The Last One
Member
I have a Switch but I don't understand why it's more powerful in docked mode. It's because of its battery? Like, in undocked mode the Switch runs in lower clock speeds to save battery?
I have a Switch but I don't understand why it's more powerful in docked mode. It's because of its battery? Like, in undocked mode the Switch runs in lower clock speeds to save battery?
I'm not against games coming to the switch. The more the better. I'd be over the moon with a port of GTA V, and I'll be buying Fifa 18. Wish Pes was coming too. Infact I want more and more ports.
My issue was only against the talk of Fifa 18 being a custom built engine. EA are just trying to talk it up, that's normal I get it.
But if the game sells well, watch how quickly they get Journey on there and the Switch get's a "custom" version of Frostbite.
Do you think Journey is only possible on Frostbite too? Because for me personally that's more EA bullshit.
I have a Switch but I don't understand why it's more powerful in docked mode. It's because of its battery? Like, in undocked mode the Switch runs in lower clock speeds to save battery?
I have a Switch but I don't understand why it's more powerful in docked mode. It's because of its battery? Like, in undocked mode the Switch runs in lower clock speeds to save battery?
Someone correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not that knowledgeable on FIFA modes but isn't the Journey heavily dependent on online features and microtransactions, rather than dependent on some engine? If so I would imagine it being left out has more to do with Nintendo's online services being very bare bones currently.
Yes. It also doesn't have to render in 1080p undocked.
Yes battery life and heat.
While docked they can increase the GPU clockspeed as battery life is not an issue.
As far as I know CPU clockspeed remains the same regardless.
Nope. The microtransaction heavy part of FIFA is FUT and that's present in FIFA 18 Switch.
I see, thanks guys. But how does the docked mode improve the cooling system?
Ah that's right, I guess I mixed the two of them up. Then what exactly is the Journey? Is it something that's somehow hardware power intensive?
It doesn't Nintendo just doesn't want you to be holding a tablet that gets too hot. When it's docked you're not holding it.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong because I'm not that knowledgeable on FIFA modes but isn't the Journey heavily dependent on online features and microtransactions, rather than dependent on some engine? If so I would imagine it being left out has more to do with Nintendo's online services being very bare bones currently. EDIT: Yep I'm wrong, thanks Jaded Alyx.
In the context of this thread (discussing relative power and how that can affect third party ports) I would say that online capabilities are far, far more of a problem for developers than hardware power is. Steep for example was rumored to be having porting difficulties specifically because of the online focused nature of the game.
.
I see, thanks guys. But how does the docked mode improve the cooling system?
I see, thanks guys. But how does the docked mode improve the cooling system?
It doesn't improve the cooling, but the fan could spin quicker, and any increased heat wouldn't really be an issue as you're not holding the device.
With regards to the fan, I'm not even sure if it spins quicker while docked. Maybe there have been tests done. I've not even taken the dock out of the box.
It doesn't. It gets noticeably hotter when docked because it can draw so much power, but it'll also rev up the fan to remain within temperature thresholds.
In portable mode, while there is a pretty big hit to performance, it renders no higher than 720p, sometimes dynamically, so the overall performance when docked or undocked scales pretty well.
Beyond running the fan at a higher RPM it doesn't, Nintendo just doesn't want you to be holding a tablet that gets too hot. When it's docked you're not holding it.
It's common sense. BotW is a title built ground up for the WiiU, by the most talented Nintendo in-house teams, after years of experience with not only the WiiU, but also the same CPU architecture since the GCN days.
The Switch version is based on that version, ported in a fraction of the WiiU dev time, while the hardware itself is still fairly unknown even to Nintendo's own dev teams. Had they built BotW ground up for the Switch in 3 years, i'm sure everybody would see how massive the difference would actually be.
I'm not against games coming to the switch. The more the better. I'd be over the moon with a port of GTA V, and I'll be buying Fifa 18. Wish Pes was coming too. Infact I want more and more ports.
My issue was only against the talk of Fifa 18 being a custom built engine. EA are just trying to talk it up, that's normal I get it.
But if the game sells well, watch how quickly they get Journey on there and the Switch get's a "custom" version of Frostbite.
Do you think Journey is only possible on Frostbite too? Because for me personally that's more EA bullshit.
The Tegra X1 was first used in a product in 2015, was it not? Wouldn't that make the Switch 2015 level rather than 2014?
You can try and quote unverified numbers all you want, but the proof will very much be in the pudding. Grab me when that FF7 remake port happens.They were graphically downgraded but that didn't stop them from selling. And I never said the Switch ports would compare to the PS4 versions, in fact I said they'd obviously be downgraded. So I'm not sure why that matters.
And yes, the gap is far, far smaller. Most estimates put the PS4 about 5x ahead of the Switch at most, whereas the Wii was closer to 20x weaker than the PS3 and 360 (in different ways for each).
As for FIFA, that is flat out incorrect. That was the rumor for a while but we've seen the actual game listing by EA and it's a 100% custom version that's more comparable to the PS4/XB1 versions than the PS3/360 versions, though lacking the Journey mode of the latter.
Handheld it's basically an upclocked Wii-U, give or take. Multiply that by 2-3 if you put it in the dock. Considering it's form factor, that's impressive. Considering what other consoles are pushing, it's disappointing. It's all a matter of perspective.
I don't get why this discussion is even going. We can see with our own eyes what the thing is capable of now. The numbers mean very little.
I don't see how me not owning a Switch would make any of those observations any different or less valid, the specs of the console are static either way. I just don't only own a Switch.
Switch is pretty cool for what it is....but that's only on its own merits. I'd be lying if i said i didn't pretty much only justify my Switch purchase for the 1st party Nintendo titles, feels bad to admit it, but it's true. But assuming I didn't??? The lack of horsepower relative to everything else on the market does become an issue, because where are the rest of the games going to come from???
I don't personally see the point in crunching the Switch's numbers in an environment confined only to itself. People are going to want 3rd party games, and 3rd party developers are under no obligation to develop for weak hardware. So in that sense, no, the Switch really isn't going to feel that much more powerful than the WiiU. It's going to lose ports for all of the exact same reasons. Now, I don't believe it's a bad console, which is what i assume people just kneejerk default to when I point out how weak it is. There is alot of value in its portability. But...it is a weak console. I don't know how else to put it really.
Now, as a portable, absolutely, the Switch is indeed powerful...but in reality, that's only going to be taken advantage of if developers give the console the same kind of love that the PSP/3DS received. And seeing as Nintendo is reluctant to actually call the damn thing a portable...time is just going to have to tell on that one. Everyone is talking about BotW, but Zelda isn't even a Switch exclusive.
You can try and quote unverified numbers all you want, but the proof will very much be in the pudding. Grab me when that FF7 remake port happens.
Tegra uses Nvidia's Maxwell core design which launched in 2014.
Same for the Radeon core in the Wii U that's supposedly R700ish, which means watered down high end from 2008
You can try and quote unverified numbers all you want, but the proof will very much be in the pudding. Grab me when that FF7 remake port happens.
Switch can go Super Saiyan sooooo
The Wii U and Switch are completely different architectures, with the latter being based on a mobile chipset essentially; trouble is it's not that easy to compare the two, which is why I asked the question, also with very few built for Switch only titles to get our teeth in too doesn't help.
No I said it'll probably get no triple a ports, and if it does they'll be heavily gimped. Learn to read.Oh you're talking about architecture, that makes more sense. Thanks for clarifying.
What does FF7R have anything to do with this? I said it will get some ports, probably not even that many, in response to you saying it'll get none. It already has several announced.
It look just like Mario Kart 8 but open world-ish.
Mario Odyssey will be a better showcase than BotW, since its likely built from the ground up for Switch.
Looks far less impressive than BotW from what we've seen so far, and has been pixel-counted to run at 720p unless I'm mistaken? Sure, it runs at twice the framerate, but still.
Don't get me wrong, I will play the hell out of that game, I'm just not very impressed by it visually.
You say that like that's some inconsequential thing.
Looks far less impressive than BotW from what we've seen so far, and has been pixel-counted to run at 720p docked unless I'm mistaken? That could change though, I guess. And sure, it runs at twice the framerate, but still.
Don't get me wrong, I will play the hell out of that game, I'm just not very impressed by it visually.
Still, the proof is in the pudding..
The things is, you can afford to go wild with your main sprites when your most demanding fx are essentially for free.Only effects like boss or stage scaling, rotation and warping. That Yoshi sprite is 100% vanilla SNES.
Splatoon 2 ran at 720p docked until recently but launched at mostly 1080p
Splatoon 2 ran at 720p docked until recently but launched at mostly 1080p
In dock : Better than Wii U ( but a bit )
, in handled mod : largely weaker than Wii U ...
( 150+ Tflops vs 300 for WII U ... )
In dock : Better than Wii U ( but a bit ) , in handled mod : largely weaker than Wii U ... ( 150+ Tflops vs 300 for WII U ... )
No I said it'll probably get no triple a ports, and if it does they'll be heavily gimped. Learn to read.
Are you familiar with the term Pascwell and how it came into existence?Tegra uses Nvidia's Maxwell core design which launched in 2014.
In dock : Better than Wii U ( but a bit ) , in handled mod : largely weaker than Wii U ... ( 150+ Tflops vs 300 for WII U ... )
In dock : Better than Wii U ( but a bit ) , in handled mod : largely weaker than Wii U ... ( 150+ Tflops vs 300 for WII U ... )
Indies and some are already have better sales on switch than on steam. EA likes switch compared to WiiU and considering the fifa port situation alone there's plenty to be done on switch vs WiiU/PS3/360 level architectures. We have snake pass and rocket league optimized will show the system has the good. The amount of developers on horsepower complaints can literally be counted on one hand with 3 fingers left. Go ahead check post history I've commented in those threads as well.
Switch already has a better port situation a few months in to existence than WiiU ever enjoyed before or after it's launch. Switch has plenty of devs who aren't interested in what AAA publishers are pumping out. Switch is already enjoying things like UE4 support which basically every gen before for a 3d nintendo console was a joke. EA literally customized an engine, which most didn't expect at all to get shit done. It's the 5th strongest console of all time out of how many? Not saying the system can be optimized to do anthem yet it's far cry from any of the Wii situations.
Vulkan based apis own older apis due to much better performance without the need to optimize so much and none of the overhead and have proper multithreading to cpu to gpu not a single other nintendo console could offer this. Id software made a vulkan patch in a few months compared to nearly years worth of efforts done on older gpu api tech when even see these type of patches show up. Devs already are porting titles that are having times equal to gc port efforts or quicker. This entire passage is rubbish and asks us to ignore the reality of what is going on for the mere culture conjecture of devs being lazy as usual when for the first fucking time in any 3d console generation of nintedo they are doing more then they have ever done to the same point with other systems.
PSP was attempting to chase the PS3 and did it meagerly. The switch chasing the current HD giants and much closer at higher resolution and more stable fps. Comparing 3ds to switch is a joke as well one of these things was chasing the dolphin/cube/wii architecture the other literally for once is a nintendo handheld that can compete with high watt machines in some titles with decent standardization.
For someone who didn't want to crunch numbers or features you certainly weighed in a lot and managed to get it wrong or complete misrepresent the reality of what is going on.
DF put it at mostly around 900p for the sp with no drops.
Nope
Nope
Hell no.
In dock : Better than Wii U ( but a bit ) , in handled mod : largely weaker than Wii U ... ( 150+ Tflops vs 300 for WII U ... )
Jesus Christ, stop spreading nonsense please.
In dock : Better than Wii U ( but a bit ) , in handled mod : largely weaker than Wii U ... ( 150+ Tflops vs 300 for WII U ... )
lol no, BotW runs at the same resolution in handheld as Wii U does but with a significantly better frame rate, not to mention this is after 4 years of optimization for the Wii U and 1 for Switch.
Welcome to 238 pages of figuring it out we did way back when.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511628
99% sure its 176, wikipedia was just edited by a hopeful. It was just slightly fatter than it should be which threw some people, but the fabrication plant differences account for it. As well as any other changes per shader they did.
8 x 20 shader units = 160ALUs, 550mhz = 176GFLOPs. The chance of it packing double the shader units through magic is negligible.
The gradual letdown was sadly hilarious. "600Glfops, worst case scenario. They can't even order a part under 300...That, uh, looks...Shit."
that's why I'm not letting myself expect anything for NX. Nintendo can always be Nintendo Special.
Because more ram with better speed ... CPU a bit better too.
Right, and yet you said the Switch undocked is "largely weaker" than the Wii U. So why are you now arguing against your own point?
I meaan I dont get the point people are trying to make with gimped ports. Well yeah they have to be cut down. We are looking at a system that at best is 1/3 an X1 in its most powerful form. In it's weakest form its like 1/6 to 1/7. Of course ports will be lesser. Why are people so concerned about it? Getting the ports is more important than whatever arbitrary definition of gimped is.
In dock : Better than Wii U ( but a bit ) , in handled mod : largely weaker than Wii U ... ( 150+ Tflops vs 300 for WII U ... )
OPTIMIZATION and im not sure the handled version are better and have better graphics than WII U version...
Handled version have resolution scale , not WII U version. ( maybe why the switch port look more smooth ... )