I can't even be mad at you.They didn't want to make too mini.
I can't even be mad at you.They didn't want to make too mini.
Existing code won't run on ARM yet anyways. It will have to be ported ground up for ARM. Then its possible with Switch's gpu clock.I'm not sure if they can even run the game on the CPU clock numbers we are talking in portable mode.
Friendly reminder that this is the technical discussion thread, so be aware that you don't clog up the thread too much with possible games discussion.
I do wonder what the price range of an additional dock can be. It does require an active controller to convert and reroute the data from the DisplayPort bus into a HDMI and USB signal. This may add a couple of dollars to the production cost, which adds a larger bit on the suggested retail price. I'm actually guessing at 25 to 30 dollars factoring in everything. If it's much more it won't be attractive for the consumers anymore.
I can't see it worth more than $20 for what it does. It charges the Switch/is a power source and indirectly boosts the clockspeed to normal speed. If they charge more than that, its a bit much imo..
So to help set some expectations, Nintendo sells 3DS docks for about $15 each, but those only support power.
Whereas, USB-C multiport adapters alone cost between $25 to $40 on Monoprice. I would hope Nintendo's costs would be close to what a generic adapter would cost, but with the added size for the dock function and fan, it may be a bit more.
What, exactly, would need to be ported "ground up"? Did they develop the game in x86 assembly language?Existing code won't run on ARM yet anyways. It will have to be ported ground up for ARM. Then its possible with Switch's gpu clock.
CPU clock is the same docked or undocked.
proof that people just dont read freaking ops!
Existing code won't run on ARM yet anyways. It will have to be ported ground up for ARM. Then its possible with Switch's gpu clock.
Uhh...
Have we gone back to the days of, "it needs to be x86 to run third party games" again?
Can you elaborate on that statement?Existing code won't run on ARM yet anyways. It will have to be ported ground up for ARM. Then its possible with Switch's gpu clock.
I feel like people ignore that Nintendo won't release multiple games a month regardless if they could or not
Quoting myself from a few days back.
I was previously assuming that USB-C would be directly driving the HDMI port instead of over Displayport, which may require another converter in the dock to output an HDMI signal.
In either event you are looking at an adapter (or more) that sells for between $25 and $50 on Monoprice to get the non-power functionality in the dock. The addition of power complicates things more.
its literally functioning like an ac adapter that boosts clock speeds of laptops(which the laptop is programmed to when given a power source like that) when plugged in. It doesn't have an extra chip to boost peformance. I mean I guess it has a fan and connects to a USB port and has power button, so it has the leeway of costing more than your typical power source. Of course they will sell it for at least 20-25$, which probably isn't too bad. Here's hoping it isn't significantly more.
So to help set some expectations, Nintendo sells 3DS docks for about $15 each, but those only support power.
Whereas, USB-C multiport adapters cost between $25 to $40 on Monoprice. I would hope Nintendo's costs would be close to what a generic adapter would cost, but with the added size for the dock function and fan, it may be a bit more.
I would expect docks to be like controllers. Priced WAY above actual costs. It would not surprise me to see a dock costing $60-99USD
We know at least one studio is using Unreal Engine 4 as well(Next Level Games) so if Nintendo is willing to embrace middleware that will help their productivity too.
Nintendo will use middleware. They'll use their own stuff. You don't make games for 30 years and not develop your own tools.
Existing code won't run on ARM yet anyways. It will have to be ported ground up for ARM.
Mary Christmas, NintenGAF, may your 2017 has less of:
Mary Christmas, NintenGAF, may your 2017 has less of:
Quoting myself from a few days back.
I was previously assuming that USB-C would be directly driving the HDMI port instead of over Displayport, which may require another converter in the dock to output an HDMI signal.
In either event you are looking at an adapter (or more) that sells for between $25 and $50 on Monoprice to get the non-power functionality in the dock. The addition of power complicates things more.
I want Switchmas. Give me switchmas.Thanks, marry Christmas to you too, though what we are mostly waiting for in here is Switchmas in January 12
In other threads, i speculated about the dock power connector been an USB port in the back instead of something else, like for example, having the power supply build inside the dock. The logic behind it at the time, was that Nintendo could include a modular power brick that both powers the dock and can be taken when on the go to charge the Switch through the USB C port. So the shape of the power brick male plug would be compatible with the bottom USB C port of the Switch itself and with the back of the dock.What the dock actually needs is an incoming USB-C port for power, three outgoing USB-A ports and one outgoing HDMI port. The actual chips inside will be small, since it only needs to combine the three USB-A ports into one USB data stream and convert the DP into HDMI. I guess chips like that would cost a couple of dollars in wholesale price.
I suppose the actually power will just go through the dock without the dock having to manage anything. There will be some sort of power management chip in the Switch itself to regulates these things, as you are able to plug in the power cable directly into the Switch.
UE4 cured my cancer.
Are Nintendo still using that heavily modified Twilight Princess engine for most of their games?
The port technology used is a USB-C 'Alt mode' called DisplayPort over USB-C. It allows the data transfer to be reprogrammed pin-by-pin. The protocol then uses a mix of DP signal and USB 3.1 data to transfer video, audio and data. Power is delivered and managed by seperate pins. The video protocol has then to be changed to a compatible HDMI signal, which requires a bit of logic and power hence active conversion is needed.
What the dock actually needs is an incoming USB-C port for power, three outgoing USB-A ports and one outgoing HDMI port. The actual chips inside will be small, since it only needs to combine the three USB-A ports into one USB data stream and convert the DP into HDMI. I guess chips like that would cost a couple of dollars in wholesale price.
I suppose the actually power will just go through the dock without the dock having to manage anything. There will be some sort of power management chip in the Switch itself to regulates these things, as you are able to plug in the power cable directly into the Switch.
The reason why many of those adapters cost quite a bit more is because of the extra costs that come into a final product. They still need a shell too, need to be manufactured, assembled, packaged, shipped to wholesale, wholesale needs to handle them, shipped to retailers, retailers want a profit and then you get the final price, which are also calculated into the whole dock of the Switch. It's also dependent on the amount of product you produce. Since the dock is already needed in tens of millions of consoles, it can be sold seperately as a by-product of normal production.
I'm not well-versed in manufacturing prices of electronics, but I would guess at a bill of materials and manufacturing cost of around 15-20 dollars. If it's any more it would put a serious dent in the profitability of the Switch as a whole console. I doubt many people would want to pay $60 dollars for an additional dock either.
Merry Christmas to you too, sir.Merry Christmas, NintenGAF, may your 2017 has less of:
Immediately come to mind Conservative Rasterisation and Rasteriser Ordered Views.Merry Christmas to you too, sir.
I started a discussion in the other Switch thread about this, but it is probably more appropriate here: Are there any other particular GPU features that Maxwell/Pascal have that the GCN architecture in the PS4/XB1 does not, besides the 2x fp16?
Immediately come to mind Conservative Rasterisation and Rasteriser Ordered Views.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/mt186615(v=vs.85).aspx
Immediately come to mind Conservative Rasterisation and Rasteriser Ordered Views.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/mt186615(v=vs.85).aspx
Not quite, though CR does have a relation to tiling. Read on..This the fancy way of saying tiled rasterizer?
Well, OIT is definitely the poster use of ROV, but CR has way more uses - think collision detections and voxel trees.Considering how both are linked to practical realtime Order Independent Transparency they cannot be universal son enough... pet peeve of mine ever since they removed HW translucency sorting in the PVR line :/...
Those should have made it in the Polaris feature set both PS4 Pro and Scorpio use though...
Not quite, though CR does have relation to tiling. Read on..
Ironically, ARM did to Intel what Intel did to mainframes and specialized workstations back in the day. It's really charming when somebody gets outmanoeuvred by their own gig.Apparently ARM is some weird, esoteric architecture that nobody supports and isn't in literally billions of devices, to a level that Intel can only dream of.
In fairness, I don't believe the OP covers the Eurogamer Report.
The Wii U is powerful enough for most indies. With much better tools and middleware support Switch should be more than fine.No. More like I'm not taking specs as official till they are official so to speak.
As I stated before I'm not saying I know or don't know with regards to switch being powerful enough to indies.
It's just one of the key areas I hope the Switch gets right.
Thanks. Looks like I have a little reading to do.Immediately come to mind Conservative Rasterisation and Rasteriser Ordered Views.
https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/mt186615(v=vs.85).aspx
After that definition ue4 is a heavily modified ue3.UE4 cured my cancer.
Are Nintendo still using that heavily modified Twilight Princess engine for most of their games?
Meaning they might have to rewrite some of the game to accommodate the lower power of Switch.What, exactly, would need to be ported "ground up"? Did they develop the game in x86 assembly language?
Lower power and different architecture yeah sure. You could say that for xbone compared to PS4 too.Meaning they might have to rewrite some of the game to accommodate the lower power of Switch.
Lower power and different architecture yeah sure. You could say that for xbone compared to PS4 too.
It being arm is not an issue.
Engines have to be modified to run well on any particular piece of hw. Different engines are designed with different topologies and work distribution in mind. Engine development is nothing new to the likes of Switch - it's not like this brand new concept of 4x ARMv8 cores and a SM5 GPU sprung overnight.Engines will probably have to be heavily modified to run well on the Switch. Engines are programmed with specific things running on each core
Engines will probably have to be heavily modified to run well on the Switch. Engines are programmed with specific things running on each core
Multiplatform engines are coded to be platform agnostic and not even assume that there are multiple cores, let alone hardcode specific things to run on specific cores.
The golden era of computing is ove (easy per thread performance scaling year over year) r, you will see these engines catering more and more to the platform quirks to extract performance than before or progress will slow down a lot.
With that possible low specs, of 400 GF, is the switch weaker or stronger than GPD Win?
This is interesting because I remember people swearing that the next Nintendo's handheld wouldn't have been even remotely in the same ballpark as this.GPD uses Intel HD 405 clocked at 200Mhz with a burst speed up to 600Mhz. So about 50Gflops standard and 150Gflops at the top speed of 600Mhz. Not sure if it ever sustains that 600mhz for very long though (?).
With that possible low specs, of 400 GF, is the switch weaker or stronger than GPD Win?
Looking purely at their handheld line, Switch's guts seem more like what I'd have expected of a GameBoy/DS of 2021 rather than 2017.This is interesting because I remember people swearing that the next Nintendo's handheld wouldn't have been even remotely in the same ballpark as this.
To be fair they didn't expect it to double as their next home console.Pretty similar when undocked, much more powerful when docked.
Edit
This is interesting because I remember people swearing that the next Nintendo's handheld wouldn't have been even remotely in the same ballpark as this.