ethomaz
Banned
There is only one Tegra X1 chip and it is made in 20nm.There's no way the Switch's Tegra is 20 nm right? Did you mistype this post?
Said that there is no real advantage with the X2 16nm.
Last edited:
There is only one Tegra X1 chip and it is made in 20nm.There's no way the Switch's Tegra is 20 nm right? Did you mistype this post?
There is only one Tegra X1 chip and it is made in 20nm.
Said that there is no real advantage with the X2 16nm.
Why is that? Denver cores are the BIG coresDenver cores are useless to Switch
Yes but the switch is underclocked way below stock, even PLAIN X1 at stock speeds would be a massive improvementBoth X1 and X2 runs around the same clocks with GPU peaking a bit over 1Ghz for the same 256SPs
Unfortunately not a typo.There's no way the Switch's Tegra is 20 nm right? Did you mistype this post?
Its very costly to skrink chips, you have to redesign the chip to fit the new process, might as well ask for a custom design.Wow crazy! I'm assuming Nvidia doesn't have any real reason to research and fab this down to 14nm or less?
They are "old" chipsWhat's the deal with the chips being fabbed on such a big size?
Die shrink cost money... it is not easy and most times need redesign... why should nVidia want to do that in a chip that already works fine?Wow crazy! I'm assuming Nvidia doesn't have any real reason to research and fab this down to 14nm or less? What's the deal with the chips being fabbed on such a big size?
They are "old" chips
Nvidia pretty much abandoned the mobile soc market after X2.
Xavier is not aimed at mobile soc market and doesnt even carry the tegra moniker.
Two big issues in my view.Why is that? Denver cores are the BIG cores
Thats precisely what i was thinking the other day! Nintendo has a BC tradition to uphold, not to mention a successful switch ecosystem, its switch 2 successor must be bc. That locks Nintendo to nvdia, so they must be reassured by nvidia that they will provide a next gen soc for the Switch 2. Nintendo must know whats on nvidias roadmap for mobile.Okay, that's the answer! Makes sense now that I know they abandoned the market. So it makes me wonder what will a Switch 2 look like as far as a CPU\GPU is concerned if Nvidia is out of the market. To be fair a Switch 2 will probably not be a thing. Nintendo is hard to predict most times.
But both are 64 bit, Nintendo games are running on top of an api layer anyways so it should be doable.- Denver 2 is more suitable to high single-thread performance while Cortex-A57 is geared for multi-threading (Switch games are developed using that scenario)
- Denver 2 will break the compatibility with X1 while A57 will maintain the compatibility (any game that runs on Switch X1 will run with little effort on Switch X2)
X2 is the direct replacement of X1, nintendo must have got a terrific deal on those unused, overstocked X1 chips.
Why do you doubt itI would gladly exchange my current Switch with a more portable one without these stupid joycons, but only if the screen is as good as the one of my launch model. Which I doubt will be the case.
But we don't have anything new about Volta for ages...This rumor needs to die. Nintendo and Nvidia began talking in 2013 , two years before the X1 was available.
Volta on 10nm with HBM2 ,was on Nvidia's road map to launch in 2016 at the time, which didn't happen for numerous reasons.
The deal Nintendo and Nvidia had was probably for that chip and the X1 was just a stopgap until something like it is ready.
Whats the explanation for them skipping on X2 then? Newer architecture, smaller procces nodes, better cpu and more power efficient.This rumor needs to die. Nintendo and Nvidia began talking in 2013 , two years before the X1 was available.
But X2 has only 2 Denver2 cores...But both are 64 bit, Nintendo games are running on top of an api layer anyways so it should be doable.
Multi threaded in this context just means more cores, is it not possible to use 4 Denver cores?
Every one of the big 3 has done it. Not sure if you can even count vita lasting 4 years.4 years of lifespan for a console shouldnt be acceptabe.
Thats for mobile use in general the BIG.little setup, use the big cores for more demanding apps. That dosnt meant in cant do multi threaded configurations, it would just consume more powerDenver 2 works better when you use its dynamic code optimization process but that still is a big unknown for games
Would it take too much work to the point its not worth the cost to add 4 Denver cores? that way it retains compatibilityBut X2 has only 2 Denver2 cores...
Exiting the market doesn't count, not a very favorable comparison either.Every one of the big 3 has done it
Because, if this is going to be an affordable system, they're going to want to cut costs to keep profits high. A lower quality screen is one of the first ways they could lower production costs.Why do you doubt it
I"m not sure what are you trying to say... there is no direct compatibility between Denver2 and A57 used in Switch today.Thats for mobile use in general the BIG.little setup, use the big cores for more demanding apps. That dosnt meant in cant do multi threaded configurations, it would just consume more power
A53 were disabled because they are low power (little)
Would it take too much work to the point its not worth the cost to add 4 Denver cores? that way it retains compatibility
To use 4 Denver cores instead of A57. Compatibility should be doable with softwareI"m not sure what are you trying to say... there is no direct compatibility between Denver2 and A57 used in Switch today.
To get better perfomance, if its cost effective, thats why i asked.Why redesign X2 to add 2 more Denver2 cores???
Dever2 core has better perfomance???To use 4 Denver cores instead of A57. Compatibility should be doable with software
To get better perfomance, if its cost effective, thats why i asked.
Of course, thats why its better at single threaded operations.Dever2 core has better perfomance???
How much??? Any evidence???Of course, thats why its better at single threaded operations.
What do you mean dude? The whole concept of the Big.Little setup is to use High power cores combined with low power coresHow much??? Any evidence???
I kind of doubt it. I don't see anything wrong with my 2dsxl screen even though its a late model.Because, if this is going to be an affordable system, they're going to want to cut costs to keep profits high. A lower quality screen is one of the first ways they could lower production costs.
I just said what nVidia says but that is reasonable because when you use only Denver2 cores the clock goes high than only using A57 cores because it is 2 vs 4 cores (2.5-3Ghz vs 2.0Ghz)... that is why in single threaded tasks Denver2 will do better than A57 while in multithreaded A57 will do better.What do you mean dude? The whole concept of the Big.Little setup is to use High power cores combined with low power cores
The evidence is thats better at single threaded performance, you said it yourself.
How do you compare different cores to see which one is better: Single threaded benches
Nvidia lists 2GHz as the max speed for both clusters when used individually.when you use only Denver2 cores the clock goes high than only using A57 cores because it is 2 vs 4 cores (2.5-3Ghz vs 2.0Ghz
I don't know either.Nvidia lists 2GHz as the max speed for both clusters when used individually.
After some googling, to be honest i dont know anymore. I did a whole bunch of assuming with Denver, it seems its a CPU arch geared towards AI.
The switch is already fucking portable why another one? I just want to be able to play on a tv at 1080p. That shit should be standard in this day and age.It is Nintendo, so what did you exspect? Hardware wise their biggest monster was the Cube.
I love their franchises, this is the only reason why I still buy their stoneaged consoles and handhelds
Because Nintendo have a long history of going the cheap route as much as they can, and current Switch screens already had a downgrade. 3DS had the best screens at launch, and quality was drastically reduced when they lowered the price. Not even talking about 2DS...Why do you doubt it
The switch is already fucking portable why another one? I just want to be able to play on a tv at 1080p. That shit should be standard in this day and age.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&sou...5YzFDS_f3BcwhzW1mtSSM&ust=1555716749883330But we don't have anything new about Volta for ages...
BTW Volta is focused in AI processing.
Whats the explanation for them skipping on X2 then? Newer architecture, smaller procces nodes, better cpu and more power efficient.
What does this mean?Nintendo wants everyone to get off their stopgap as fast as possible.
Volta was for gaming , before Nvidia decided to split up it's GPU's based on workload.
NVIDIA Volta AI Architecture | NVIDIA
NVIDIA’s Volta Architecture is the new driving force behind AI, fueling breakthroughs in every industry.www.nvidia.com
That's my question, where does Nintendo go from here? True, they're hard to predict, but given the success of the Switch and that comfortable niche they've carved out for themselves as the not-just-a-handheld, not-quite-a-console, less-expensive, "go anywhere" gaming device, I think they're going to want to follow up the Switch with a similar concept at least. But if the hardware isn't there, realistically, what can they even do?Okay, that's the answer! Makes sense now that I know they abandoned the market. So it makes me wonder what will a Switch 2 look like as far as a CPU\GPU is concerned if Nvidia is out of the market. To be fair a Switch 2 will probably not be a thing. Nintendo is hard to predict most times.
no i think like the previous handhelds - will be a small iteration - like 2ds or 3ds bumps. There is no need for switch 2 as switch selling very well and building up its library.So, the latter system is really just Switch 2 and way out still?