Nintendo Switch Technical discussion [SOC = Tegra X1]
- Thread starter Alucardx23
- Start date
-
- Tags
- nintendo nintendont
Rikimaru
Veteran
By FLOPS it is 1/3 of Xbox One, but xone desktop architecture is more powerful. Also Switch is very bandwidth starved.
If you're going by numbers only, then it's 0.471 TFlops vs 1.3 TFlops. Does one third seem not so far behind to you?
The Perculator
Newcomer
I donìt think, the xbox has 1.3 tf in fp32, however the two architectures are very different but I think that xbox one gpu is more powerful, it has also a more capable cpu, greater memory bandwitch (yes maxwell is a very efficent architecture from the point of view of saving bandwitch , but we still talk about of 25 GB / s on Switch, even lesser than last gen consoles). Returning to the gpu, I think that swtich gpu is comparable to a 920mx, also maxwell, 256 cuda core, higher clock but less rops, higher textures rate, but smaller pixel fill rate. I don't say it's the same but similar
Mihailjones
Newcomer
Yeah pure gflops comparision = switch is a slow machine vs home consoles and average vs phones.
If we are comparing pure gflops(not taking heating/throtling/features etc in the calculations) switch is not that impressive even against phones.
Like lets compare it to oneplus 3 from 2016, cheap(costs same as switch at least here at Finland) but powerfull phone.
It uses this chip and from google I found these numbers:
Snapdragon 820 (MSM8996) 14nm 510~624 MHz 407.4~498.5 gflops
So basically only looking at gfrops = it is almost identical vs switch.
BUT has 2x more RAM(6gb) and 2x flash memory(64gb), fullHD amoled display, 2x cameras, gps, and other phone stuff.
So in my eyes switch is really unimpressive on this price point(349-389€), because even basic phone gives same level of raw power with twice the ram, flash and resolution(+superior amoled).
Personally I would never pay extra for brand only(like apple devices), if I can get similar power with less money.
So switch is basically cheap gaming device, with low ram,mem and cheap display but they sell it with premium price.
I know it is portable, but if I can buy ps4 pro for 50€ more, or ps4 slim for 100€ less = it is not worth that much to me.
And when comparing to other portable devices it really feels like they could have done better, but wanted to maximise profits.
In my eyes it is 199-249€ machine and they are asking for 349-389€.
And it shows up, while it may sell well in US/Japan, here it sells worse than wiiu I think.
When wiiu came out, I didnt see many on stores for a while, but I have seen full shelf of switch in every store I visit, even on launch day.
And I know a guy that currently have the only gaming store on downtown = he have sold 2 total since the launch.
I guess it depends of the market/culture too, I have seen maybe 10-15 Times handheld gamers on the wild in last 5-10 years, so portability is nothing for many areas/countries.
We dont have 2h commutes and weather is usually too cold, rainy or when it is sunny, we have better things to do outside because it is only few months/year
If we are comparing pure gflops(not taking heating/throtling/features etc in the calculations) switch is not that impressive even against phones.
Like lets compare it to oneplus 3 from 2016, cheap(costs same as switch at least here at Finland) but powerfull phone.
It uses this chip and from google I found these numbers:
Snapdragon 820 (MSM8996) 14nm 510~624 MHz 407.4~498.5 gflops
So basically only looking at gfrops = it is almost identical vs switch.
BUT has 2x more RAM(6gb) and 2x flash memory(64gb), fullHD amoled display, 2x cameras, gps, and other phone stuff.
So in my eyes switch is really unimpressive on this price point(349-389€), because even basic phone gives same level of raw power with twice the ram, flash and resolution(+superior amoled).
Personally I would never pay extra for brand only(like apple devices), if I can get similar power with less money.
So switch is basically cheap gaming device, with low ram,mem and cheap display but they sell it with premium price.
I know it is portable, but if I can buy ps4 pro for 50€ more, or ps4 slim for 100€ less = it is not worth that much to me.
And when comparing to other portable devices it really feels like they could have done better, but wanted to maximise profits.
In my eyes it is 199-249€ machine and they are asking for 349-389€.
And it shows up, while it may sell well in US/Japan, here it sells worse than wiiu I think.
When wiiu came out, I didnt see many on stores for a while, but I have seen full shelf of switch in every store I visit, even on launch day.
And I know a guy that currently have the only gaming store on downtown = he have sold 2 total since the launch.
I guess it depends of the market/culture too, I have seen maybe 10-15 Times handheld gamers on the wild in last 5-10 years, so portability is nothing for many areas/countries.
We dont have 2h commutes and weather is usually too cold, rainy or when it is sunny, we have better things to do outside because it is only few months/year
Blazkowicz
Legend
But this powerful phone will throttle, doesn't have buttons and joysticks, runs Android. So, it's better if I want to send pictures of my **** over the internet but if a gaming device is wanted, with real games on top of that, I think the Switch wins that easily.
Otherwise I only really disagree about the RAM, 4GB is very nice on handheld. Same as on some.. Surface Pro and Apple Macbook computers! ok, that sucks on desktops/laptops and even phones may have issues running recent versions of "apps" (monstrous bloatware) but this is a Game Boy with 262144x the RAM
Only the price is way high, but well, it's launch price, not sold at a loss. Much everything is expensive (RAM, flash, US dollar). Where's a 99€ phone with a low end SoC, 4GB RAM, 32GB reliably fast flash, 720p screen and good support? They're nowhere, the RAM is expensive.
Otherwise I only really disagree about the RAM, 4GB is very nice on handheld. Same as on some.. Surface Pro and Apple Macbook computers! ok, that sucks on desktops/laptops and even phones may have issues running recent versions of "apps" (monstrous bloatware) but this is a Game Boy with 262144x the RAM
Only the price is way high, but well, it's launch price, not sold at a loss. Much everything is expensive (RAM, flash, US dollar). Where's a 99€ phone with a low end SoC, 4GB RAM, 32GB reliably fast flash, 720p screen and good support? They're nowhere, the RAM is expensive.
Last edited:
All through the discussion of Switch, I've been thinking how this may no longer be true because of my own mobile game. Getting real games on mobile may not be impossible. As for throttling, I guess Switch's active cooling means mobile can never compare, but certainly by not maxing your GPU you can keep temps lowers and avoid throttling sounds like an option.
We still haven't really seen anything stressful on the system yet. I think the best looking game currently known is probably Ubisoft's Mario + Rabbids. That game looks amazing and is apparently running Ubi's newest engine.
Splatoon 2 also seems to have finally gotten it's last bit of polish and now runs at 1080p, 60FPS with better lighting (as far as I can see).
Since there still isn't much in terms of third party support, it's hard to say what it can do. Apparently that new DBZ game can be done on Switch as well (the devs said that fans should request it). The best bet in terms of showing us what it can do will probably be Metroid Prime 4, but that's a ways out (though we'll probably see gameplay next year). Mario Odyssey looks really nice too, though inconsistent in some areas. I honestly think they might be using the Super Mario 3D World engine on that one, but it did get some upgrades.
Splatoon 2 also seems to have finally gotten it's last bit of polish and now runs at 1080p, 60FPS with better lighting (as far as I can see).
Since there still isn't much in terms of third party support, it's hard to say what it can do. Apparently that new DBZ game can be done on Switch as well (the devs said that fans should request it). The best bet in terms of showing us what it can do will probably be Metroid Prime 4, but that's a ways out (though we'll probably see gameplay next year). Mario Odyssey looks really nice too, though inconsistent in some areas. I honestly think they might be using the Super Mario 3D World engine on that one, but it did get some upgrades.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Oof, what's up with that blur filter on everything. Even 720p shouldn't look that blurry. At most you'd just see a lot of jaggies and shimmering due to that when in motion. But maybe that's their AA in effect as there aren't any horribly aliased edges. It's looks like maybe they are using Quincunx? Does Maxwell even support Quincunx? Or other overly aggressive shader based AA?
Or maybe they are using a smartphone to do the video capture.
Regards,
SB
Ok, but i talked about 942 FP16 Gflops, it's not so far behind 1,3 TFlops. Or I just don't understand something?
We also can compare 3DS to fist IPhone. IPhone was more powerfull but can't run games with graphics like Super Mario 3D Land, Resident Evil Revelations or Monster Hinter 3.
Congratulations with that new project!
Sebbbi has spoken on FP16 being adequate for upwards of two third of his shaders, so while its true that the ability to use half precision doesn't really bring a 2x boost to performance, it is also far from being just a marketing bullet point. The Tegra X1 sees a significant boost from half precision shaders. It doubles the throughput in that particular work load. If a game isn't maximizing the use of half precision shaders, then its impossible to maximize the potential of what the Tegra X1 is actually capable of.
Blazkowicz
Legend
It's true that it will be untenable if I think of mobile/phone games as if they were the same things as in 2009 or 2011, with at best bird catapults, jewel bustlers, temple runners version 1.0 and that slow motion zombie fps. I would be like a granpda who calls every console a Nintendo and think they all play Mario Bros, or that it's all Pacman and Space Invaders.
For the phone hardware itself I've somewhat learned that it's about implementation. Implementation, implementation (developers, developers! developers! developers!)
I was thinking when reading your post that as of now you can likely recreate Wing Commander IV for example, with enough controls on the sides. Vids - lots of FMV scenes - as H264 or better to bring the size down much
I was thinking of Under a Killing Moon too, more laid back (it's a mix of 3D first person adventure game and FMV). Now I'm giving embarassingly ancient references. But these games made everything else feel like toys. Also had professional treatment of audio and graphics, as if you have a directory of photography and sound technician/engineer (they did). Like you can make or break your day depending on bass/treble knobs or equalizer to deal with some music and gear. And thus if you can have controls be just the right size or sensitivity within a few % or 5% let's say, it might make a difference next to some devs that copy pasted them from some random or default thing, didn't think about them scaling from 4" to 6" and from 3:2 to 18:9, etc.
You are not alone
I'm working on very very low profile first person perspective adventure/maze game for Android/iOS that I affectionately called Retro Maze. I'm using downscaled pre-rendered 3D scenes to give it an early 90s style (LucasArts for example, although people I show it to keep comparing it to Doom for some reason...).
Mobile's biggest problem seems to be battery life. I have a buddy who got into one of those arena mobas on phones and it eats his battery like termites through wood. Otherwise I think mobile would be a lot further along than it is. The Koreans are really good at making mobile stuff, especially with UE4 mobile.
The other big problem for some people like myself is that most of the games are pay to win. I don't know why phone games refuse to adapt more consumer friendly f2p options more akin to what PC has now. Path of Exile I feel is one of the best examples imo. This whole whale model that they usually run seems really unstable in the long run. It also doesn't help that phone users refuse to buy a game. Nintendo tried to sell Mario Run for $9.99 and while everyone played it, only 10 million out of like 100 million actually bought it. Mobile users are trained to never pay for a game, but to buy microtransactions in f2p games.
It's kind of sad to me, because I feel like mobile could bring in a lot of new gamers into not just mobile, but consoles and PC as well.
The other big problem for some people like myself is that most of the games are pay to win. I don't know why phone games refuse to adapt more consumer friendly f2p options more akin to what PC has now. Path of Exile I feel is one of the best examples imo. This whole whale model that they usually run seems really unstable in the long run. It also doesn't help that phone users refuse to buy a game. Nintendo tried to sell Mario Run for $9.99 and while everyone played it, only 10 million out of like 100 million actually bought it. Mobile users are trained to never pay for a game, but to buy microtransactions in f2p games.
It's kind of sad to me, because I feel like mobile could bring in a lot of new gamers into not just mobile, but consoles and PC as well.
Nothing new though. They're called imposters.