News Steam Deck Hardware Analysis: A Potent Handheld for 720p Gaming

[watzupken]

That‘s a good point. If this is popular we could see MS release their own version (running Windows, obviously).

This is possible, but I think MS will leverage more on cloud gaming rather than trying to render it locally like this. Modern games are already becoming a challenge for low end dGPUs, not to mention iGPU. FSR is not going to help much in this case because at such a low resolution, we are always going to be CPU bound.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

Quoting FPS numbers on a system that isn't released or independently benchmarked seems foolish.

I'm not sure if this is directed at what I said in the article, or what I've said in the comments, but to be clear I have a full suite of testing on the Ryzen 7 4800U, a 15W Zen 2 8-core CPU with Vega 8 Graphics, on the 17 games I mentioned. There's almost no chance the APU in the Steam Deck will be slower (in gaming) than the 4800U. Yes, it will have potentially half the CPU performance, but also potentially 70% (give or take) more GPU performance and bandwidth. So, based on the numbers I have from the 4800U at 720p, I'm extremely confident that the Steam Deck will be able to do 1280x800 at more than 30 fps in nearly all games, and lighter games will be able to break 60 fps with the right settings. That's about as foolish as saying, "I think the PlayStation 6 will be significantly faster than the PlayStation 5 when it launches in five to ten years."

 

[twotwotwo]

OK, going out on a limb*: a vocal group of buyers will complain bitterly, because they spent $500+ then tried games it can't play well. On the other hand, other people will play games that are either old or designed for slower hardware (think anything with a mobile version), like they do on the Switch but with a little higher ceiling, and they'll love it.

*Not going out on a limb. "Some will like it, some not" is the least informative thing anyone could possibly say haha

 

[watzupken]

OK, going out on a limb*: a vocal group of buyers will complain bitterly, because they spent $500+ then tried games it can't play well. On the other hand, other people will play games that are either old or designed for slower hardware (think anything with a mobile version), like they do on the Switch but with a little higher ceiling, and they'll love it.

*Not going out on a limb. "Some will like it, some not" is the least informative thing anyone could possibly say haha

That's why I said, while this sounds great on paper, it will not be for every PC gamer. Most PC gamer stuck to PC gaming because it allows them to play at high graphical settings, and/or, high FPS. This Steam console likely will offer none of the benefits of PC gaming. Fortunately, it should run well enough for older titles and emulation. It is still an interesting product to try out.

 

[TerryLaze]

This is possible, but I think MS will leverage more on cloud gaming rather than trying to render it locally like this. Modern games are already becoming a challenge for low end dGPUs, not to mention iGPU. FSR is not going to help much in this case because at such a low resolution, we are always going to be CPU bound.

Not if you are playing on an iGPU that is just ok for that resolution.

Also you can forget about cloud/stream gaming, if google didn't manage to do it while having all the severs of the world no other company is going to be able to pull it off, and losing your ability to game anywhere your signal is bad for a portable device would be extremely bad.

That's why I said, while this sounds great on paper, it will not be for every PC gamer. Most PC gamer stuck to PC gaming because it allows them to play at high graphical settings, and/or, high FPS. This Steam console likely will offer none of the benefits of PC gaming. Fortunately, it should run well enough for older titles and emulation. It is still an interesting product to try out.

Why do you think that this is targeted at PC gamers, just because it uses PC hardware?
This is a portable device for people that want more than mobile games and don't like nintendo games for whatever reason or that just want some more choice.

 

[TommyTwoTone66]

Why do you think that this is targeted at PC gamers, just because it uses PC hardware?

Umm… maybe because it plays PC games? On Steam? And if you have a large collection of PC games, that you bought on Steam, you’re very likely a PC gamer.

Valve mainly concentrates on local streaming of games so I’d expect it to at the very least operate like a Steam link from day 1, and I do think they would add internet streaming if enough people buy one. Google’s issue was lack of content and high game prices, Valve will not suffer either of those.

At the price of the hardware tho, it’s a very expensive low res, underpowered emulator machine that will appeal to very few people so I doubt we will see it really take off

 

[TerryLaze]

Umm… maybe because it plays PC games? On Steam? And if you have a large collection of PC games, that you bought on Steam, you’re very likely a PC gamer.

I was clearly responding to watzupkens idea of PC gaming only being high res/FPS top end gaming.

Valve mainly concentrates on local streaming of games so I’d expect it to at the very least operate like a Steam link from day 1, and I do think they would add internet streaming if enough people buy one. Google’s issue was lack of content and high game prices, Valve will not suffer either of those.

Steam link is a given but that's only inside your home or wherever your local network reaches.
For on the go, they do have the benefit of only needing 720/800 resolution but valve has like zero infrastructure for something like that.

At the price of the hardware tho, it’s a very expensive low res, underpowered emulator machine that will appeal to very few people so I doubt we will see it really take off

It's the same price as the atari vcs and it comes with a display controller battery and is usable on the go.
It will appeal to enough people.

 

[Victor Butk0]

I got the impression that the author is a theorist and never distributed games in the library between an SSD and a slow HDD

 

[DavidC1]

There's almost no chance the APU in the Steam Deck will be slower (in gaming) than the 4800U. Yes, it will have potentially half the CPU performance, but also potentially 70% (give or take) more GPU performance and bandwidth.

You are potentially setting people up for disappointment by attaching a number to it.

In a dGPU, performance per watt translates directly into performance. In an APU, it's shared with the CPU so the gains will be reduced since only the GPU portion gains perf/watt. The higher performance will also increase utilization elsewhere, such as the CPU and memory controller and further reduce perf/watt.

The mobile Vega chips are also not very bound by memory bandwidth, not with 8 CUs anyway. My guess is it'll end up about 30% faster than the 15W 4800U. Also it says on battery it'll be further lowered in TDP.

I can see the 25W version doing well, because now you start to have enough room for both. At 15W it's really not much, and even the uncore portion takes a non-insignificant amount.

Also comparing with Tigerlake:
-At 15W AMD is equal or even pulls ahead
-At 25W Intel pulls ahead by 25-30%

Tigerlake gains a decent amount with LPDDR4x and a huge amount with higher TDP. Another way of looking at it is AMD does better with cheaper setups and low power configurations. I assume in the RDNA2 iGPU generation AMD will be similar as 8 Vega CUs are very small to really do much.

 

[-Fran-]

We've tweaked some of the CPU and GPU discussions, but you have to remember that Vega 8 is generally limited to DDR4-3200 memory speeds, plus it's an older and less efficienct architecture. Putting a 16 CU Vega chip into an APU just wouldn't make sense without more memory bandwidth, and the 8 CU RDNA2 architecture could end up with similar requirements. Except, with LPDDR5-5500, that's 72% more memory bandwidth (though probably worse latency). Anyway, my rough seat-of-the-pants math says each RDNA2 CU should be 50–75% faster than a Vega CU. Adding in 72% more memory bandwidth would go right along with that increase in comput performance. If a 50% or more increase in relative performance is "leapfrogging," then I think RDNA2 can do that. But the 15W TDP will likely still limit the improvement, which I probably should have made clearer.

As for Zen 3 vs. Zen 2, I think that's far less of a concern. The big changes with Zen 3 revolve around using a unified 8-core CCX and 32MB L3 cache. This chip will only have a 4-core CCX and probably 8MB L3 or something (it might be 16MB). So, that kills off most of the Zen 3 advantage. Plus it's a monolithic design with integrated graphics, which means it needed more space for the GPU and video stuff. The LPDDR5 interface might have also increased relative die size over a DDR4 interface.

Overall, though, it still looks impressive. It should easily beat any of the other current generation handhelds mentioned in the article, like Aya Neo and GPD Win3. It will also inevitably have much higher volumes than those handhelds, and hopefully better design elements, plus even the 512GB model costs about half as much as the base model Win3. And yet, it's also still double the price of a Switch, more or less. Success is by no means guaranteed, but it could be good. Maybe. LOL

I'm not sure Vega, at least in the APUs, is less efficient (by much) than RDNA2 at that low power budget and speed. RDNA1 is at almost the same performance level as RDNA2 (tested by HUB, I think) and the only real differentiator was the speed they can get out of it. This is to say, given the reported speeds, I don't think RDNA2 in the Steam Deck is going to be that far off what you see in the 4800U with Vega if they operate at similar speeds. It will be slightly faster, since it'll probably be able to sustain the high clocks better and the extra bandwidth will help, but remember that having a DDR5 controller you're taking a bit extra in terms of power budget then a DDR4 one. Not sure how much, but in that power envelope it may matter. I do agree the extra bandwidth will help, as RDNA2 seems to be, as with most AMD GPU Archs, bandwidth hungry and since the APU doesn't have eRAM or Cache (or at least, it wasn't reported to have), it will need the extra bandwidth for sure.

I also believe Zen2 is not a bad uArch to use in this first iteration. It's a mature (by now) design and they probable managed to port it easily. I'm still curious about the process node, as that will really affect how it will perform in the 15W TDP envelope. Also, let's keep in mind that TDP is not Power Rating. The APU could work at 28W all day if the cooling is there. That's the beauty (and annoyance) of modern power control of CPUs.

Regards.

 

[salgado18]

I think one of its competitors is Steam Link for Android/iOS. A 5GHz wifi, a tablet or smartphone, and a bluetooth controller will deliver pretty good performance, using desktop hardware for the rendering (which is both cheaper and upgradeable). Image quality suffers a bit, but quality settings could me maxed out, and maybe using FSR for heavy games on the deck will give similar quality.

To me, this only makes sense for those who want to play outside their home.

 

[hotaru.hino]

That's why I said, while this sounds great on paper, it will not be for every PC gamer. Most PC gamer stuck to PC gaming because it allows them to play at high graphical settings, and/or, high FPS. This Steam console likely will offer none of the benefits of PC gaming. Fortunately, it should run well enough for older titles and emulation. It is still an interesting product to try out.

Of course it won't be for every PC gamer. But then again, a given PC, even if it's built for gaming, isn't for every PC gamer. Not everyone can afford $2000-$3000 systems, and some people are just fine with whatever comes in a $1000 box.

As a gamer, the technical aspects aren't really much of a necessity for me. I mean yes, I have my requirements, but I like to think they're pretty tame. Even then, when given a PC and it's the only thing I have, I'll make due with what it's capable of. The high end technical stuff is just a bonus.

No to me, as a gamer, the biggest draw to PC gaming is simply the vast library of games I can play and tweak to my liking. And it's not just what's on the Steam store or whatever either. A lot of my time growing up, before storefronts were really a thing, was simply finding freeware and demo sites and downloading whatever I could to try them out. Heck the games I've been playing every day can run on potatoes.

 

[-Fran-]

I think one of its competitors is Steam Link for Android/iOS. A 5GHz wifi, a tablet or smartphone, and a bluetooth controller will deliver pretty good performance, using desktop hardware for the rendering (which is both cheaper and upgradeable). Image quality suffers a bit, but quality settings could me maxed out, and maybe using FSR for heavy games on the deck will give similar quality.

To me, this only makes sense for those who want to play outside their home.

I gave your comment a lot of thought and I did come up with a tangible answer to it: high end smartphones and tablets. I have to say I am still surprised at how good the Samsung Note10+ plays games in its power envelope. And this is also accounting for quality settings. That being said, and to explain a bit more what you already mention in your own comment... Most mobile games are just garbage, but there's a few that, visually at least, are really amazing. Genshin Impact is the one I have in mind, but there's a few others that will really make you say "dang; that looks good". So, Steam Deck is going to enter a middle ground that some others have already have been trying to enter, but using Windows, which is not quite the same as Linux. I have a feeling that SteamOS will be better to include Android games alongside the Steam Library without much tweaking. Why? Android is using the GNU Linux kernel and just a modified JVM, but if you are running Linux, you can most definitely run Android stuff in it. Or, it is easier to achieve than in Windows. Even with X86 and not ARM. So, in terms of competition, the Steam Deck is not only going to compete head on with "PCs", but also Android devices and, to a lesser degree, iOS devices.

That is also another interesting angle the Steam Deck will attack and I am VERY curious about it. Imagine a portable development console for Android!

Regards.

 

[salgado18]

I gave your comment a lot of thought and I did come up with a tangible answer to it: high end smartphones and tablets. I have to say I am still surprised at how good the Samsung Note10+ plays games in its power envelope. And this is also accounting for quality settings. That being said, and to explain a bit more what you already mention in your own comment... Most mobile games are just garbage, but there's a few that, visually at least, are really amazing. Genshin Impact is the one I have in mind, but there's a few others that will really make you say "dang; that looks good". So, Steam Deck is going to enter a middle ground that some others have already have been trying to enter, but using Windows, which is not quite the same as Linux. I have a feeling that SteamOS will be better to include Android games alongside the Steam Library without much tweaking. Why? Android is using the GNU Linux kernel and just a modified JVM, but if you are running Linux, you can most definitely run Android stuff in it. Or, it is easier to achieve than in Windows. Even with X86 and not ARM. So, in terms of competition, the Steam Deck is not only going to compete head on with "PCs", but also Android devices and, to a lesser degree, iOS devices.

That is also another interesting angle the Steam Deck will attack and I am VERY curious about it. Imagine a portable development console for Android!

Regards.

You've made a good point. The Steam Deck will also compete with the Android and iOS ecosystems, even though with different games.

But my point is that Steam Link (and Parsec, a third-party app) allow a mobile user to stream and play games from a desktop or notebook with Steam, inside their local network. Sometimes I play like that, and the experience is pretty good. It may need some infrastructure (a fast router, bluetooth controller, configurations etc), but once that's done, there's no need for a dedicated portable gaming device. Oh, and you don't even need a high-end device, I believe even some budget phones and tablets can stream fine (as long as they have 5GHz wifi). I wouldn't buy a Steam Deck for this reason, Steam Link already gives me portable gaming.

 

[hotaru.hino]

But my point is that Steam Link (and Parsec, a third-party app) allow a mobile user to stream and play games from a desktop or notebook with Steam, inside their local network. Sometimes I play like that, and the experience is pretty good. It may need some infrastructure (a fast router, bluetooth controller, configurations etc), but once that's done, there's no need for a dedicated portable gaming device. Oh, and you don't even need a high-end device, I believe even some budget phones and tablets can stream fine (as long as they have 5GHz wifi). I wouldn't buy a Steam Deck for this reason, Steam Link already gives me portable gaming.

And that's a good point.

But that's not the entire point of the Deck.

 

[jakjawagon]

Look at the Nintendo Switch, which has comparatively pathetic hardware. It's basically Nvidia's Shield Tablet Tegra K1 SoC

Nope. It's the Tegra X1, but with the A53 cores disabled.

 

[TommyTwoTone66]

I think it will sell 100K units and we will never hear anything about it ever again, like the steam game pad, steam link box, and steam machines PCs among other failed projects.

So far the valve index is their only successful hardware, and even that takes second place to the HTC Vive.

 

[hotaru.hino]

I think it will sell 100K units and we will never hear anything about it ever again, like the steam game pad, steam link box, and steam machines PCs among other failed projects.

There were issues with all of them that prevented them from reaching some semblance of critical mass:

• With the Steam Controller, people pointed out it was awkward to use. Also it appeared to have limited out-of-the-box support with games when Xbox 360 style controllers were ubiquitous by the time of its release, so it was the de-facto standard for controller inputs. The Steam Controller relied on community profiles to make it work with games.
• Steam Link was not only super niche, but it required a computer in the same network (or maybe across the internet, I haven't tried) to stream the content to the device. Plus if you had a laptop, you could turn it into a Steam Link device anyway.
• The problem with Steam Machines was Valve wanted system builders to make it, but system builders saw no value for them in it. If the whole point of the Steam Machine was to bring a console-like ecosystem to the PC, then Valve chose the wrong business model in which to do it. System builders saw there was no point in building a niche system if it was simply a one-time purchase and consumers weren't interested in a machine that could do only one thing if it cost the same as any other PC they could buy from said system builder. The only console manufacturers to try this method out was Phillips' CDi and 3DO's 3DO. Both hoped that by letting other manufacturers build their consoles the cost would go down, rather than pit the console itself as a loss-leader and make up the money through software licensing. But given that the golden standard versions of those consoles were $500-$600 USD at the time of release when $200-$300 was what everyone was expecting, you can see how nobody really bothered with those consoles

This actually has a shot at being something other than a failed project. Valve is making the hardware themselves, are undercutting the current market (GPD Win and the likes go for around $750 USD starting), and this sort of formfactor is still lacking in the market.

 

[TommyTwoTone66]

Competing with the Nintendo Switch on form and function, having a library of low spec indie PC games and emulators with no first party titles, but pricing like a PS5 is resolutely bound for failure.

if you want a handheld with great games, get a switch.

if you want a machine that lets you play a bunch of indie games on steam, get a PC.

if you want to play those games on the move, get a laptop

if you want to spend $600 on a next gen gaming system, get a PS5 or an Xbox 4

There’s no circumstance where this weird hybrid of PC and console makes sense at $600. It needs to be priced like a switch to compete with the switch, and it needs a few exclusive first-party games as well, which I can’t see Valve actually doing.

 

[-Fran-]

Competing with the Nintendo Switch on form and function, having a library of low spec indie PC games and emulators with no first party titles, but pricing like a PS5 is resolutely bound for failure.

if you want a handheld with great games, get a switch.

if you want a machine that lets you play a bunch of indie games on steam, get a PC.

if you want to play those games on the move, get a laptop

if you want to spend $600 on a next gen gaming system, get a PS5 or an Xbox 4

There’s no circumstance where this weird hybrid of PC and console makes sense at $600. It needs to be priced like a switch to compete with the switch, and it needs a few exclusive first-party games as well, which I can’t see Valve actually doing.

You're missing the point of the Steam Deck by a mile. You can't cross-compare a PS5 to it. This is an ultra-portable PC with built-in controllers. While the Switch is a closer type of beast to it, the Nintendo ecosystem is no-where near a PC's. As long as you can add it to the Steam Library, you can play it. That's it. And assuming you can install Windows, well, your repertoire explodes as you can run emulators in it, which, believe me, you will be able to.

Regards.

 

[TommyTwoTone66]

You're missing the point of the Steam Deck by a mile. You can't cross-compare a PS5 to it. This is an ultra-portable PC with built-in controllers. While the Switch is a closer type of beast to it, the Nintendo ecosystem is no-where near a PC's. As long as you can add it to the Steam Library, you can play it. That's it. And assuming you can install Windows, well, your repertoire explodes as you can run emulators in it, which, believe me, you will be able to.

Regards.

don’t confuse quantity with quality. Yeah, you get the entire Steam Library, but chances are you already have that on a PC so it’s not giving you anything new. You’re not getting Zelda breath of the wild, Mario Odyssey or Smash Bros on this, or anything close to the quality or scope of those games.

It won’t play GTA5, it won’t play Cyberpunk, COD15 or Battlefield 5, And you’re not going to be playing Hearthstone, Overwatch, League of Legends or Valorant on this thing, since they aren’t on Steam. Games like that would actually make sense on the steam deck since they work well on low spec machines, but nope, not on steam.

Yes, it will play Cuphead, Super Meat Boy, Fez and Castle Crashers, but then so does the Switch, for less than half the price. So what?

Handheld emulator machines have been a thing for decades, and cost a lot less than $600. Nobody cares. If I wanted to play emulated games on a handheld, I’d rather have something like a Dreamhax RG300 for $100, which lasts way longer on a charge, has a nicer screen, weighs a lot less and has a better controller setup for emulation. But, like most people, I don’t care about handheld emulators so I haven’t even got one of those, and I certainly won’t be dropping $600 on this thing either.

 

[-Fran-]

don’t confuse quantity with quality. Yeah, you get the entire Steam Library, but chances are you already have that on a PC so it’s not giving you anything new. You’re not getting Zelda breath of the wild, Mario Odyssey or Smash Bros on this, or anything close to the quality or scope of those games.

It won’t play GTA5, it won’t play Cyberpunk, COD15 or Battlefield 5, And you’re not going to be playing Hearthstone, Overwatch, League of Legends or Valorant on this thing, since they aren’t on Steam. Games like that would actually make sense on the steam deck since they work well on low spec machines, but nope, not on steam.

Yes, it will play Cuphead, Super Meat Boy, Fez and Castle Crashers, but then so does the Switch, for less than half the price. So what?

Handheld emulator machines have been a thing for decades, and cost a lot less than $600. Nobody cares. If I wanted to play emulated games on a handheld, I’d rather have something like a Dreamhax RG300 for $100, which lasts way longer on a charge, has a nicer screen, weighs a lot less and has a better controller setup for emulation. But, like most people, I don’t care about handheld emulators so I haven’t even got one of those, and I certainly won’t be dropping $600 on this thing either.

Why won't it play GTA5, Cyberpunk or CoD? How can you be so sure of that? Have information we don't? If your angle is the DRM side, Valve is working on it. On the other hand, you could just install Windows and play them there.

Also, while portable emulators have been a thing for a while, they aren't full fledged portable PCs that, well, give you much more than just one thing; this is to say, the Steam Deck is not a "one trick pony" like Consoles and/or Emulators.

If it's not for you, that's fine. That doesn't mean this product is a bad idea or that it won't succeed. Your main argument is Valve's support. Do you even own any Valve hardware?

Regards.

 

[hotaru.hino]

if you want a handheld with great games, get a switch.

The Switch doesn't have some the games I may want to play on the go.

if you want a machine that lets you play a bunch of indie games on steam, get a PC.

Which is what the Steam Deck is?

if you want to play those games on the move, get a laptop

Which is more inconvenient to use on the go than the formfactor Steam Deck provides.

if you want to spend $600 on a next gen gaming system, get a PS5 or an Xbox 4

But I can't take it on the go.

If you don't understand who would want to buy it or why, that's fine. This product isn't for you then.

 

[TommyTwoTone66]

If you don't understand who would want to buy it or why, that's fine. This product isn't for you then.

Oh I fully understand who would want it and why, what I’m saying is that amounts to maybe 100K people in the entire world, so it’s not going to be a success. There aren’t enough indie game enthusiasts and contrarians with $600 to burn on a toy for this thing to turn a profit.

Its great that there’s finally the battery-powered pc of your dreams in the form factor you want, and super that you plan to buy one, but you alone aren’t enough of a market to make this machine a success. 100K sales might make a great Kickstarter project, but for a company the size of Valve, it’s a big fail.

To be a success at this scale you need mass appeal, good marketing, good features and some kind of unique selling point (for example exclusive games or VR support). Something that would set you apart from the rest, not just some crusty old games that people already have on their PC.

 

[-Fran-]

Oh I fully understand who would want it and why, what I’m saying is that amounts to maybe 100K people in the entire world, so it’s not going to be a success. There aren’t enough indie game enthusiasts and contrarians with $600 to burn on a toy for this thing to turn a profit.

Its great that there’s finally the battery-powered pc of your dreams in the form factor you want, and super that you plan to buy one, but you alone aren’t enough of a market to make this machine a success. 100K sales might make a great Kickstarter project, but for a company the size of Valve, it’s a big fail.

To be a success at this scale you need mass appeal, good marketing, good features and some kind of unique selling point (for example exclusive games or VR support). Something that would set you apart from the rest, not just some crusty old games that people already have on their PC.

You quote that number a lot... Have some information we don't have?

Also, funny you mention $600 "toy". Is not a gaming PC a toy? Isn't a console a $400 toy? I have a Valve Index with the accessories; that's ~$1600. I'm sure they've sold about the same number you quote? Maybe a bit more? Is it not a successful product? Is not the Quest 2 a successful product?

Regards.