this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2024
493 points (98.8% liked)

Steam Deck

14507 readers
238 users here now

A place to discuss and support all things Steam Deck.

Replacement for r/steamdeck_linux.

As Lemmy doesn't have flairs yet, you can use these prefixes to indicate what type of post you have made, eg:
[Flair] My post title

The following is a list of suggested flairs:
[Discussion] - General discussion.
[Help] - A request for help or support.
[News] - News about the deck.
[PSA] - Sharing important information.
[Game] - News / info about a game on the deck.
[Update] - An update to a previous post.
[Meta] - Discussion about this community.

Some more Steam Deck specific flairs:
[Boot Screen] - Custom boot screens/videos.
[Selling] - If you are selling your deck.

These are not enforced, but they are encouraged.

Rules:

Link to our Matrix Space

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This would presumably let x86 windows games run on ARM hardware.

This is almost certainly meant for the next Valve VR headset, but ARM has so much better power efficiency than x86 that a future ARM based Deck would be a huge improvement to battery life.

Also see this tweet:

VR games that have already secretly pushed Android ARM builds onto the Steam Store are ran via Waydroid (androidARM to LinuxARM)

VR games that do not have an ARM build on Steam (windows x86) are being translated/emulated via ProtonARM and FEX

Edit: here's gamingonlinux coverage of this info, includes some more information

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

keep in mind, for the longest time Intels processors were still on Intels fab. a huge chunk of the efficiency/performance gains was less x86 > arn and more Intel Fab > TSMC. even to a lesser extent, compare the snapdragon 8 gen 1 to the snapdragon 8+ gen 1. Samsung wasn't as far behind tsmc (compared to intel) at the time and both designs basically are the same chip but implemented at two different fabs.

It also involves how manufacturers decide how to handle price performance. Most laptop manufacturers see any performance lost due to clocking it low bad for sales(so they agressively clock it higher for performance) causing louder fans. Apple takes the opposite approach, where they tune it for noise performance because they control what people see on their graphs (while being misleading, by essentially never including anything faster than it) and asking users to pay top dollar for the top tier fab runs (apple essentially has top cut priority at TSMC) so they always get to see the bleeding edge efficiency nodes/performance before anyone else does at the higher cost to them(which is then passed on to the consumer)

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

AMD is on a much better process node than Intel, but their battery life still isn't as good as Apple's. Particularly under low to medium loads. My M1 MBP easily gets 12 hours of battery life under a real load. My AMD powered ThinkPad is closer to 7 hours, and my Intel machines get like 4, on a good day.

[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 4 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

the thing is, people are attributing it to ARM, rather than how Apple handles their OS. its the sole reason why Snapdragon X Elite wasn't that great on Windows, because ultimately, the problem wasn't about x86 vs Arm, but it was about how windows handled low powered operations. If valve makes a piece of hardware that's arm based, they clearly aren't going to be using OSX for any reason. You can tell by the discussion because you can easily name which generation processor you run on a MBP, but fail to mention the cpu models for either the AMD nor intel powered machines and gives the aura of equivalent playing fields when it fundamentally wont.

Just because Apple with their heavily controlled OS space can make the transition to ARM work flawlessly for batterylife doesn't mean it applies to all other ARM devices. Arm definitely does some aspects better, but it's not by default better in every situation due to the nature of the environment that surrounds said hardware is. The power efficiency only exists if all applications are recompiled to target said hardware. For a gaming device, it's not going to be very useful because very few games that Valve would target have an arm based build. You get into the problem that emulators have. things like proton is a translation layer and suffers much less overhead (e.g why mobile phones can do switch emulation for instance(arm to arm based translation layer) but no phone remotely will do ps3 emulation (arm to ibm cell processor), despite console wise, being roughly the same in performance.

It's the sole reason why Apples dev kit for games doesn't run games like proton does(where it can legit run games better than original if its using an older API). Because architecture changes isn't just a translation layer, theres a layer of emulation to it, which while can be hardware accelerated if done right, is never 1:1 like a translation layer is.

Want to test how your MBP battery life is on a different environment not entirely tailored to Apple, run Asahi Linux for example and you will notice immediately that the battery life isn't the same. (asahi linux is a fedora based distro tailored for M series machines)

[–] red@sopuli.xyz 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

This comment makes it seem like we don't already have Modern Arm Windows based laptops that have excellent battery life, comparable to Apple M devices.

But we do.

[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

me mentioning the snapdragon x elite is the situation. it doesnt have good battery life in the usecase this while topic is about (gaming). your comment sounds like you read the reviews and didnt understand which functions excelled in battery life, and which ones didnt.

the whole point is just because something is Arm, doesnt automatically make it more efficient in all usecases. what's the point in a gaming device thats less efficient when its gaming.

[–] red@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Windows Arm laptops are currently just as bad for gaming as all the other arm based laptops, so it's weird to single them out. That's why I didn't think you were only speaking about gaming any more.

[–] Dudewitbow@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 hour ago

Im not singling them out, im saying arm in GENERAL isn't great at gaming, and it's silly to assume just because something is ARM that it's instantly more efficient at everything it does. IDK how you're reading my statements