Hope it is successful.

      • RedWeasel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Most of the handheld benchmarks have been 3% or 4% higher compared to the Steamdeck at 15 watts, which often is a 1 to 4 FPS difference. This would explain why Valve isn’t in a hurry for a Steamdeck 2. If you plan of playing on battery, then that is what you’ll probably running around that if you plan on playing a while. The main advantage of these newer chips is when used plugged in.

    • funkajunk@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      The Steam Deck is already a couple of years old, so it’s not that hard to do. This thing has better specs across the board, with even the base model having twice the cores and threads as the Deck.

      • Mango@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        I’m not really sure core and thread count is a good metric. The steam deck is getting more specific support and there’s more to consider about a CPU.

      • rockSlayer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        Steamdeck performance is still pretty good though, imo the most important factor in the handheld pc market is battery life. If games take a 5% hit to performance for an extra 40 minutes of battery life, the tradeoff becomes obvious to me.

  • stormesp@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    those are pretty good prices for 7840 and 8840. Most handhelds with a 7840 have been closer to 1k.