Nintendo Switch Technical discussion [SOC = Tegra X1]

[Deleted member 13524]

Edit : here is how WF2 can look at times
I guess it's the portable mode.

Wow that looks terrible. I wonder at what point is DigitalFoundry ever going to speak objectively about the image quality of Switch ports
I mean without constantly bringing the "b-but it's mobile!" argument to enrich even their commentary on docked mode graphics.

That depends how you define current gen. For me current gen is the Xbox One X.

For me it's my desktop's Vega 64 with a 10-core/20-thread Xeon @ 3.2GHz and 64GB RAM!
Ha!

Which I've been using to.. erm.. play Fallout 4 a couple of times a month.

 

[Entropy]

Wow that looks terrible. I wonder at what point is DigitalFoundry ever going to speak objectively about the image quality of Switch ports
I mean without constantly bringing the "b-but it's mobile!" argument to enrich even their commentary on docked mode graphics.

They likely won't. Because, you know, it is mobile. That's kind of the point. It comes equipped for 2-player local multiplayer anywhere out of the box.
That it allows you to play current high budget games originally intended for PS4/XB1 while in bed is icing on the cake.
We don't even have to comment on the results, anyone can watch youtube vids on a cell phone screen, and, if we discount the youtube compression, judge for themselves how they feel about the quality on offer.

Aren't we done kicking the Switch for not being a mains tethered clone of the other offerings already on the market?
For anyone interested in multiplatform games, the unique benefit of the Switch is that you can play them anywhere. In bed, on the veranda or balcony, in transit...
While it can be used as a stationary console when you desire the full couch experience, that's never been its draw.
Why would anyone with our kind of PC hardware play a multiplatform game anywhere other than on the PC, which allow us to tailor the performance to our preferences?
Portability is the only thing that could provide a draw.

For me it's my desktop's Vega 64 with a 10-core/20-thread Xeon @ 3.2GHz and 64GB RAM!
Ha!

Which I've been using to.. erm.. play Fallout 4 a couple of times a month.

I'm worse, I'm playing Vampire the Masquerade:Bloodlines from 2004 on my Vega 56.
Seriously, while I hoped that the Switch would ship with Parker, we know its specs quite well now. It is what it is. There really is no news to be had since TechInsights did their scan of the chip, and Eurogamer shared the clocks.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

I'm worse, I'm playing Vampire the Masquerade:Bloodlines from 2004 on my Vega 56.

Awesome game!

 

[Deleted member 13524]

They likely won't. Because, you know, it is mobile.

Not in docked mode.. which was my point.
Has DF ever been critical to any Switch game? Honest question, because I haven't seen DF be anything but awed at the console so far.
Everything is fantastic because the Switch can turn mobile. Yeah well great for Nintendo but honestly Wolfenstein 2 on the Switch does not look good in my opinion, and AFAICS this is its 2015 hardware is weighing it down, just one year after release.

Aren't we done kicking the Switch for not being a mains tethered clone of the other offerings already on the market?

I was quite honestly kicking this particular game because it looks pretty terrible at 640*360..

Why would anyone with our kind of PC hardware play a multiplatform game anywhere other than on the PC, which allow us to tailor the performance to our preferences?
Portability is the only thing that could provide a draw.

I can think of other reasons, such as playing online with my friends who own a console.

 

[Entropy]

I can think of other reasons, such as playing online with my friends who own a console.

Only if they are on a Playstation. ;-)

Regarding the port of Wolfenstein, I was actually quite satisfied by what I saw doing my cell phone test. Not that it matters much to me, I own both Doom and Wolfenstein 2 on the PC, and would rather be staked out naked on an anthill covered in honey than play either of those games with anything but a keyboard and mouse. The footage is there for anyone to see though, and anyone is free to have their own opinion about the visuals. It is the full game though.

It might start to be interesting to speculate if Nintendo will introduce an updated Switch after Sony and Microsoft has played their hand, even if it would signify a short generation for them again.

 

[Goodtwin]

But yeah man. There's a good degree of sloppiness to the port. I saw direct feed footage and there's just no excuse for that poor an image. I swear playing N64 games on my 55 inch sammy is not as blurry Add to that the whole game isn't even on the cart and the amount of cut corners are evident. And it still dips to the twenties?!

Again, not discrediting the port team, I can't speak to what restraints were put on them. But to use it as Switches benchmark...?

I look at Doom and Wolfenstein 2 far differently. I think Panic Button has done terrific work. I have played Doom on Switch for over 70 hours, and have about 7 hours on Wolfenstein 2. Wolfenstein 2 certainly suffers more so than Doom in presentation. Both games are rather blurry, but Dooms art style holds up better. The redish hazy areas in Doom with lots of larger characters tended to hold up better. Wolfenstein 2 does indeed get blurry enough at times to make it tough to see enemies in the distance. The dynamic resolution is there in both games, but I think Panic Button set it up to allow it to drop even lower in Wolfenstein 2. Do not be mislead however, the resolution can dip as low as 360p, but this is not the typically rendering resolution where it typically renders a lot higher than that. I think this was a smart choice as they have achieved a smooth 30fps in all but a few areas. This is what happens when you take a game developed targeting much more capable hardware and make it work on hardware that has a fraction of the power, especially in handheld mode.

I would have to think memory bandwidth is probably one of the biggest hurdles developers face. 25 GB/s is pretty darn low for modern games, and when the screen fills with a bunch of post processing effects in Doom and Wolfenstein 2, I would have to think that is causing the delay in the rendering pipeline. When comparing the Switch hardware to PS4/X1, there are certain aspects that hold up more favorably compared to others. 3.2GB of available system ram for example does not sound so bad, but when you compare the 25 GB/s memory bandwidth to the 176 GB/s the PS4 is rocking, its easy to see how that would be a bottleneck.

I think the conversation evolved over time, before launch the critics panned the Switch for not being powerful enough to accommodate third party ports. A few months later, Bethesda debunks that announcements for Doom, Skyrim SE, and Wolfenstein 2. The argument wasn't that ports wouldn't need significant compromises, that was always obvious, but the idea that there was a hard ceiling that would keep AAA titles off the platform just wasn't founded in anything beyond pessimism.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

a smooth 30fps

That's an oxymoron.

 

[Goodtwin]

That's an oxymoron.

LOL, well.....as smooth as a consistent 30fps offers just the same.

 

[Recop]

I think the conversation evolved over time, before launch the critics panned the Switch for not being powerful enough to accommodate third party ports. A few months later, Bethesda debunks that announcements for Doom, Skyrim SE, and Wolfenstein 2. The argument wasn't that ports wouldn't need significant compromises, that was always obvious, but the idea that there was a hard ceiling that would keep AAA titles off the platform just wasn't founded in anything beyond pessimism.

This argument was mainly about 30fps games. Skyrim is not an AAA...

 

[Entropy]

Just saw over at Motley Fool that the Switch represented 18% of nVidias revenue last fiscal year.
At that amount of yearly revenue there is little doubt that for an updated Switch, Nintendo can comission pretty much whatever they want from nVidia.

 

[Gubbi]

Just saw over at Motley Fool that the Switch represented 18% of nVidias revenue last fiscal year.

I think they messed some numbers up. Nvidia had revenue of $9.7 billion in 2018, with $972 million allegedly coming from Switch, that's 10% no 18%. And that's assuming all $972 million is from Switch sales, which is dubious; In april Nintendo announced 17.5 million Switches sold which would mean Nvidia is paid $55 per Tegra.

Cheers

 

[Entropy]

I think they messed some numbers up. Nvidia had revenue of $9.7 billion in 2018, with $972 million allegedly coming from Switch, that's 10% no 18%. And that's assuming all $972 million is from Switch sales, which is dubious; In april Nintendo announced 17.5 million Switches sold which would mean Nvidia is paid $55 per Tegra.

Cheers

Percentages are difficult for mere mortals (analysts...).
However the revenue figure would seem to be in the right ballpark, and it doesn’t all have to be per SoC payments, depending on how they penned the deal. Nintendo surely pays for all the nVidia software as well, although it may be that software is rolled into the cost per SoC. Be that as it may, money is money, and a billion dollars (and almost 20 million SoCs) per year is a lot by any yardstick. Enough to roll a custom design, definitely.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

In april Nintendo announced 17.5 million Switches sold which would mean Nvidia is paid $55 per Tegra.

If that's how much Nintendo is paying nvidia for the single chip then this is a spectacular deal for nvidia.
If nvidia is selling them the whole PCB with SoC + LPDDR4 + eMMC included, then it seems like a fair-ish price. and Nintendo is getting close to a 200% profit from each Switch sold.

 

[Sigfried1977]

Not in docked mode.. which was my point.
Has DF ever been critical to any Switch game? Honest question, because I haven't seen DF be anything but awed at the console so far.

What I took from the df video about Wolf2 was that John was mostly impressed that they got the thing working relatively smoothly but really not that much else. I'd call that damning with faint praise at best. I'd compare that video to the dozens of Doom versions he's checked out some time ago. Most of them were impressive in their own rights yet still absolutely shit.

I also wanna stress once more that lower resolutions simply aren't that big of a deal on the Switch. I tried out Crash Bandicoot yesterday. It looked noticeably soft, but still rather pleasant. I never tried Wold or Doom, though. Maybe those simply go too low. I believe Crash runs at 480p in handheld mode.

Ports which are actually shit are pretty rare on the system, so why should df go on and on about it?

 

[phoenix_chipset]

Not in docked mode.. which was my point.
Has DF ever been critical to any Switch game? Honest question, because I haven't seen DF be anything but awed at the console so far.

To be fair, doom and wolf seem to be the only games that really don't hold up on switch Visually. But yeah I would've roasted these games personally.

Theoretically, if there ever is a TX2 variant of switch that runs games faster ala xbox one x from s, Doom and other games with dynamic res should look a hell of a lot crisper by default.

 

[phoenix_chipset]

@Goodtwin Yes, bandwidth is definitely the weakest part of the switch. If not TX2, an 128 bit bus or eDRAM added to the TX1 would've gone a long way. That and, having the 4th core available to games. But on its own, the switch is still very impressive and exclusives can still shine bright.

Although, that 25GB/s is still more than Ps4's GCN if it had 25GB/s. Perhaps it'd be 40GB/s or something compared to PS4 for switch? (random number I made up) I should research just how much color compression on maxwell helps vs. the other consoles. Because if it was apples to apples I don't think switch could be getting some of these ports to begin with.

Think about how the 1070Ti for e.g. compares to vega 56 in bandwidth looking at the numbers, yet it does just fine. Nvidia hardware clearly does more with less currently.

 

[BRiT]

What I took from the df video about Wolf2 was that John was mostly impressed that they got the thing working relatively smoothly but really not that much else. I'd call that damning with faint praise at best. I'd compare that video to the dozens of Doom versions he's checked out some time ago. Most of them were impressive in their own rights yet still absolutely shit.

I also wanna stress once more that lower resolutions simply aren't that big of a deal on the Switch. I tried out Crash Bandicoot yesterday. It looked noticeably soft, but still rather pleasant. I never tried Wold or Doom, though. Maybe those simply go too low. I believe Crash runs at 480p in handheld mode.

This was pointed out as being a real kick in the pants on the Wolf 2 Switch game, where you have to read the text on a clip board, but well, here have a look for yourself to see how absolutely unread it is on the Switch

 

[Goodtwin]

This was pointed out as being a real kick in the pants on the Wolf 2 Switch game, where you have to read the text on a clip board, but well, here have a look for yourself to see how absolutely unread it is on the Switch

I played through that scene in docked mode, but I did have to lean forward out of my chair to get a good look. It was perfectly legible in docked mode, but the text is just very small. Portable mode is pretty blurry, so I can imagine that picture is fairly accurate.

 

[Goodtwin]

I'm supposed to believe something at 360p with reconstruction is the best switch can do? I'm not saying panic button doesn't work hard, but wolf 2 is an obvious chop shop port not made with switches limitations in mind. Let me know when those 1080p games and ue4 show up on 360 ps3. 512mb of ram is not closer to switch than the latter is to current gen. Wii u is graphically ahead of last gen so I don't think 360 would run mk8 at 720p. Deferred rendered games with that detail at 60fps don't exist on last gen.

Any time a game is ported to weaker hardware it is at a big time disadvantage compared to exclusives, but even exclusives have to contend with limitations of the hardware. Sure, avoiding inherent weaknesses is more controlled, and sticking to the target spec is there from day one, but these developers are still trying to compete with any and everything else out on the market. Take Killzone Mercenaries on PS Vita as an example, this was a ground up effort for PS Vita by top tier Guerrilla Cambridge.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-inside-killzone-mercenary

Even within a ground up effort by a very capable developer, they still made a compromises. They targeted the native resolution, but ultimately chose a dynamic resolution that could scale down when things got hectic. They went from deferred rendering on the PS3 Killzone games to forward rendering on Vita. How well would Vita have handled a Killzone 3 port?

Everything is relevant. Just like comparing Killzone Mercenaries to Killzone 3 on PS3 would have resulted in a less than favorable comparison, the same is true with Doom and W2 on Switch. They are impressive because of the hardware they were on. Everything is evaluated differently. Mobile hardware can never stand toe to toe with space heater consoles and PC, but when evaluated from proper perspective, its easy to see why Doom and W2 are not sloppy ports. On the same token, it does make you curious as to what someone like Guerilla games could achieve with Switch level hardware.

 

[bunnybug]

Performance of multiplats isn't just proportional to hardware ability, but also port investment. Wii U had a tiny user base. Did it attract full-on investment for ports to make them the best possible for the hardware, or did it just get half-arsed cash-ins that didn't do the hardware justice.

I feel we should create a standard replies reference. The same arguments come up in so many many conversations, it'd be quicker and easier for everyone involved if we could just refer to a library of cookie-cutter arguments.

I open with statement number 7.
I reply with statement 14.
I counter with statement 9 (which you knew I'd do anyway), and I'll pre-empt your statement 18 response with a number 15.



B3D needs more data.

I highly disagree with this post. multiplats are the best way gauge hardware ability, same excuse was also used by sony fans claiming ps3 was generations ahead of 360, they used the bad/half assed port excuse. if the hardware is a notable step up, its gonna run most games better period. It's not like were talking about a few games, there was plenty of ports on the wiiu. The ports pretty much line up with wiiu specs.