ArchedThunder
Banned
Not really, no.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Confirmed: The Nintendo Switch is powered by an Nvidia Tegra X1
- Thread starter FZZ
- Start date
- Status
Not really, no.
DrROBschiz
Member
More like mostly the same
BrownWalrus
Member
In that case is there any reason why the switch is advertised at ~393gflops but the Shield at 540? Or is that BS Shield hype coming from the company?
Referring to this:
Could be shopped for all I know.
DrROBschiz
Member
Switch just has its hardware configured differently to strike the balance in performance it needs as a hybrid portable device
there is very little difference in the inherent hardware and capabilities
Thanks for the link, I'll check it out. My point was more that even though PS4 hardware is mostly known, it isn't emulated yet. We are 4 years in, I'm thinking it's still probably a few years away, but most of its catalog is on PC, and with PS Now having ps4 games, I don't know how much drive that community has in emulating the ps4 vs another community that can't play most of Switch's catalog, until they have. (unless, you know, they buy a switch and the games)
In that case is there any reason why the switch is advertised at ~393gflops but the Shield at 540? Or is that BS Shield hype coming from the company?
Referring to this:
Could be shopped for all I know.
Nvidia shield TV throttles to 768mhz. So it drops from 512gflops to 393gflops. The big difference is that Shield is running on Android and Switch is running on custom Nvidia api and a game centric OS. It also has 4GB of ram. I'm sure the shield cpu is faster but the cycles and multitasking nature of Android is going to draw various resources from the machine and away from its games.
BriareosGAF
Member
Magical fp16 x2 FLOP throughput.
I think if the encryption were fully cracked, emulating PS4 would be significantly easier than emulating PS3. (Note that I'm not talking about fully accurate hardware emulation here, which is infeasible for both anyway, but about presenting an execution environment on a PC that allows games to run well)
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
The version of big.LITTLE this CPU uses only allows one set of cores, big cluster or small one, to be active at the same time so if you were timesharong then maybe you could get somewhere closer to that ideal scenario, but you would ware a lot of performance and battery as you are fighting against the platform.
tiredheadcrab
Member
In that case is there any reason why the switch is advertised at ~393gflops but the Shield at 540? Or is that BS Shield hype coming from the company?
Referring to this:
Could be shopped for all I know.
I think that is reall. Nvidia I think had that in their presentation when they showed of the tegra X1 at CES one year.
It's a good chip. Power efficient, and is built for both mobile and console. I think they choose really well here. I am sure they will stick to hardware iterations every few years and maybe put an even more powerful tegra in and maintain BC.
Also going with a modern architecture was a wonderful move. Get off that power pc bull shit.
Skittzo0413
Member
The Shield TV gets 2x FP16 performance too.
The major difference between the two which will show in the performance of Switch games is the Nvidia API and the massive Android overhead which really bogs down the performance of Shield TV games.
Alebrije
Member
Since Nintendo said it's a home console, do not blame them.
Hope they drop the price soon , since they are using Tegra X1 it seems they need to focus on reduce screen cost and battery. Switch at 200- 250 US seems the fair spot.
jobrro
Member
We will see where FP16 get us. Switch, PS4 Pro and I believe Scorpio all support FP16 so developers may become more familiar with juggling which tasks need to be performed at FP32 and which are possible on FP16. I am not expecting a 2x FP32 power on any of the systems but it should certainly leave some room for optimization that won't be tied to one platform.
Its advertised as 512gflops, the reason for that is its based on a theoretical maximum 1Ghz GPU clock speed. But in reality Shield can't sustain that in games. The Shield GPU generally sits around 768Mhz and sometimes dips even lower. Switch on the other hand runs at 768Mhz constantly.
Of course this is purely looking at hardware, the software will make the biggest difference between something like Shield TV and Switch. The Custom Switch API and much liter weight OS will make real world gaming performance much better than Shield TV.
In that case is there any reason why the switch is advertised at ~393gflops but the Shield at 540? Or is that BS Shield hype coming from the company?
Referring to this:
Could be shopped for all I know.
Sustainable performance vs. peak performance. Nvidia Shield throttles quite fast almost to the Switch levels in real life scenario.
It will dip below Switch on the GPU side, but it seems to maintain the CPU clocks.
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
The Switch is whatever you want it to be. Some people may dock it and play it exclusively on their television as a console while others may use it exclusively as a portable system and then others will use a mixture of the two.
If Nintendo released a dock for the 3ds that output to your TV, does it stop being a handheld?
TX2 would be more of a generational jump than new 3ds. That was just a cpu and memory upgrade, while TX2 is better across the board.
Diablohead
Member
Switch is holding back power yes, either for heat or battery issues, or even both.
Note that the shield tv throttles to something like half performance when hot but it's also not fan cooled in the tv.
ArchedThunder
Banned
From what I gather the X2 isn't actually much better than the X1, but the extra grunt could allow them to run games in 1080p in mobile mode.
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
It depends, on this hypothetical DS, do the controls detach from the sides to form a traditional controller?
Tx2 is just a clock upgrade and possibly a memory bandwidth upgrade, but there is no guarantee that they would use the new clocks over better power consumption. Best to wait for Volta and A73, double the SM gives better performance than doubling the clocks.
Well you'd certainly have to take the controller off the dock, since it would probably charge it. Is that the hybrid concept? Removable controllers? A pro controller user is not using it like a hybrid?
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
Then again, it depends. Some customers may plug this DS in their television and then never remove it. At that point it's a console.
Minsc
Gold Member
Naw, it's still a docked portable. It doesn't lose it's portability aspect just because you have it docked (you can still grab it at any moment and walk out of the house with it). The only point it becomes a console is when they (Nintendo) super glue it to the dock and make removing it impossible.
I think portable just means that the device is portable, and both are (consoles) just one is exclusively a home console, so personally to that person it can be a home console, but that doesn't mean that the device itself isn't a portable.
Laptops are sometimes used exclusively at home on a desk, but this doesn't mean that it isn't a laptop and is now a desktop.
The hybrid concept is that it's capable of two types of local multiplayer: multiple controllers using one screen (console-style local mp), or wireless multiplayer where everyone has their own personal screen (handheld style local mp).
That's why it's not just a straight handheld or a straight console. It's a hybrid. The hybrid concept refers to the gameplay possibilities/configurations. This is the same device that will likely have local Pokemon trading among multiple Switch devices, along with 8 player Smash on a single Switch device.
Docking a 3DS wouldn't make it a console because it doesn't do everything a console can do like a Switch does. Switch is conceptually a hybrid device. It has nothing to do with processing power. Remember, the Wii was also a console despite not being as powerful as it's HD competitors.
There have been Multiplayer handhelds, the lynx iirc had Multiplayer games utilizing 1 screen for instance
It's a docked portable. The moment you let a system be handheld, it is a portable in terms of cost-to-power.
The option for an overpriced/underpowered Nintendo "console" is there, but everything about the systems' design places its lineage squarely in portable territory.
Yeah, people like to conveniently forget the OS when comparing the two.
Except for the 2.0 wiimotes called Joycons
Yea, Sega Nomad also had this feature. That doesn't mean it's not a hybrid device.
LegendofLex
Member
Good thing this isn't how value propositions to consumers work. Portable vs. home console is down to use cases and form factors, not power envelopes.
ArchedThunder
Banned
And it's made with mobile components because the main draw is the ability to play it anywhere. It doesn't matter if Nintendo considers it a home console "first and foremost" (and that will likely change as they phase out the 3DS for Switch), what matters is that it was designed with portability in mind and has to conform to the restrictions of mobile hardware.
I'm not saying it isn't a hybrid, I'm saying it's a portable. The psp plugged into your TV with the proper cable, the function has been around for a very long time, but Nintendo has found a way to market this device in a way that others haven't. That doesn't mean this device isn't a portable with home console functions.
Minsc
Gold Member
But what if you only use a console for surfing the internet and watching netflix, then by the argument proposed for the Switch it's no longer a console anymore right? It's now more like a computer providing a variety of different purposes besides gaming.
Really though, people were using console as meaning a stationary device like the PS4, and handheld meaning a device like the Vita. I don't think anyone was arguing the Vita is a console not a portable like with the Switch (which technically the Vita is going by your correction, a console). I'll agree the Switch a handheld console. But not a home console in the sense a PS4 is one.
Well, Nvidia did officially stated custom Tegra. Now, I chose not to follow the Foxcon thread, where the wildest speculation seem to be contained, but outside of it we mostly concentrated on realistic tweaks, like removing the useless A53 cores, a shrink to 16nm and I was hopping for some kind of embedded memory pool, but I gave up on that when the first footage of Zelda showed up.
Skittzo0413
Member
Yup, acting like everyone knew (or should have known) it would be a completely standard TX1 is pretty disingenuous. Most reasonable expectations had it as a chip very similar to a TX1, likely with some memory customization, but a bog standard TX1 always seemed quite unlikely given the history of gaming consoles.
And Nvidia and Nintendo explicitly calling it a custom chip.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I'm actually very shocked it's pretty much a stock part.
Still anyone bitching either doesn't know much about hardware aside from simple numbers, or is being disingenuous. This is the most powerful handheld on the market. Technically Shield can be at it's peak, it can also be noticeably weaker according to testing. So I still feel safe in my assessment.
Nintendo has completely given up the dedicated home console arena. But because of that, they've kind of jumped back into the power arena in the handheld space.
It's a powerful little system. Much much more powerful than I would have ever expected a new generation Ninty handheld to be. I honestly expected around Vita and a half at best.
Bowing out of the console arena (kind of) leaves them a bit more room in the handheld. And I really like what I've seen. Devs shouldn't ignore it.
Still anyone bitching either doesn't know much about hardware aside from simple numbers, or is being disingenuous. This is the most powerful handheld on the market. Technically Shield can be at it's peak, it can also be noticeably weaker according to testing. So I still feel safe in my assessment.
Nintendo has completely given up the dedicated home console arena. But because of that, they've kind of jumped back into the power arena in the handheld space.
It's a powerful little system. Much much more powerful than I would have ever expected a new generation Ninty handheld to be. I honestly expected around Vita and a half at best.
Bowing out of the console arena (kind of) leaves them a bit more room in the handheld. And I really like what I've seen. Devs shouldn't ignore it.
Also the X1 isn't in a portable shield, the only portable x1 besides switch is the pixel c and that throttles to 200mhz on the gpu side from what I've heard (though I haven't seen the numbers myself so take that for what you will) which is about half as powerful as the gpu in switch when undocked.
Schnozberry
Member
The custom part seems entirely related to the OS/Driver/API stack that Nvidia and Nintendo created together.
johannesbergcrantz
Member
The Switch doesn't need to compete horse-power-wise. Great art-direction = Great graphics. This has been true since the dawn of art and will continue to be true for the rest of eternity. Having a lot of horsepower is great of cource, but nintendo is a mature company that has enough talent to know how to prioritize. And though you shouldnt always trust the "critics-consensus" just take a look at gamerankings.com
Still, I wish BotW could realize its stellar art direction more competently, instead of 900p with crazy frame drops.
finalflame
Banned
There's no problem with this for first and second party studios, but you can't force third party developers to work their "art direction" around your underpowered console when they can properly realize their vision on every other console currently in existence this generation but yours.
Skittzo0413
Member
Yeah that seems to be the case. It's just borderline misleading when Nvidia's blog post used the phrase "custom Tegra processor" which heavily suggests (if not explicitly indicates) a physical customization to the processor. Rather than purely a software/firmware customization.
- Status