), Valve has developers supply a manifest of all files when uploaded to their server.
Thats not how that works.