I think what Hoo-doo meant is that some people are too optimistic thinking that the Switch will end up being better than what is currently reported.
It may help to look at how bad the specs could go and not just how good they can be, like with how I disagree that Nintendo would go for 16nm and instead go for 28nm considering the inconsistencies with the clock speeds.
That's not to say it's true, it's just I'm finding some blind optimism here and there like some people now thinking that the SCD is a guarantee and that it will be 4 TFLOPS and cost $200 and provide 4K gaming. What makes me question that for example is that Nintendo are in the game of making things affordable and peripherals do not sell that well to a console userbase. If an SCD did ever happen I'd expect it to use the same Tegra tech possibly at stock clock speeds so that it could be cheaper than $100 along with using features like Wi-fi to make the visuals in portable mode better as stated in the patent.
First off, the sky isn't falling, the numbers I was talking about are 2SM @ 307mhz and 768mhz there is no optimism there, just running the numbers and comparing architecture performances, you can ignore it, you can come up with your own numbers, but don't think those are pie in the sky optimism, it's just the cold numbers.
As for the person who posted about that dock, it was me, you are literally replying to me and saying some people when you mean "you" I am speculating on the real possibility that Nintendo is using the USB-C as an expansion port like they have done on many many prior opportunities.
The 4TFLOPs number comes from current nvidia gpu offerings, you can buy a 4tflop gpu for your pc for $199. As for "same tegra tech" Tegra is just a package, there is no difference between GPUs in desktops and inside tegra chips.
I was expecting anything from 435gflops to 750gflops, and for the portable to have the same performance at a lower resolution (of 720p) OH NO, 393gflops! what will we do, that is 10% less than could possibly be acceptable. Optimism is fine to have if you keep in mind that that is the highest we could expect. Now that we know the clocks, it is best to accept the 2SM as the most likely possibility and move forward with that speculation.
If people want to lower expectations further, they are free to do so, but it isn't based on any numbers we have, we know the gpu isn't r700 anymore, if people want to treat it like it is, they should also remember that 360 was 240gflops.