Tech is silly sometimes.
Comment on Networking issues (desktop mode)
khannie@lemmy.world 2 days agoHoly. Fucking. Shit.
This was it.
Here’s my ping output. You can see where I unplugged and replugged the HDMI cable. Absolutely not in my wildest dreams would I have thought of this. Thank you so much.
(1)(deck@steamdeck ~)$ ping google.ie PING google.ie (74.125.193.94) 56(84) bytes of data. 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=1 ttl=108 time=818 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=2 ttl=108 time=674 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=3 ttl=108 time=308 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=4 ttl=108 time=289 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=5 ttl=108 time=404 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=6 ttl=108 time=25.7 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=7 ttl=108 time=17.2 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=8 ttl=108 time=19.6 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=9 ttl=108 time=18.6 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=10 ttl=108 time=19.4 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=11 ttl=108 time=17.0 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=12 ttl=108 time=16.0 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=13 ttl=108 time=17.0 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=14 ttl=108 time=17.5 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=15 ttl=108 time=25.2 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=16 ttl=108 time=17.1 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=17 ttl=108 time=15.2 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=18 ttl=108 time=19.7 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=19 ttl=108 time=14.0 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=20 ttl=108 time=21.2 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=21 ttl=108 time=20.3 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=22 ttl=108 time=18.8 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=23 ttl=108 time=13.9 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=24 ttl=108 time=18.1 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=25 ttl=108 time=12.9 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=26 ttl=108 time=17.9 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=27 ttl=108 time=16.1 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=28 ttl=108 time=19.1 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=29 ttl=108 time=15.1 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=30 ttl=108 time=16.2 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=31 ttl=108 time=16.4 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=32 ttl=108 time=18.1 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=33 ttl=108 time=21.7 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=34 ttl=108 time=23.2 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=35 ttl=108 time=411 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=36 ttl=108 time=287 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=37 ttl=108 time=412 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=38 ttl=108 time=2445 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=39 ttl=108 time=1679 ms 64 bytes from ig-in-f94.1e100.net (74.125.193.94): icmp_seq=40 ttl=108 time=666 ms ^C --- google.ie ping statistics --- 41 packets transmitted, 40 received, 2.43902% packet loss, time 40064ms rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 12.890/223.052/2445.465/478.256 ms, pipe 3
Krauerking@lemy.lol 1 day ago
Fubarberry@sopuli.xyz 21 hours ago
Would have never expected that, I’m glad I came back to this thread to see if you had made any progress. Searching online about that, sounds like it’s actually a somewhat common issue (that I had never heard of before now). Basically the advice is to try a better quality hdmi cable, swap to 5ghz wifi (which is less likely to get interference from this than 2.4Ghz), route the hdmi cable different to have more space between it and the deck, or add ferrite cores around the ends of the hdmi cable.