Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (Chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chino tradicional)
日本語 (Japonés)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandés)
български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Danés)
Deutsch (Alemán)
English (Inglés)
Español - España
Ελληνικά (Griego)
Français (Francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandés)
Norsk (Noruego)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portugués - Brasil)
Română (Rumano)
Русский (Ruso)
Suomi (Finés)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Informar de un error de traducción
My main concern was storage, but considering that the titles I intend to play don't gobble up that much space and because external storage can also be used I settled with the 256Gb version. It can hold one or two of my AAA games and then has room to spare for smaller games (and possible screenshots (?)).
People are forgetting sd cards. Get a couple of 1tb sd cards and carry your entire game library with you.
Because gaming off SD-cards never was a bad idea or anything. Have fun draining your battery entirely on loading up GTA5
Not to mention asset-heavy games such as Battlefield that pretty much load up assets constantly.
Sd cards may not be fast, but they beat hard drives. No seeking times on sd cards.
And there are plenty of videos showing games running from sd cards just fine.
... besides huge games (e.g. GTA5) and asset heavy games (e.g. Battlefield). Of course you can run plenty of games just fine. Yet still SD cards are not designed for constant heavy load. They are designed for quick reads / writes of small data (e.g. photography)
Didn't watch the video because I already know the result basically because it's physically obvious.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efD2wAfhXrU
PS: I am not saying it is impossible. Infact most games showcased on Steam Decks so far were running off SD-cards. Yet still the point stand valid... SD-cards are not designed for such loads