Steam pushed 100 exabytes in 2025 — why that number matters for infrastructure, money and legal risk

Numbers like “100 exabytes” grab attention only because they translate into real operational consequences: constant background downloads, massive server bills, and a platform-sized legal surface. Steam’s 2025 Year in Review – published by Valve and summarized across outlets – isn’t just a brag sheet. It makes plain that Steam is both the internet-sized delivery problem publishers rely on and the gatekeeper that must reckon with the costs and risks of that scale.

Key takeaways

• Steam delivered roughly 100 exabytes of data in 2025 (up from 80 exabytes in 2024) – the equivalent of about 100 million 1TB SSDs moved across Valve’s network.
• Users averaged 274 petabytes of installs and updates per day — about 11.4 PB/hour or ~190,000 GB/minute platform-wide.
• Peak concurrent users hit 42 million in 2025, sustaining multi-year growth of roughly 3.4M CCU per year.
• Valve reported paying 76% of platform revenue to non‑Valve developers in 2025, reflecting its tiered share system; finer print matters here.

Why the scale matters — and why you should care

On paper, 100 exabytes is a headline meant to impress advertisers and reassure partners. In practice it describes the daily reality of modern PC gaming: almost everything is downloaded, patched, or hot‑patched. That 274 PB/day stat is the one that should worry infrastructure teams — and excite investors — because it underpins what players experience and what studios must budget for.

Consider small signals that add up. Retail “boxed” copies increasingly ship Game‑Key Cards (GameHub flagged this around Pokémon Pokopia’s launch), which drives more post‑purchase downloads instead of physical installs. Live services and seasonal content updates mean studios push megabytes and gigabytes regularly. Multiply that by tens of millions of users and you have an aggregate that forces Valve to be both CDN and marketplace — with all the operational and commercial implications that implies.

Money on the table — 76% sounds generous, but the real split varies

Valve’s statement that 76% of revenue went to non‑Valve developers is the headline figure and a useful macro indicator: the platform is still routing most of the cash to creators. But the headline masks complexity. Valve’s post‑2018 tiered cuts (75-80% depending on sales) and exclusions for external key sales mean developer take‑home varies by title and distribution channel.

Put that against the rise of transparent funding deals elsewhere: Outersloth published its funding contract showing 50% until recoupment, then 15% after (GamesIndustry.biz). Those are studio‑level choices that sit alongside platform splits. For an indie weighing a Steam listing, the choice isn’t just “which storefront” — it’s “which business terms and delivery costs will swamp my margins in year one?”

Put that against the rise of transparent funding deals elsewhere: Outersloth published its funding contract showing 50% until recoupment, then 15% after (GamesIndustry.biz). Those are studio‑level choices that sit alongside platform splits. For an indie weighing a Steam listing, the choice isn’t just “which storefront” — it’s “which business terms and delivery costs will swamp my margins in year one?”

Legal friction grows with scale

Scale brings scrutiny. The UK’s Performing Right Society has sued Valve, alleging Steam didn’t obtain licences for PRS‑managed songs used across titles on the platform (TechRaptor). Whether the claim sticks will hinge on how courts view platform liability versus publisher responsibility — but when your service is shipping 100 exabytes a year, the exposure multiplies.

Here’s the uncomfortable observation Valve’s Year in Review skips over: the larger you are, the less plausible it is to treat licensing, refunds, fraud, and cross‑border taxation as purely the publisher’s problem. Those externalities show up as legal fees, compliance work, and potentially new licensing deals — all of which cost money and attention that could otherwise go to infrastructure upgrades or developer payouts.

The question I’d ask Valve’s PR rep

How much of the reported 76% developer payout accounts for external key sales and refunds, and what share of your infrastructure costs is passed back to developers through fees or storefront economics? That’s the specificity missing from the glossy headline.

What to watch next

• Steam’s 2026 Year in Review — will CCU growth and exabyte deliveries keep rising, or level off as live‑service plateaus mature?
• Legal developments in the UK PRS lawsuit — a court finding there could force platforms to change how they license third‑party music.
• Platform competition and business models — compare Valve’s payout headline to public funding/contract terms like Outersloth’s, and to competitor benchmarks (Epic’s publicly reported numbers) for a fuller picture of where developer revenue is heading.
• Operational signals: Watch for any Valve disclosures about CDN partners, regional caching expansions, or a financial line item that reconciles bandwidth costs year‑over‑year.

Steam’s Year in Review is more than a vanity metric sprint. It’s a snapshot of a platform that now has to be a content delivery network, a marketplace, and a compliance organization — all at once. For developers and players that reality shapes pricing, update cadence, and where new games choose to launch.

TL;DR

Steam moved about 100 exabytes in 2025 with 42M peak users and 274 PB/day of installs and updates. Valve says 76% of revenue went to non‑Valve developers, but the headline hides exclusions and variability. Watch legal cases and next year’s metrics to see whether growth brings higher costs, stricter licensing, or a shift in who actually keeps the money.