Nintendo announce: Nintendo NX

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think the 8xJaguar over 4xBulldozer choice would have more to do with power+heat than area.
 
I think the 8xJaguar over 4xBulldozer choice would have more to do with power+heat than area.
I do wonder about though, much higher IPC, the Wii U is close to 200mm^2 for its die size, so there is room for an APU made around this chip possibly, especially if they are cutting down on ALUs and going with 14nm. I think AMD recently said that they are dropping bulldozer & puma for Zen on desktop and mobile.

Of course for the handheld they would be using ARM but the console could be anything from AMD really, even puma(+) would be a nice upgrade in performance over jaguar (lower heat/power for similar processing power)
 
After reading about Naughty Dog shifting a bunch of work from the CPU to the GPU on The Last of US remaster for PS4 made it clear how much smaller the CPU's role will be going forward. When you can take advantage of compute shaders, and get a 2-3x performance boost, its obvious that the workload is better suited there.
Keywords here are WHEN you can take advantage. GPU compute isn't a magic solution to every problem, which will automatically jump out at you if you just wave it around a bit like a wizard's wand. GPUs are very good at handling certain sub-sets of computing tasks, not terribly good at many others, and completely useless at a bunch of tasks as well. It all depends on how easily the problem can be broken down into an algorithm that suits a GPUs simplistic streaming-heavy execution hardware.

We're gonna need strong CPUs with strong math units for quite a while yet.
 
I do wonder about though, much higher IPC, the Wii U is close to 200mm^2 for its die size, so there is room for an APU made around this chip possibly, especially if they are cutting down on ALUs and going with 14nm.

The Wii U is 200mm^2 because it uses a very old process.
Odds are, if the NX is a handheld, its SoC won't have 200mm^2 or it won't be done using 14nm.


I think AMD recently said that they are dropping bulldozer & puma for Zen on desktop and mobile.

That they're dropping bulldozer is pretty much a given, though the desktop APUs in 2016 will still be using Excavator (they're basically Carrizo + DDR4), sharing the same socket as Zen.
As for Puma, I'm guessing AMD hopes they can scale down Zen as well as Intel could scale Broadwell cores, and AMD isn't pursuing smartphone SoCs anyway so it's not important to them to keep developing two very different cores I guess.

Of course for the handheld they would be using ARM but the console could be anything from AMD really, even puma(+) would be a nice upgrade in performance over jaguar (lower heat/power for similar processing power)

I think if 4 Puma cores could fit into a 4.5W TDP tablet chip using GF's 28nm, then they're as good as many ARM offerings for a home console.
 
Keywords here are WHEN you can take advantage. GPU compute isn't a magic solution to every problem, which will automatically jump out at you if you just wave it around a bit like a wizard's wand. GPUs are very good at handling certain sub-sets of computing tasks, not terribly good at many others, and completely useless at a bunch of tasks as well. It all depends on how easily the problem can be broken down into an algorithm that suits a GPUs simplistic streaming-heavy execution hardware.

We're gonna need strong CPUs with strong math units for quite a while yet.

Absolutely, but it seems console manufactures are not placing much importance on the CPU. Even the X1/PS4 have relatively weak CPU's compared to anything you would find in a gaming PC. Even with lots of cores, just like not everything can be moved to the GPU, not everything scales across lots of CPU cores well either. For Naughty Dog, I would assume the work they were handling on the SPU's in the Cell processor were actually a good match for Compute, but this time they have cycles to spare on the GPU side, and last gen the CPU was where the untapped potential was found.
 
Absolutely, but it seems console manufactures are not placing much importance on the CPU.
Because of cost concerns, and jaguar cores were what AMD had to offer for APUs at that time. It still doesn't have anything else that is cost effective. Anyway, you might say SOME emphasis was put on CPU requirements, with eight cores available, even if they're weak individually... :p
 
Keywords here are WHEN you can take advantage. GPU compute isn't a magic solution to every problem, which will automatically jump out at you if you just wave it around a bit like a wizard's wand. GPUs are very good at handling certain sub-sets of computing tasks, not terribly good at many others, and completely useless at a bunch of tasks as well. It all depends on how easily the problem can be broken down into an algorithm that suits a GPUs simplistic streaming-heavy execution hardware.

We're gonna need strong CPUs with strong math units for quite a while yet.
Cue psorcerer...
 
Tweaked Mullins APU in a handheld, that plugs into a small box under your TV that charges the handheld and outputs via HDMI, and something like a Wii U Pro controller for use when plugged in. $199, launches with Pokemon and Monster Hunter 5.

Screencap this :D
 
Maybe the idea of the NX is that the console can be integrated into anything? If you make it small and lower power consumption enough then you could fit it into a TV, a satellite/DVR/cable box. If they go with a quad core they could probably get away with it compared to current generation consoles as the current consoles only have 6 full cores to dedicate towards games. If they're smart they could get quite a nifty system on 14nm finfet, and maybe that could give them a competitive advantage over MS/Sony.
 
Perhaps the NX is an idea based on internet-of things. I can't think of what or how exactly, but it seems like a technology trend that Nintendo must have taken note of when they were planning. The QoL device (alarm clock probably) seems to indicate that they had this on their minds already.
 
This story is from 2014. http://mynintendonews.com/2014/02/0...helds-will-no-longer-be-completely-different/

The quote that is most relevant to me:

“Still, I am not sure if the form factor (the size and configuration of the hardware) will be integrated. In contrast, the number of form factors might increase. Currently, we can only provide two form factors because if we had three or four different architectures, we would face serious shortages of software on every platform. To cite a specific case, Apple is able to release smart devices with various form factors one after another because there is one way of programming adopted by all platforms. Apple has a common platform called iOS. Another example is Android. Though there are various models, Android does not face software shortages because there is one common way of programming on the Android platform that works with various models. The point is, Nintendo platforms should be like those two examples.”

Ironically with their backs on the wall, I think Nintendo is in the best position to now ditch the traditional console generation cycle and move to a more of a continual platform that can upgrade and introduce new devices without wiping out the install base with new hardware releases. I think this is the way forward for them.
 
I think this is the way forward for them.
What you just wrote has been suggested before. The biggest thing stopping Nintendo from doing this is that they themselves do not have a platform such as iOS or Android. The firmwares of the 3DS and Wuu are likely much too primitive (and limited, and possibly also poorly thought-through) to serve as a foundation.

Rolling your own OS is very tricky, and Nintendo has always been bad with resident software. They pretty much didn't even have any at all until the Gamecube, and what we got in Wii was so poorly designed on a technical level it makes you shudder even reading about it.
 
The biggest thing stopping Nintendo from doing this is that they themselves do not have a platform such as iOS or Android. The firmwares of the 3DS and Wuu are likely much too primitive (and limited, and possibly also poorly thought-through) to serve as a foundation.

Which is why they're partnering with DeNa.
 
I don't see what DeNa is having to do with Nintendo firmwares. They will make games and online user account system for Nintendo.

Nintendo is still responsible for their firmwares, and we all know that they are not doing the great job in that area.
 
Could Wii U's slow OS be more to do w/ the processor or slow NAND they use? I wonder if they will build off that foundation, or if it is even worth it in the case that they switch to an ARM CPU.

Also, what are some of the pros/cons for Nintendo using a custom branch of Linux?
 
Could Wii U's slow OS be more to do w/ the processor or slow NAND they use? I wonder if they will build off that foundation, or if it is even worth it in the case that they switch to an ARM CPU.

Also, what are some of the pros/cons for Nintendo using a custom branch of Linux?
No. It's just not a very good OS.

Sony uses FreeBSD. With Linux Nintendo should open source which is undesirable.
 
With Linux Nintendo should open source which is undesirable.
There's no need or reason for Nintendo to open-source anything beyond Linux itself of course.

I'd be enormously surprised if Nintendo was to go Linux anyhow; you'd need to perform extensive modifications to turn that monolithic desktop-centric OS into a light-weight and efficient console firmware. I don't think Nintendo would be up to it, frankly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top