The second photo is not a die scan... it is a graph created to show the chip content lol
Ok sorry i'm not expert ^^
The second photo is not a die scan... it is a graph created to show the chip content lol
It was 4x high-power ARM CPU or 4x low-power ARM CPU.So we have the 8-core ARM CPU in this not the 4-Core one that was speculated sometime in december when the X1 was confirmed.
I guess the system is a bit more powerful than the WiiU/PS3/X360.
Even with 4 cores is more powerful.So we have the 8-core ARM CPU in this not the 4-Core one that was speculated sometime in december when the X1 was confirmed.
I guess the system is a bit more powerful than the WiiU/PS3/X360.
Nintendo went with the cheap option over the cutting-edge option. Same as every handheld and every post-GameCube console they've ever released.
Seems likely, right? As big of a Nintendo fan as I am, I was never a fan of how they did that with the New 3DS and DSi
Can someone tell me why the Switch costs so much?
Can you explain why it should cost less?Can someone tell me why the Switch costs so much?
Ok, but the switch is a great console and is already something I vastly prefer over the Wiiu.
It has one of the best modern games of the century.
I'm good.
Even with 4 cores is more powerful.
It was 4x high-power ARM CPU or 4x low-power ARM CPU.
It can't be used both at the same time... it is one or other... so at the end it is a 4x ARM CPU.
Isn't the X2 pretty old news by this point too? Xavier is the new one right? Does Nvidia just not have anything better for mobile since 2015? Would be a bit odd. Must have been a REALLY good deal on those X1's. Dumpster diving NVidia does it again!
If the Switch had come out at £199 or something, yup you'd be correct and it's a good pelt 720p handheld the kids can kick around and it does portable Zelda. Good enough!
But the feature creep and bad production in other areas at £280 just makes the package look poor, especially in the hyrbid space it wants to occupy. Realistically HD rumble and all the JoyCon fartery is never going to offer more than a slight spec bump would have for the handheld. Zelda wheezing on launch day is a terrible look for brand new exciting hardware you're looking at maybe half a decade with.
The dock having absolutely fuck all in it, not even felt, when "they got a good deal on X1's" is one of those situations where I'm not sure Nintendo is passing on any savings whatsoever.
Can someone tell me why the Switch costs so much?
Right. It's different clock speeds on an older CPU and older GPU. The K1 topped out at ~350 GFLOPS. The X1 at 512 GFLOPS.
Because there's more to the price than the processor? It is a tablet after all..
A lack of customizations as was stated is strange. But to the people saying that it's disappointing that it's an X1: what mobile chip should they have gone with?.
Not even remotely close.But it offers zero tablet features...
And I don't really think the bom on the controllers or dock offset the cheap plastic and lack of a glass screen. iPad mini 2 with an A7 probably is about as powerful as well, for less money and much better build quality. Not to mention a much better screen.
I'm reading the article and it never actually says the chip is stock. Just that we know it has 4xA53's and 4xA57's nothing about bud width, GPU features or core count, or well anything to that effect.
Is it somehow implied in a technical way that I don't understand?
4x A15 @ 2.2Ghz > 3 or 4 A57 @ 1 Ghz
Shield Tablet 327 gflops > undocked Switch 197 gflops
What exactly are you comparing the Nintendo Switch to determine that it's too expensive?
4x A15 @ 2.2Ghz > 3 or 4 A57 @ 1 Ghz
Shield Tablet 327 gflops > undocked Switch 197 gflops
Switch Die (HD) :
It's not the same.
DSi wasn't great because they removed the GBA port. But I really liked the New 3DS XL because of the improved 3D.
Not even remotely close.
A lack of customizations as was stated is strange. But to the people saying that it's disappointing that it's an X1: what mobile chip should they have gone with?
Any other mobile chip out there still doesn't have the GPU performance of an X1 (sans maybe Apple chips, but that ain't happening). Tegra X2 simply wasn't ready.
I suppose they could have waited until fall and gone with Tegra X2, but then they would have to compete against the hype for Scorpio, and other holiday games.
This was simply their best option.
Nvidia shield costs about 200e here. I don't think a rumble function is worth extra 150-200.
Yep so a 3 year old tablet that launched at $199 is more powerful, and has a better screen. Bom on dock and joycons is nowhere near $100.
Can someone tell me why the Switch costs so much?
A lack of customizations as was stated is strange. But to the people saying that it's disappointing that it's an X1: what mobile chip should they have gone with?
Ok then compare to the k1. More gflops in portable mode and it's 3 years old.
They kind of shot themselves in the foot with such low clocks.
4x A15 @ 2.2Ghz > 3 or 4 A57 @ 1 Ghz
Shield Tablet 327 gflops > undocked Switch 197 gflops
Ok then compare to the k1. More gflops in portable mode and it's 3 years old.
They kind of shot themselves in the foot with such low clocks.
The tools/ dev environment that keeps getting so much praise by devs is in large part Nvidias work and probably where most of those 500 man years went. I see no reason Nintendo won't stick with Nvidia.This aside, does this leave Nintendo quite open or tied to Nvidia going forward, BC for example.
Based on the Dragon Ball console power level chart I made, XB1 is Cell Games SSJ1 Gohan, PS4 is Perfect Cell, and Switch is Super Vegeta (aka ultra SSJ)
Ok then compare to the k1. More gflops in portable mode and it's 3 years old.
They kind of shot themselves in the foot with such low clocks.
Nintendo went with the cheap option over the cutting-edge option. Same as every handheld and every post-GameCube console they've ever released.
Hey, leave Pie and Beans alone.It's funny how some people don't stop for a few seconds and think "wait, maybe I don't know enough about this to post that".
Because there's more to the price than the processor? It is a tablet after all..
So? What are you getting at? That they shouldn't price this thing to sell at a profit? That the product shouldn't exist?
They should be focusing on a longer tail. I hope there is a price drop in the future.Nintendo likes to make a healthy profit right out of the gate. How is this surprising?
There is no X1 chip with only A57 unless Nintendo asked nVidia to remove them... that means the X1 on Switch is custom that is not the case from the die shots.I could be wrong but there seem to be two versions of the X1, one with only 4 cores and one with 2x 4 cores and I think the reveal last year was talking about the switch having the 4-core X1. Well it doesn't matter much anyway I guess, most games will only use the 4 fast cores and I guess the slower ones will be used for the interface, web browsing, music and video (eventually, as the Operating System evolves).
Tablets and phones have a hard time sustaining max clocks for more than a few minutes before throttling down due to thermal issues.Ok then compare to the k1. More gflops in portable mode and it's 3 years old.
They kind of shot themselves in the foot with such low clocks.
Nvidia shield costs about 200e here. I don't think a rumble function is worth extra 150-200.
From what I'm looking at on Amazon the Nvidia Shield doesn't have a screen, for one.
I'm not arguing that a screen is worth $100, but that's a good place to start in regards to the price difference.
I think this is sarcasm but I can't be sure. Kind of has to have some basic apps and a browser at the least to be defined as a tablet device IMO.
I think this is sarcasm but I can't be sure. Kind of has to have some basic apps and a browser at the least to be defined as a tablet device IMO.