![]() Suffice to say it’s loosely equivalent to an Nvidia GTX 1050. Its APU doesn’t work the same way as a desktop video card. ![]() There are several reasons why it’s difficult to name a specific Steam Deck GPU equivalent. This is why cards like the GeForce GTX 1660 can give better performance than the GTX 1060 despite roughly similar clock speed and overall power draw. Even though specifications may seem lower than expected, its performance relative to power consumed will actually quite high. To make matters even more complicated, the Steam Deck GPU is based on much more power-efficient architecture than other comparable video cards in its performance class. Instead, its GPU pulls memory from the shared pool as needed. ![]() Of course, that makes comparisons even more challenging, since desktop video cards typically run on a distinct pool of GDDR memory. Not only is this memory optimized for mobile hardware, its four channels provide a huge amount of bandwidth to the APU. The hardware includes 16GB of four-channel LPDDR5 RAM, the latest flavor of Low Power Double Data Rate memory. Though its GPU specs may look underwhelming on paper, the Steam Deck’s overall performance will be greatly enhanced by its speedy memory. RAM: 16GB LPDDR5 (5500 MT/s quad 32-bit channels).Here’s a quick look at the base specifications shared by all Steam Deck models: Understanding Steam Deck specifications and performance To better understand performance, we need to understand what makes the Steam Deck APU different from the usual sort of desktop PC hardware. These are chips that contain both CPU and GPU, meaning the Steam Deck’s GPU is part of a larger chip instead of being a discrete graphics processing unit. That’s because Valve based the Steam Deck around a modern AMD APU, or accelerated processing unit. Unfortunately, that sort of comparison doesn’t tell the full story. ![]() However, the GPU’s maximum throughput of around 1.6 teraflops makes it loosely equivalent in power to an Nvidia GTX 1050 or GTX 950. The M1 Ultra is otherwise impressive, and it is unclear why Apple focused on this particular benchmark as it is somewhat misleading to customers because it does not take into account the full range of Nvidia's chip.Īpple's M1 Ultra is essentially two M1 Max chips connected together, and as The Verge highlighted in its full Mac Studio review, Apple has managed to successfully get double the M1 Max performance out of the M1 Ultra, which is a notable feat that other chip makers cannot match.The Steam Deck GPU is based on hardware that is difficult to compare to typical PC video cards. It's sort of like arguing that because your electric car can use dramatically less fuel when driving at 80 miles per hour than a Lamborghini, it has a better engine - without mentioning the fact that a Lambo can still go twice as fast. The Mac Studio beat out the 16-core Mac Pro, but performance was about half that of the RTX 3090.īut it seems that Apple just simply isn't showing the full performance of the competitor it's chasing here. The Verge decided to pit the M1 Ultra against the Nvidia RTX 3090 using Geekbench 5 graphics tests, and unsurprisingly, it cannot match Nvidia's chip when that chip is run at full power. Apple showed the M1 Ultra beating the RTX 3090 at a certain power level, but Apple isn't sharing the whole picture with its limited graphic. When the M1 Ultra was introduced, Apple shared a chart that had the new chip winning out over the "highest-end discrete GPU" in "relative performance," without details on what tests were run to achieve those results. Despite Apple's claims and charts, the new M1 Ultra chip is not able to outperform Nvidia's RTX 3090 in terms of raw GPU performance, according to benchmark testing performed by The Verge.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |