Is the 64GB Steam Deck slower than the 256GB and 512GB models? Yes, it is.

The recently launched Steam Deck comes in three storage options – 64GB eMMC, 256GB NVMe SSD, and 512GB NVMe SSD. This has led many to wonder – is the 64GB model slower than the higher capacity SSD models? The short answer is yes, the 64GB Steam Deck is slower due to using a less advanced eMMC storage technology compared to the faster NVMe SSD storage found in the 256GB and 512GB variants.

In this in-depth guide, we‘ll break down the differences between eMMC vs SSD storage, look at real-world gaming performance benchmarks, battery life impacts, and help you determine if the 64GB Steam Deck‘s savings are worth the trade-off in speed.

Slower eMMC storage in 64GB Model

First, let‘s look at why the 64GB model is slower. While the 256GB and 512GB Steam Decks utilize fast NVMe solid state drive (SSD) storage, the cheaper 64GB model uses eMMC storage instead.

eMMC stands for embedded Multi-Media Controller flash storage. It‘s a type of lower-cost, slower speed storage commonly found in budget laptops, smartphones, and handheld gaming devices.

According to Valve, the 64GB eMMC storage loads game files around 12.5% slower than the flagship 512GB NVMe SSD model. Booting into SteamOS is approximately 25% slower as well.

While the eMMC storage is certainly slower, it‘s still reasonably fast for a handheld form factor. The differences are modest – we‘re talking seconds slower, not minutes. However, the speed gap is certainly more noticeable compared directly against the NVMe SSD models.

Faster NVMe SSD storage in 256GB & 512GB

So what makes the SSD models faster? The 256GB and 512GB Steam Deck variants utilize high speed NVMe solid state drive storage.

NVMe stands for Non-Volatile Memory Express, which is a protocol that allows SSD storage to connect via the much faster PCIe interface rather than the dated SATA interface used by traditional SSDs.

Here are the key advantages of NVMe SSDs over eMMC storage:

• Faster sequential speeds – NVMe SSDs can reach sequential read/write speeds of up to 3,500MB/s. That‘s nearly 4x faster than SATA SSDs. This matters most for transferring large files, performing installs, and loading games with long load sequences.

• More bandwidth – NVMe SSDs have significantly more bandwidth. eMMC maxes out around 400MB/s while NVMe SSDs can hit over 3,000MB/s. This allows NVMe SSDs to handle intensive read/write tasks faster.

• Lower latency – NVMe SSDs have lower latency, meaning less lag between a data request and the storage delivering it. This directly improves load times.

• Better multitasking – The higher bandwidth of NVMe allows the SSD to handle multiple storage operations simultaneously better.

While synthetic benchmarks show NVMe SSDs handily outperforming eMMC storage, how much does this actually impact real-world gaming on the Steam Deck? Let‘s take a look…

Benchmarks – eMMC vs SSD Game Load Times

Several outlets have benchmarked the 64GB eMMC model against the 512GB SSD model to compare real-world gaming performance. Here are some examples:

• TechRadar tested loading times for The Witcher 3 across storage models. The 64GB eMMC loaded in 32.51 seconds while the 512GB SSD was faster at 27.34 seconds. So approximately 15% quicker load time.

• For Portal 2 load times, Tom‘s Hardware saw the 64GB model take 15.75 seconds to load and the 512GB model complete it in 13.77 seconds. Roughly a 14% improvement with the SSD.

• In Call of Duty Warzone, PC Gamer observed a load time of 27.4 seconds on the 64GB model versus 24.74 seconds on the 512GB, for a 10% quicker load.

As you can see from these real-world game tests, the SSD models load anywhere from 10-15% quicker than the eMMC storage in the 64GB Deck. These few seconds add up over the course of longer gaming sessions.

While not dramatic, competitive gamers and those wanting every last bit of performance should opt for the NVMe SSD models. For more casual gamers, the 64GB eMMC model is likely fine.

What about frame rates and game performance?

Importantly, the storage type does not directly impact in-game frame rates or performance once loaded. All models use the same custom AMD APU and deliver equivalent gameplay experiences.

The faster NVMe SSD affects only initial game load times, install speeds, and boot ups – not actual in-game fps performance. Rest assured all models deliver full Steam Deck performance while gaming.

Battery life – eMMC vs SSD Models

Beyond speeds, the other key difference between the storage types that can impact real-world usage is battery life.

Because SSD storage is more power efficient, the Steam Deck tends to last slightly longer on a charge with the 256GB and 512GB models.

Based on TechRadar‘s battery rundown test playing The Witcher 3, here were the results:

• 64GB model lasted 1 hr 47 mins
• 512GB model lasted 2 hrs 14 mins

So while not drastically longer, the higher capacity SSD models yielded around 20% better battery life while gaming. For a handheld, battery life is king so this is an important consideration.

64GB capacity is very limiting

While the moderate performance gap can likely be overlooked by many, the tiny 64GB capacity is a much bigger issue. After the SteamOS system files, you‘re left with only ~45GB of usable storage.

Many modern AAA game installs are 50GB+. Call of Duty Warzone and Red Dead Redemption 2, for example, take up a massive 150GB+ of drive space.

With only 45GB usable, the 64GB Steam Deck can realistically only fit a couple small indie games before requiring a microSD card. This severely limits its usefulness as a true handheld compared to the more spacious 256GB and 512GB models.

Valve themselves recommend the 64GB primarily for backwards compatible titles and smaller 2D indie games. For modern 3D AAA gaming, the extra space of the SSD models is far preferable.

microSD card expansion helps, but isn‘t perfect

Luckily, all Steam Deck models include a microSD slot for adding more storage. This allows you supplement the 64GB model with a cheap 1TB microSD card for around $150.

While convenient, microSD cards are still a bit slower than the internal drive. And having to juggle which games are installed internally vs externally reduces the seamless handheld experience.

Still, if budget is your main concern, a 64GB Deck plus large microSD card is certainly a workable solution. It just requires more storage micromanagement compared to the SSD models.

Should you consider the 64GB Steam Deck?

At only $399, the 64GB Steam Deck is $130 cheaper than the 256GB model. If maximizing value is important, the 64GB Deck can still be a great handheld gaming system with the right expectations:

• Performance is only moderately behind SSD models
• Expandable via microSD card
• Great for indie & retro gaming
• More affordable entry point

However, its downsides are real – the small amount of usable storage, need to juggle multiple SD cards, slightly worse battery life. For a seamless premium handheld experience, the 256GB or 512GB NVMe SSD models are likely worth the extra investment for most gamers.

My recommendation would be to start with a 256GB Deck. It‘s a good balance of storage, speed, and price. Power users who want maximum performance or plan to install a large library should consider the 512GB.

The 64GB model makes the most sense for light indie gaming, emulation, or as a tinkerer‘s system. Just be aware of its limitations as your primary handheld device before committing to save $130.

The Bottom Line

While measurably slower than the SSD variants, the 64GB Steam Deck can still provide an excellent handheld gaming experience, especially when augmented with a large microSD card. For those on a budget, it‘s a decent way to get your foot in the door.

However, serious gamers wanting a premium handheld with seamless performance and ample native storage should consider investing in the 256GB or 512GB NVMe SSD models instead. The moderate price premium grants meaningful advantages in sustained speeds, battery life, and usable capacity that lead to a superior overall user experience.