I may be mis-remembering but the dev kit details for Wii U prelaunch were ridiculously vague.
It would be an issue even if the game could have been adapted because developers would have more working towards a much higher target.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Nintendo Switch Dev Kit Stats Leaked? Cortex A57, 4GB RAM, 32GB Storage, Multi-Touch.
- Thread starter Robert at Zeboyd Games
- Start date
- Status
I may be mis-remembering but the dev kit details for Wii U prelaunch were ridiculously vague.
It would be an issue even if the game could have been adapted because developers would have more working towards a much higher target.
th3sicknness
Member
Very simple solution. The fan is there to keep the device cool to the touch rather than making sure thermals are in check. They aren't going to throttle anything as that would affect performance targets.
WiiU's dev tools and info was crap.
You'll have to pardon me, my knowledge is cursory which is why I ask! I am a physicist, not a games developer, lol.
The wiiU CPU is essentially a tricore Wii CPU with some customizations and a slightly higher clock. Which itself is just an overclocked GameCube CPU. You are overestimating the wiiU CPU power by orders of magnitude
I'm not sure how to interpret this new development. Something just seems off.
If the leaks about the devs kits - running with an actively cooled Tegra X1 inside, mind you - were true, wouldn't this be a very notable downgrade unless there are significant performance gains in other areas?
The info about the revealed clocks seems very accurate. However, if that's all to the story, then surely, a downgrade of this nature would greatly compromise several games already in development, with the console's launch right around the corner.
There's no way that would sit well with developers who were already deep in development. Yet, everyone is still quiet? The sources who leaked all initial info suddenly have nothing to say about this?
Either the initial reports about the dev kits were all wrong to begin with, or Nintendo have presented developers with near-final hardware that generally maintains the same performance of the dev kit specs, even at such low clocks. How can both reports be true without serious consequences(and leaks) behind the scenes?
I'm neither saddened nor shocked by these new reports. I feel nothing, in that regard, except confusion. I'll most gladly sit this one out until the full reveal.
If the leaks about the devs kits - running with an actively cooled Tegra X1 inside, mind you - were true, wouldn't this be a very notable downgrade unless there are significant performance gains in other areas?
The info about the revealed clocks seems very accurate. However, if that's all to the story, then surely, a downgrade of this nature would greatly compromise several games already in development, with the console's launch right around the corner.
There's no way that would sit well with developers who were already deep in development. Yet, everyone is still quiet? The sources who leaked all initial info suddenly have nothing to say about this?
Either the initial reports about the dev kits were all wrong to begin with, or Nintendo have presented developers with near-final hardware that generally maintains the same performance of the dev kit specs, even at such low clocks. How can both reports be true without serious consequences(and leaks) behind the scenes?
I'm neither saddened nor shocked by these new reports. I feel nothing, in that regard, except confusion. I'll most gladly sit this one out until the full reveal.
You just cast the Blu-signal.
The what?
No worries, it's just one of those things that gets glossed over when most discussion is surrounding the raw pixel throughput.
Keeping it cold to the touch is also something I've had in mind. Seems like a very nintendo thing to do.
I wouldn't be surprised if they were concerned about people/children picking up the switch after an hour in docked mode and wanted to limit heat there as well.
No worries, it's just one of those things that gets glossed over when most discussion is surrounding the raw pixel throughput.
What would you say are the trade-offs/gains in the proposed scenario? Is there any reason to do such a thing? I ask because, in numerics, it brings us back up to what the devkits "could be" and what we would have thought but it seems like a weird way to go about it.
That would be indeed a very Nintendo solution to a very Nintendo problem.
As a Canadian in a frozen winter I would prefer it to be warm while I am playing in bed.
Good points, it is curious and it begs the question, is there more to the story than just the clock numbers? Have devs got hold of the final release hardware yet or have they just had access to the X1 units?
JoshuaJSlone
Member
A fact shared without judgment.
I think the gap is large enough to call it much, MUCH weaker, even with the severe downclock.
Anyway we still don't know if they threw a couple of ultra-low power cores to run the OS. Hopefully they did, as even 2 A35 would be enough and those should be dirt cheap and extremely power efficient.
Anandtech said:
Pokemaniac
Member
The "bloat" in the Wii U's OS is actually largely space set aside for the multitasking apps to use. Tabbed web browsers need lots of RAM.
I think he meant the source DF got their info from
You're right. I'm too tired for this, obviously, I should hit the bed.
wonderful103
Member
The switch is using an ARM CPU.
lwilliams3
Member
One thing that is bizarre for me is that the original doc stated the max frequency of the CPU/GPU, and the max GFLOPS instead of the capped clock frequency. My initial thoughts was that they were trying to close to the max performance with more efficient parts. How did devs planned for HH mode if the clocks weren't given to them, though?
Yep. The conversation was about somehow putting in an additional PowerPC core in the system for BC.
Maybe the devs knew that the jump between the docked and hh mode should be one full resolution bump and planned accordingly?
SolidSnakex
Member
Digital Foundry isn't painting a picture of the Switch being bad. I'd suggest watching the video the posted alongside the article
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzS4LbH5nmA
For the most part they seem to be fine with it. In many ways it seems like what they expected given what Nintendo is trying to do and their recent history. The only thing that really disappoints Richard is that it doesn't seem to be using Pascal. I think the issue is that many fully bought into insider rumors. The rumors that basically had Nintendo building some sort of super platform. One that could operate as a console but also work as a handheld and could somehow run any game on the PS4 or Xbox One without much issue. If you took a step back from that for a moment it never really seemed realistic, although it obviously sounded good.
Where does it state that? They've claimed the specs in the op were shown to developers, which aren't Switch specs at all obviously, since they're X1 dev kit specs. Obviously if they were shown they're merely a performance range to expect that developers would be previously familiar with.
A quick thought, so antonz mentioned before those leaked specs came from someone else and not the person linked in the OP.
Considering that insiders and Eurogamer have verified it(?), wouldn't it mean that the idea of an overclocked dev-kit is false even though there was a loud fan? The spec sheet didn't show the GPU to be running higher than 1GHz.
Considering that insiders and Eurogamer have verified it(?), wouldn't it mean that the idea of an overclocked dev-kit is false even though there was a loud fan? The spec sheet didn't show the GPU to be running higher than 1GHz.
Yes, that would mean that their initial speculation that the TX1 might be overclocked because it had a loud fan was not correct. Maybe the loud fan was because the tablet was heating quite a bit on the inside.
Again they're listing the same source as the op, they even say:
Just that the original twitter leak mentions 1tflop but they don't list that part of it in the article. Its a cut and paste job of a X1 dev kit, its not actual Switch hardware.
Whether people say its come from a different source or not, its clearly point for point just the same as the op, a X1 dev kit. It even has "1Ghz max" for the GPU, those aren't Switch specs obviously.
I mean again are people just deciding to ignore that this is a custom SoC. You don't have to take Nvidia's word for it either. I mean people go on about "but its Nintendo" and then they ignore the biggest trait of Nintendo, every single system they put out is custom, they don't do off the shelf GPU's. Say what you want about WiiU for example, but it was again a very customised GPU.
Schnozberry
Member
The X1 wasn't designed for symmetric multi-processing. If the A53 cores are active, the A57 cores are not. In an Android scenario, it allows the A53's to be active for most of the time, while the A57's are only active for intensive tasks. They share circuitry as well. There's nothing stopping Nintendo from changing it, but there's no reason to believe they have.
Tom Nook Sawyer
Member
Wasn't there someone on here that said it was Pascal?
We don't know if the actual dev kits have a small form factor or similar to a retail Switch, in which case having a fan makes sense.
No that I recall, Nate said it was a TX1 Maxwell, Emily said it was close to XBONE and was confirmed by Laura, it doesn't seems the case anymore, OsirisBlack said it would be able to handle XBONE/PS4 ports with out much problem. But yeah, we had missing this down clock gift from Nintendo all this time.Tom Nook Sawyer said:
It's right there in your quote they confirmed that devs have been briefed with the same specs
Well not that its going to be X1 but I'd say having low power cores that are only active in place of high power cores is completely pointless in a gaming system.
Are you not actually reading my posts? Ok lets go with a easier example of what I'm trying to say. Right, developers have been briefed that Switch's GPU runs up to 1Ghz yes?
I would also like the Switch to double as a ice scraper and Timbit dispenser.
Schnozberry
Member
Digital Foundry made pretty clear in the video that the number of CUDA Cores, CPU Cores, and process node for the final chip is completely unknown.
The pie in the sky scenario is that Nintendo was approximating performance of the final lower clocked custom chip that has more SM's/Cores by using a full clocked TX1 in the dev kits that was readily available for people to work on.
The most likely scenario is that Nintendo lightly customized the TX1 to their liking and is running the clocks the way they are for energy efficiency and to stay within a tight thermal envelope.
Schnozberry
Member
I know. They probably wouldn't be used at all.
They have been briefed with the specs in the digital foundry article from a hardware perspective including the 256 cuda cores at the given clocks in the table also in the article.
The clocks given are just max frequencies for the parts as stated in the article.
The digital foundry article does not state the 1tf in the OP as part of their confirmed information
Rather than customise the SoC to remove them they could instead customise to allow them to run in conjunction with higher powered cores in order to run backgrounds tasks like the OS? Not that you'd need 4 A53's to run a OS I suppose but a couple of them would do it with a tiny power draw.
Ok wait a minute, you're claiming those specs are geniune Switch specs, but apparently they've quoted "up to 1Ghz" to developers simply because a X1 can run at 1Ghz.. why would they do that if those were genuine Switch specs? They wouldn't do that obviously.
Again none of those specs are actual Switch specs, they're a X1 dev kit, right down to the "upto 1Ghz". Same thing listed in the OP just with the 1Tflop info removed.
Actual switch developers have been confirmed by digital foundry to have been briefed with those same specs. It doesn't matter if they were pulled from another development board. Devs working on the system have confirmed that's what they are working with.
Ok I can tell you're just going to repeat the same thing over and over and ignore anything I say so I wont bother anymore, life is too short to keep repeating myself
I'll just say its going to be interesting to see the whole picture. Because like I said, Nintendo don't do off the shelf GPU's and down clocks do not make a custom GPU.
I'll just say its going to be interesting to see the whole picture. Because like I said, Nintendo don't do off the shelf GPU's and down clocks do not make a custom GPU.
Then it's more likely we're looking at a 28nm node with 2 SM.
They could pick 20nm but they stuck a fan in the Switch when it shouldn't be necessary with how low clocked it is.
TSMC have apparently cut the price of 28nm and 20nm nodes by 10% a few months ago but I assume that 28nm is still cheaper in comparison.
This also makes it less likely we see anything better than A57 and A53 for the CPU. My concern is with A57 being clocked that low doesn't compare favourably with Wii U or the other consoles as mentioned.
At this point, what we need to know is if this spec sheet is for the final dev kit or an older one.
Astral Dog
Member
That clockspeed thread meltdowned :O
That's why you need a fan.
- Status