• schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Well, the article is talking 65 and 80w, so uh, that’s probably sadly not where these will end up.

    There’s a big gap between the 15w tdp on the steam deck and either of those numbers, especially in battery life (unless measuring battery life in minutes) and the fact that 80w in a steam deck would be less gaming console and more portable burn generator.

    For laptops, though, yeah, that’s looks pretty remarkable given that roughly equivalent laptops now use quite a lot more than 65w for that alleged performance.

    • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Yeah def spoke too soon. Thats what I get for commenting before reading the damn article. Still, I’m enjoying witnessing what feels to be an inflection point for mobile chipsets.

      • schizo@forum.uncomfortable.business
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        For sure. It’s nice that low-ish power CPUs with iGPUs went from ‘roughly a box of melted crayons’ to ‘competitive with current-gen graphics’ in what, like 2-3 years?

        And, of course, there’s no reason Nvidia couldn’t make a 15w variant later either since it looks like both AMD and Intel have CPUs competitive in that space now, rather than it just being a one-off design like the Steam Deck’s APU is.