Quoting: Wookietiddy

Quoting: kokoko3kPerformances seem really bad from the screenshot I see, with almost nothing on the screen and gpu (and battery!) struggling at 99% with a mere 40fps.

Nah those screenshots are on high settings which for this kind of game you really don't need. Putting everything on low gets 60+fps solidly. But also for a 4x game, 30+fps is more than enough.

The fact that putting everything to low improves the refresh is nothing new and does not imply that the performace are good.
The fact that a 4x game does not need high frame rates is also not an excuse for draining power due to not being performant/efficient.
This is always true, but particullary concerning for battery powered devices.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Performances seem really bad from the screenshot I see, with almost nothing on the screen and gpu (and battery!) struggling at 99% with a mere 40fps.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Thanks for the news.
Out of curiosity, what do you intend by "Linux" that requires you to specify "and steam deck"?

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Calinou

Quoting: kokoko3kI used this kind of tricks to play Rise of the tomb raider at 48hz, but the input latency was so bad that i opted for 75hz instead.
Can't even imagine the feeling with a FPS.

BTW, since the deck uses Wayland, things are not so easy like with xorg and a custom EDID has to be crafted and loaded at boot by modifying the kernel command line.
https://github.com/kevinlekiller/linux_intel_display_overclocking
(skip the xrandr part ofc)

I didn't know the Steam Deck's display could be overclocked. It's an interesting avenue for those retro games running at 35 or 70 FPS (and without source ports that support arbitrary framerates).

I don't say it can be overclocked, I don't own a deck, but shared my experiences with wayland and Xorg with my benq monitor.
The statement that the display can be clocked differently (underclocked) is by the article.

(Just Edited the first post.)

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: MagicMyth

Quoting: kokoko3kI used this kind of tricks to play Rise of the tomb raider at 48hz, but the input latency was so bad that i opted for 75hz instead.
Can't even imagine the feeling with a FPS.

Couple of things could cause the latency there. If you managed to set the panel to 48Hz it may not truly have been running at that rate and internally stretching arbitrary frames or it may have perfectly ran the panel at that refresh but the compositor was doing a crap effort of syncing to that rate (wasn't mutter notorious for doing that for a while?). If you were using the decks frame limiter you always run the risk of artificially (as in worse than 30FPS input latency should be) inflating latency depending on how clever the game engine is. Some games will hold up processing everything else until that frame time has expired where as others will go "hey I don't need to make another frame for a while. Let's do the other bits". Some games seem capable of the latter if you use their in game limiter but not when an external application holds up the frame rate. Annoyingly most games with their own FPS limiter don't allow very fine grained choices. You'd think 45/48 FPS would be a more common option. 45 FPS would be a good compromise on the Steam Deck as many games can't quite reach 60 and jumping from 30 to 45 FPS is night and day.

My panel definitely handles 45Hz properly, and no compositor was running, so the problem has to be elsewere.
It may depend on the game; maybe it probes for input on a per frame basis, so that vsync'ing it and limiting it to 30fps (hoping it was not doing triple buffering that would make thing even worse) would give a latency of (2/30)*1000=66+msecs.
Way too much, but in line with my observations.
Today i prefer the maximum hz with adaptive vsync (79hz on my non vrr panel) which is a tradeoff versus smoothness, but the best for input latency.
But i can understand that jumping from 30 vsync'ed fps to anything higher is a win.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

I used this kind of tricks to play Rise of the tomb raider at 48hz, but the input latency was so bad that i opted for 75hz instead.
Can't even imagine the feeling with a FPS.

BTW, since the deck uses Wayland, things are not so easy like with xorg and a custom EDID has to be crafted and loaded at boot by modifying the kernel command line.
https://github.com/kevinlekiller/linux_intel_display_overclocking
(skip the xrandr part ofc)

-EDIT-
^^ This was with a normal monitor, not the Deck display ^^

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: Ehvis

Quoting: kokoko3k

Quoting: Ehvis

Quoting: kokoko3kIn other words, the use of nvidia-patch/nvlax, even suggested by the developer of gpu-screen-recorder for fullscreen captures, is not permitted.

Good thing I don't need their permission then.

I'm not sure to get your point...

The point is that nvidia is not free to ask whatever they want in their licence. Restrictions set by local law will still apply. There's also a minor detail that no Linux user ever sees or agrees to this licence.

Definitely two good points!

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: elmapulwhat an alphabet soup, it sound like an over complicated work arround...

i dont like how any of this sounds,android didnt helped linux desktop, instead it created its own ecosystem , and nowadays its painfull to run android apps on desktop linux and linux softwares on android.
hell its easier to find an good android emulator for windows than for linux.

and now with chromeOS, i can see the samething happening again, i can understand the security argument, but we always trusted the comunity to make an safe system, chromeOS seem to be more closed than android or even windows in that regard.

it help nothing that the games on googleplay are basically 'free ads for the true product, in game itens' i want linux to grow at the desktop, but not to get something worse than windows.

Let they do what they want.
As kong as it will brings more playable games, i'm fine with it.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: ShabbyXPixel art didn't look better back then because screens had lower res. It was because CRT didn't show the pixels as clearly as LCDs do. So if you get the same pixel art that looks smooth and nice on a CRT and show it on LCD it looks like garbage. Artists back then "worked around" the pixel art by taking advantage of CRTs' analog-ness. Pixel arts of today are a totally different thing.

Here, some photos: https://www.google.com/search?q=pixel+art+crt+vs+lcd

Anyway, my point is, pixel art back then has little to do with pixel art now.

Well, it is due to both.
What you say is true for 15khz monitors or Tv sets, but on good quality VGA monitors they didn't look so good.
I still like pixel art today, the one made by hand, without much tools by artists.I find it so much personal.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: JahimselfWhat is called pixel art is because if you launch those game on modern screen they look pixelated as the image is increasingly zoomed in.

Not really.
Is is called that way, because, given the so low resolution, every pixel is important.
Moving a single pixel one pixel to the right could even causes pretty cats to explode in pieces.
Not counting that many times every pixel is drawn by hand.
You don't call the first doom pixel art just because it was running on lowres display.
Maybe you can call pixel art the nazis, because they were 2d pictures draw pixel by pixel.

View this comment - View article - View full comments