this post was submitted on 09 Nov 2023
1090 points (98.6% liked)
Technology
59455 readers
4086 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
FWIW, LTT seems to have asked about VRR and they hypothesize, based on the answer, that they're sourcing from the same place as Nintendo and that is limiting the VRR option: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCVXqoVi6RE
But my point stands in that you're thinking about the target spec of the display, not the games. There IS a difference between 20-40 and 100-144 fps. First, because it's a lot harder to keep a steady rate at 7ms frame budgets and second because the sense of stability doesn't have the same demands.
And yes, it's a perceptual thing. Some people will be more sensitive than others, but I would feel comfortable showing a 28-30 fps clip to people on a 144Hz vsync and a VRR display and asking them to spot which is which. Simply put the gaps in miliseconds between those two things are going to be too similar to tell apart. I know because I've tried. I have 100, 120, 144 and 165 fps displays, both VRR and vsynced. I've messed around with this for a long time for fun and profit.
I have no question that VRR would be a slight improvement, but I'm also not surprised that at these levels of speed and size both Lenovo and Valve decided that it wasn't worth to chase VRR compared to the high refresh alternative. That gels with my own experience.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=uCVXqoVi6RE
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
If you don't own a PC handheld and want one this is not a bad time to jump in at all, especially if you're on a budget.
I don't expect you'll see a refresh on this thing again for a couple of years at least. Given how accessible the prices for the Deck are I don't know if waiting that long makes sense. I mean, there will likely be a Switch 2 at some point in that interval, so if you only want the one handheld that may be something to wait-and-see for, but handheld PCs are PCs, there's always gonna be a big new thing to look forward to.
That is literally FOMO.
You are "missing out" on nothing and technology gets better every couple months at this rate. I don't want to put myself at the mercy of ASUS for support, but their handheld is REALLY nice. Similarly, Aya and GPD have been doing this for the better part of a decade and are largely what the Steam Deck was based on. And GPD in particular have some very interesting form factors
Most of the devices out there are geared toward Windows (which plays with Gamepass). In large part because MS have put a lot of effort into touchpad/touchscreen support whereas Linux is... gonna Linux. But there are increasing third party efforts to make linux distros and Valve seem to want to push for SteamOS as a distro (and I think Aya have said they want to use it?).
At the end of the day: if the price is right and you think you'll use it, get it. If not? Fuck it. Buy something else.
I mean, their hardware is REALLY good and often at a good price to performance ratio. I would 100% take it if it were free.
The main issue is their comically bad, and often predatory, support model. If my monitor goes to shit? Whatever, I'll buy a new monitor. If my motherboard? That is a LOT of money and effort to swap everything out.
But if my computer/game console? Fuck that.