Support NeoGAF

[The_Lump]

Suddenly running a game at two different resolutions is a very complex process and something that people don't understand how it can work. In a world where PS4 Pro makes developers run their games at 3 different resolutions.

It's amazing, right? Suddenly it's a big issue.

Back in reality and OT, the switch gimmick seems like it will be nice and simple, easy to grasp. I think this should be an easily marketable concept and an appealing one at that. You plug it in, you have HD TV suitable gaming. You unplug it, you can take that exact same* experience on the go. Done.

*

Spoiler

the actual techinical difference between 1080p v 720p(or whatever) being masked by the fact you're now looking at it on a small screen, so drop in resolution and any lower res textures etc are not as noticeable. So for average joe consumer, it's 'the same' experience.

 

[Donnie]

As i read it, fans are simply disabled when not docked. It would be such a big failure risk that i don't think nintendo would ever go there. The fan is inside the console (and the dock) only for better thermal dispersion i guess.

There's no point in including a fan in a portable device if its disabled completely in portable mode, they'd only be wasting space and decreasing cooling efficiency in portable mode for no advantage at all. If active cooling only happens when docked then you might as well just use a bigger fan in the dock if more airflow is needed and save space in the handheld.

No if the handheld device has a fan its because it will be used in portable mode. Probably only intermittently though, while it will likely run at all times when docked.

 

[KAL2006]

I don't it will be as simple as games run at 720p portable and 1080p docked. Don't get me wrong perhaps some games will do this like Smash Bros and some indie games.

However running at a higher clock speed is not enough to push the resolution up that much.

Developers will have extra power when docked. But it would be up to the developer what they do with it.

You will see one or more of the following
- 900p games
- Games with better textures
- Better draw distance
- better AA
- 1080p,only possible on games less demanding

 

[hodgy100]

Suddenly running a game at two different resolutions is a very complex process and something that people don't understand how it can work. In a world where PS4 Pro makes developers run their games at 3 different resolutions.

its really not difficult any engine worth its salt can change rendering resolution on the fly.

 

[DrWong]

Maybe 3GB of RAM is enough to run games like Dark Souls 3 at 720p, but, even with the increase in clock, I can't see that be enough to run that kind of game at 1080p.

Is possible the dock have a additional 2 GB of RAM?

Maybe the 1080p is like the 4K of Ps4 Pro: a upscale.

Dark Souls III minimum requirement on PC is 2GB of RAM, and it's the case for most of the recent big/AAA 3D games (COD, Witcher III, R6Siege, Steep...). So with 3GB of dedicated RAM as rumored it won't be an issue for 1080p rendering.

 

[Donnie]

I don't it will be as simple as games run at 720p portable and 1080p docked. Don't get me wrong perhaps some games will do this like Smash Bros and some indie games.

However running at a higher clock speed is not enough to push the resolution up that much.

Developers will have extra power when docked. But it would be up to the developer what they do with it.

You will see one or more of the following
- 900p games
- Games with better textures
- Better draw distance
- better AA
- 1080p,only possible on games less demanding

Depends on the clock speed change, of course enough of a up-clock can support that kind of difference in resolution. Though I think you're looking at this in reverse here. Its not about increasing clocks to increase resolution, remember this is first and foremost a console not a handheld. Its a case of the game being designed at full clock in docked mode at for examples 1080p and then dropped to 720p at say half the clock speed when taken into portable mode.

No way will the difference be used for better textures or draw distance, that's just overly complicated and to be honest you wouldn't even get much in the way of better texturing ability from a higher clock speed (other than perhaps some extra bandwidth, but amount of RAM would always be the same).

The point of the device that Nintendo are pushing is to have a console that can be taken away from the TV and even out on the road and still give you the same experience. Lowering resolution doesn't change the experience (especially given the screen size difference), but things like draw distance would. Makes no sense to make changes like that.

 

[Donnie]

Maybe 3GB of RAM is enough to run games like Dark Souls 3 at 720p, but, even with the increase in clock, I can't see that be enough to run that kind of game at 1080p.

Is possible the dock have a additional 2 GB of RAM?

Maybe the 1080p is like the 4K of Ps4 Pro: a upscale.

I don't think Switch would run a game like Dark Souls 3 at 1080p, but RAM has little to do with it, more the fact that it won't have enough processing power for that in any mode. You're also looking at it in reverse though IMO. As in the games will very likely (almost certainly) be designed for the dock at a given resolution and then the resolution dropped to around half that for portable mode with a similar GPU/RAM downclock.

 

[Chû Totoro]

More RAM in the dock and not "downclocked" CPU for Switch in dock mode (since not on battery and with fans maybe going even faster) is something that can easily be made.

Also different resolutions is something common in gaming. Where have you all been people all these years? Consoles are not the only things running games -_-

(and even consoles are now doing it with PS4 Pro)

 

[BDGAME]

I don't think Switch would run a game like Dark Souls 3 at 1080p, but RAM has little to do with it, more the fact that it won't have enough processing power for that in any mode. You're also looking at it in reverse though IMO. As in the games will very likely (almost certainly) be designed for the dock at a given resolution and then the resolution dropped to around half that for portable mode with a similar GPU/RAM downclock.

True about the "docked first". I don't think about it. About dark souls 3, we need to wait and see.

 

[julesodies]

What are the chances we will get some kind of Gsync on portable mode or even a 50hz screen to help with performance? Do 50 hz screens even exist?

 

[heringer]

Dark Souls III minimum requirement on PC is 2GB of RAM, and it's the case for most of the recent big/AAA 3D games (COD, Witcher III, R6Siege, Steep...). So with 3GB of dedicated RAM as rumored it won't be an issue for 1080p rendering.

Minimum requirements for Dark Souls 3 is actualy 4GB, as with most of the recente AAA 3D games.

 

[Milly Osworth]

What if you stack 10 docks on top of eachother? 4K?!

 

[bomblord1]

Minimum requirements for Dark Souls 3 is actualy 4GB, as with most of the recente AAA 3D games.

According to PC Gamer it is 8GB
http://www.pcgamer.com/dark-souls-3-system-requirements-revealed/

However we're looking at a completely different environment from the switch there as it's a PC with Windows.

 

[nynt9]

According to PC Gamer it is 8GB
http://www.pcgamer.com/dark-souls-3-system-requirements-revealed/

However we're looking at a completely different environment from the switch there as it's a PC with Windows.

If you look at its performance on current gen consoles who allow 4-6ish gigs of RAM for games it's not very promising to think how a Switch version would perform... I love the Spuls games but From'S standard for performance is really low so them saying it actually runs acceptably could mean anything really.

 

[LordOfChaos]

New fan designs are pretty silent at low rpms. I have a 13” MacBook Pro Late 2016 (no Touch Bar) that has only one fan and it usually is completely off and only comes on when the cpu heats up. I'm not a fan of that function so I have an app that lets the fan run at 2.400 rpm all the time — and you know what, I can't hear it even if I put my ear right next to the keyboard. It becomes audible at around 4.000 rpm and by no means is it noisy. If Nintendo did it right, this fan shouldn't be audible at all.

This is how the fan looks like by the way (source):



Obviously, the Switch fan would be smaller, but with a design like this it shouldn't generate much noise.

Agreed, plus a low spinning fan adds next to nothing in a modern systems total power draw. Since it sounds like the mobile part does contain one fan, keeping it on even at a low speed when undocked sounds like a good idea, rather than having the fan being dead weight while mobile.

The difference between ambient air flowing through a heatsink and a slow fan driving air through a tunnel design, as the Switch appears to have, is significant, and could mean better maintained clocks.


Apple learned that early, before the escape key macbook pro, macbook pros have historically had the fans always spin at 2000ish rpm even when mobile and even when cool, and per watt hour Apple isn't suffering for battery efficiency.

 

[Shin Johnpv]

Suddenly running a game at two different resolutions is a very complex process and something that people don't understand how it can work. In a world where PS4 Pro makes developers run their games at 3 different resolutions.

Or a world where PC developers have been supporting tons of different resolutions for decades.

 

[Skittzo0413]

True, but only if you ignore the first bit of info, where he said it was more capable (I think - struggling to find the quote now from Matt. Sure it was something along those lines though right?)

It was LCGeek who said something like (CPU wise) NX>>>>XB1>>PS4>>>>>>>>>>>>Wii U

 

[th3sicknness]

You can't use requirements from PC to drive discussion for console. Consoles are a closed platform and punch above their weight because of low level API's and more resource optimizing. Pair that with the fact that consoles don't run resource heavy operating systems.. it doesn't need loads of ram.

 

[Blackthorn]

I hope that by and large, resolution/AA is the only difference between docked and undocked mode. I want the handheld experience to be largely uncompromised as that's the main way I'll play.

Also was obvious this would be the case. No point going above native res for handheld mode, but 720p wouldn't cut it for TVs these days.

 

[popsicle_sundays]

What do you think the chances are we'd get a PS4Pro equivalent mid-cycle refresh with a dock for 4k?

 

[Vic]

What do you think the chances are we'd get a PS4Pro equivalent mid-cycle refresh with a dock for 4k?

When you think about it, every Nintendo handheld other than the GBA had a mid-cycle hardware refresh with more processing power. Will a Switch get a hardware refresh targeting 4K? Doubtful.

 

[blu]

If you look at its performance on current gen consoles who allow 4-6ish gigs of RAM for games it's not very promising to think how a Switch version would perform... I love the Spuls games but From'S standard for performance is really low so them saying it actually runs acceptably could mean anything really.

And yet the most logical conclusion for a person to make from these news, would be that FROM did an early proof-of-concept port and got an acceptable performance. That does not say much about the performance of the final product.

 

[th3sicknness]

What do you think the chances are we'd get a PS4Pro equivalent mid-cycle refresh with a dock for 4k?

0%

We will have to wait for January possibly March to know if that is even possible. I highly doubt Nintendo is even targeting 4k until the market penetration is high for the technology..

Another thing to factor in is how successful the switch is going to be. You arent going to refresh it if the sales are luke warm. This is most likely the reason that in the leak they are waiting to produce more docks to go in multiple rooms.

1 they dont want to confuse people out the gate. They are keeping the core concept targeted.
2 they want to wait to see if the switch is a success so they dont have tons of docks sitting around if the idea fails.

 

[Brofield]

When you think about it, every Nintendo handheld other than the GBA had a mid-cycle hardware refresh with more processing power. Will a Switch hardware refresh target 4K? Doubtful.

Maybe 4K streaming at the very least...but would they only refresh the hardware in the dock? I could see that happening if only to extend the lifespan of the Switch

 

[Vic]

Maybe 4K streaming at the very least...but would they only refresh the hardware in the dock? I could see that happening if only to extend the lifespan of the Switch

Tegra chips have had 4K video decoding for a while now.

 

[LordOfChaos]

It was LCGeek who said something like (CPU wise) NX>>>>XB1>>PS4>>>>>>>>>>>>Wii U

Which made that 4x Cortex A57 rumor odd/not believable for me. The Cortex A57 is in the same baseball league as Jaguar, but four of them vs 7ish running a PS4/XBO game wouldn't keep up. So I'm curious what the final CPU will be. 4 A57s, 4 A53s? 8 A57s? 4 A57s, 2 Denver?

If it does include Denver, a dev kit this late in the game not having it would be odd and leave a lot of performance on the table, no?

What do you think the chances are we'd get a PS4Pro equivalent mid-cycle refresh with a dock for 4k?

Depends...USB C alone is a physical standard, not a data one, there are products that carry only USB 2.0 speeds over it (LG 4K screen for example), it can carry USB 3.0 (5Gb), 3.1 (10Gb), and Thunderbolt 3 can also share the physical port spec.

For a GPU extension, and especially a GPU capable of 4K, you'd want Thunderbolt 3, but a chipset for that makes it far more expensive than the 'dock cheap enough for every TV' thing. I'm not even sure if a Tegra would be compatible with it. They could make their own high speed interconnect, but again, expensive.

If it's just USB over USB C, I think it's not likely there would be a future GPU dock.

 

[Skittzo0413]

Which made that 4x Cortex A57 rumor odd/not believable for me. The Cortex A57 is in the same baseball league as Jaguar, but four of them vs 7ish running a PS4/XBO game wouldn't keep up. So I'm curious what the final CPU will be. 4 A57s, 4 A53s? 8 A57s? 4 A57s, 2 Denver?

If it does include Denver, a dev kit this late in the game not having it would be odd and leave a lot of performance on the table, no?

Yeah, the LCGeek rumor was from a long time ago (Spring I think), but the TX1 devkit rumor was also from a while ago (before July likely), so we really don't know. It could be that LCGeek knew what CPU cores were in the devkit (A57) but not how many or at what clock, so just assumed it would be an overall better CPU. Or possibly that was just a core for core comparison. But more recently we do have Matt saying that the CPU will be less of a bottleneck for the Switch than it is for PS4/XB1, though again that can be taken several ways.

I guess we'll find out either in a month (if they disclose the specs) or 3 months.

Depends...USB C alone is a physical standard, not a data one, there are products that carry only USB 2.0 speeds over it (LG 4K screen for example), it can carry USB 3.0 (5Gb), 3.1 (10Gb), and Thunderbolt 3 can also share the physical port spec.

For a GPU extension, and especially a GPU capable of 4K, you'd want Thunderbolt 3, but a chipset for that makes it far more expensive than the 'dock cheap enough for every TV' thing. I'm not even sure if a Tegra would be compatible with it. They could make their own high speed interconnect, but again, expensive.

If it's just USB over USB C, I think it's not likely there would be a future GPU dock.

Just as a note, the SCD patent did mention supplementing processing power from an external GPU wirelessly. So if that tech is actually reliable then they could choose to do it that way, with no physical connection.

 

[Peltz]

Suddenly running a game at two different resolutions is a very complex process and something that people don't understand how it can work. In a world where PS4 Pro makes developers run their games at 3 different resolutions.

Considering Wii U games all can be rendered at a lower resolution on the Gamepad (often simultaneously), and PC games have been doing this for decades, I think both Nintendo and all other developers will be able to figure this out.

 

[th3sicknness]

Considering Wii U games all can be rendered at a lower resolution on the Gamepad (often simultaneously), and PC games have been doing this for decades, I think both Nintendo and all other developers will be able to figure this out.

Suddenly when Nintendo wants to do something Sony developers are already doing its hard.

 

[Vic]

Suddenly when Nintendo wants to do something Sony developers are already doing its hard.

Nintendo are incompetent when it comes to advanced technology!

 

[Peltz]

What do you think the chances are we'd get a PS4Pro equivalent mid-cycle refresh with a dock for 4k?

Personally, I don't think this impossible. But I do not think it will be a Pro-style upgrade.

It would likely be a completely stationary version of the hardware without a handheld component. Remember, Iwata said the market will dictate whether there will be multiple "form factors."

Rather than being a more souped up version of the same concept, I think a 4k option would share the same library and be entirely stationary/traditional. It would be an entirely separate "form factor." And it is likely possible considering that they are using modern architecture.

I think as 4k begins to get more and more popular, Nintendo will give its core audience this premium-style option.

 

[LordOfChaos]

Just as a note, the SCD patent did mention supplementing processing power from an external GPU wirelessly. So if that tech is actually reliable then they could choose to do it that way, with no physical connection.

There's that, but it's even more limiting than USB C 3.0 (5Gb)

The best current AC wifi is AC1600 for dual channel 2.4+5GHz, 1600Mb/s = 200 MB/s...Not something a GPU would go over.

Say they can use tri-band AC3200 speeds and use every band together, that's still only 400MB/s

There are higher frequency specs for very short range, high bandwidth use, but these are probably even more exotic than Thunderbolt 3 right now.

Yeah, the LCGeek rumor was from a long time ago (Spring I think), but the TX1 devkit rumor was also from a while ago (before July likely), so we really don't know. It could be that LCGeek knew what CPU cores were in the devkit (A57) but not how many or at what clock, so just assumed it would be an overall better CPU. Or possibly that was just a core for core comparison. But more recently we do have Matt saying that the CPU will be less of a bottleneck for the Switch than it is for PS4/XB1, though again that can be taken several ways.

Yeah, I kind of took "less CPU limited" as a relative ratio between CPU and GPU, i.e if it was the same CPU as a PS4 but with the Switch's GPU, it could be described as less CPU limited as there's less work the GPU can accept.

However everyone in that thread seemed adamant it was an objective measure between all CPUs, so I dunno.

 

[Falchion]

So that's cool, I'll rarely have it undocked anyways.

 

[Diablohead]

I don't think that's how it works. The game must be rendered in 1080p, downscaled on portable mode and stay the same on docked mode.

a lot of android based games can change resolution easily enough, not saying the switch games will do the same thing but it's not out of question to expect resolution changing.

I can't see the switch rendering 1080 and downscaling when in mobile mode, it's a huge waste of resources.

What if you stack 10 docks on top of eachother? 4K?!

sonic and knuckles cart stacking . png

 

[Donnie]

Which made that 4x Cortex A57 rumor odd/not believable for me. The Cortex A57 is in the same baseball league as Jaguar, but four of them vs 7ish running a PS4/XBO game wouldn't keep up. So I'm curious what the final CPU will be. 4 A57s, 4 A53s? 8 A57s? 4 A57s, 2 Denver?

I don't think Denver is a particularly good CPU for gaming and A57/A53 are a bit long in the tooth these days. A72/A73 would be better options.

 

[Donnie]

a lot of android based games can change resolution easily enough, not saying the switch games will do the same thing but it's not out of question to expect resolution changing.

I can't see the switch rendering 1080 and downscaling when in mobile mode, it's a huge waste of resources.

Of course the resolution will change, like you say it would be crazy to still render at the same resolution and downscale to a lower res screen. Especially when the GPU clock frequency is dropped as you'd hurt framerate significantly for no advantage (other than a bit of anti aliasing). When instead you could just render at the portable screens native resolution and keep framerate the same.

 

[Caelus]

This seems to suggest it won't be as seamless as shown in the reveal video (as that was all simulated footage), but I assume rerendering the resolution wouldn't take up too much time anyway.

 

[Skittzo0413]

There's that, but it's even more limiting than USB C 3.0 (5Gb)

The best current AC wifi is AC1600 for dual channel 2.4+5GHz, 1600Mb/s = 200 MB/s...Not something a GPU would go over.

Say they can use tri-band AC3200 speeds and use every band together, that's still only 400MB/s

There are higher frequency specs for very short range, high bandwidth use, but these are probably even more exotic than Thunderbolt 3 right now.

Well, presumably, if they do release a dock designed to supplement GPU power it would only do so when the console is docked, right? So short range (centimeters) should be very possible.

Yeah, I kind of took "less CPU limited" as a relative ratio between CPU and GPU, i.e if it was the same CPU as a PS4 but with the Switch's GPU, it could be described as less CPU limited as there's less work the GPU can accept.

However everyone in that thread seemed adamant it was an objective measure between all CPUs, so I dunno.

Yeah that's the way I took it too. But combined with LCGeeks post months ago and Thraktor's very detailed analyses about the performance of ARM CPUs and which Nintendo would choose certainly paints a picture that it could be very likely to outperform the PS4Pro CPU with the Switch. I guess there's no way to know for sure yet.

 

[Polygonal_Sprite]

Dark Souls III minimum requirement on PC is 2GB of RAM, and it's the case for most of the recent big/AAA 3D games (COD, Witcher III, R6Siege, Steep...). So with 3GB of dedicated RAM as rumored it won't be an issue for 1080p rendering.

This. For every person that says "Switch won't run game XYZ" go and youtube search a PC with an old GPU from 2008 running it.

The third party games won't look as good as the PS4 or even XB1 versions due to asset downgrade but they will certainly be possible if publishers see a market for it. They got CoD to run on Wii...

 

[atbigelow]

This seems to suggest it won't be as seamless as shown in the reveal video (as that was all simulated footage), but I assume rerendering the resolution wouldn't take up too much time anyway.

I'd bet it'll be quite close to the reveal video. The dock is probably gonna be shaped to make the Switch fall in place exactly as needed. Part of the click will be the USB ports connecting. If your TV is already on, it could pretty quickly start showing the game.

Also, the dock damn well better have HDMI CEC.

 

[th3sicknness]

This. For every person that says "Switch won't run game XYZ" go and youtube search a PC with an old GPU from 2008 running it.

The third party games won't look as good as the PS4 or even XB1 versions due to asset downgrade but they will certainly be possible if publishers see a market for it. They got CoD to run on Wii...

Anything can run... it is a matter of whether it will perform. COD on the Wii was substantially downgraded across the board when compared to the 360 or ps3. The Wii U iteration of Black Ops ran at 880 x 720, which wasnt terrible when compared to last gen, but it wasnt even native 720p.

 

[Malakai]

Anything can run... it is a matter of whether it will perform. COD on the Wii was substantially downgraded across the board when compared to the 360 or ps3. The Wii U iteration of Black Ops ran at 880 x 720, which wasnt terrible when compared to last gen, but it wasnt even native 720p.

I recall COD: Black Ops 1 on PS3 and Xbox ran at sub 720p. Heck alot of ps3 and xbox games ran under 720p. Yet, the og Wii ran the game at 480p at 30 fps.

To the PS3 version at least. The Xbox 360 version remains the same (our measurement comes in at 1040x608 with 2x MSAA) but it appears to be the case that the PS3 game has been reduced to 960x544, again with 2x MSAA.

Source


Also, CoD: Black Ops 2 ran at 880x720 resolution on the Xbox 360 and the PS3 version was running at an dynamic resolution which maxed out as 880x720.

Source

 

[Audette]

I have to say that I'm scared of a mechanical fan spinning in my Nintendo Handheld. The idea makes it feel less sturdy to me, like its life is finite..

 

[Principate]

I have to say that I'm scared of a mechanical fan spinning in my Nintendo Handheld. The idea makes it feel less sturdy to me, like its life is finite..

Well moving parts are moving parts especially in a mobile device. So yeah it will have an effect on the longevity if used outside the dock (and probably in general).

 

[Lexxism]

I hope Zelda is 1080p at least.

Zelda Wind Waker was 1080p on WiiU.

 

[Dee Dah Dave]

I'm hoping all games are designed to run at native 1080p for the sake of TV clarity. Then down res them in under-clocked mode until they hit the required frame-rate. Sub 720p should still be fine on a screen that size if necessary too, providing it's only by a little.

I don't want different graphics profiles for the two modes because that causes more development headaches, and it's better for the consumer if games are identical across the two modes. The only difference should be resolution.

If I start seeing the bulk of games at 720p on the TV I shall not be happy!

 

[th3sicknness]

I recall COD: Black Ops 1 on PS3 and Xbox ran at sub 720p. Heck alot of ps3 and xbox games ran under 720p. Yet, the og Wii ran the game at 480p at 30 fps.



Source


Also, CoD: Black Ops 2 ran at 880x720 resolution on the Xbox 360 and the PS3 version was running at an dynamic resolution which maxed out as 880x720.

Source

Doesnt say much considering the Wii U was released after both consoles and should have had better performance (Blame the developers?). Through most of these switch discussion we fail to remember the Wii U was suppose to be 2 to 3x better than the Xbox and PS3 and it didnt seem the case (Few games did show it like Bayo). But I guess it never really had a chance to succeed since it didnt have much support or sales.

We need to be careful with how we think it will perform because we will be let down as we were with the Wii U.

 

[Instro]

Doesnt say much considering the Wii U was released after both consoles and should have had better performance (Blame the developers?). Through most of these switch discussion we fail to remember the Wii U was suppose to be 2 to 3x better than the Xbox and PS3 and it didnt seem the case (Few games did show it like Bayo). But I guess it never really had a chance to succeed since it didnt have much support or sales.

We need to be careful with how we think it will perform because we will be let down as we were with the Wii U.

Outside of available RAM, the WiiU had a worse CPU, and a GPU that was marginally better than the PS3/360, but the raw numbers don't stack up well there either.

 

[KAL2006]

I'm hoping all games are designed to run at native 1080p for the sake of TV clarity. Then down res them in under-clocked mode until they hit the required frame-rate. Sub 720p should still be fine on a screen that size if necessary too, providing it's only by a little.

I don't want different graphics profiles for the two modes because that causes more development headaches, and it's better for the consumer if games are identical across the two modes. The only difference should be resolution.

If I start seeing the bulk of games at 720p on the TV I shall not be happy!

I guess you are not Happy with Xbox Onewhere quite a few games are not 1080p

Bit I guess the handheld Switch will outperform the Xbox One to allow consistent 1080p games riiiiigggght lol.

 

[Instro]

I guess you are not Happy with Xbox Onewhere quite a few games are not 1080p

Bit I guess the handheld Switch will outperform the Xbox One to allow consistent 1080p games riiiiigggght lol.

I dont see what the problem would be if the overall asset quality is kept lower to allow the resolution to stay around 1080p. I dont expect that level of customization done for multiplats of course, but for exclusives and 1st party titles it seems fair hope.