Yup, thanks for expanding on my post.
I'm not currently in the GeForce 'ecosystem' and while I'm aware of GRID, GeForce Now, etc., it's not usually on my mind.
-
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.
SemiAccurate: Nintendo NX handheld to use Nvidia Tegra-based Soc
- Thread starter Fourth Storm
- Start date
Yup, thanks for expanding on my post.
I'm not currently in the GeForce 'ecosystem' and while I'm aware of GRID, GeForce Now, etc., it's not usually on my mind.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
It's kinda sad that we care so much either way, frankly. (myself included)
I'll just wait for the official announcement at this point. We don't have the faintest idea what NX really is appart from second-hand source claims.
efyu_lemonardo
May I have a cookie?
Perhaps we've become information junkies.
Soapbox Killer
Grand Nagus
Question? (sorry if this has been asked)
For this question let's assume that there are indeed 2 devices in the NX platform:
NX Go = Handheld Running Tegra K1 modified.
NX Home = Console Running Tegra X1 modified
If this is indeed plausible, is it also conceivable that the Nx Go could be used as the so called "Supplemental Computing Device"that was seen in the pattens floating around? Like a playable docking station? Could those processors work in tandem to provide an experience on par with current gen standards?
I'm smellin a lotta if coming off this plan.
For this question let's assume that there are indeed 2 devices in the NX platform:
NX Go = Handheld Running Tegra K1 modified.
NX Home = Console Running Tegra X1 modified
If this is indeed plausible, is it also conceivable that the Nx Go could be used as the so called "Supplemental Computing Device"that was seen in the pattens floating around? Like a playable docking station? Could those processors work in tandem to provide an experience on par with current gen standards?
I'm smellin a lotta if coming off this plan.
SerTapTap
Member
It's surreal that one thread is disappointed about "only" as powerful as Xbox One and this thread is like "540p should be enough for anyone". If this thing displays on a TV and is targeting 540p it's going to be a mainstream disaster. I don't realy think they're leading with the handheld so this all sounds strange to me.
GhostTrick
Banned
GifGafIsTheBestGaf
Member
why wouldnt they go with samsung instead?
Astral Dog
Member
Thats,a strange way of looking at things, i dont expect a console revision anytime soon and in theory it would be a different system altogether.
But as always its wiser to wait to see how things will turn out.and the handheld will be cheaper of course, with how the 3DS turned out as the primary and only Nintendo system for most people the console could only have the occasional AAA TP port or FP exclusive.
chrisPjelly
Member
Hmm, this is what I was worried about when Nintendo was toying around with the idea of "unifying" handhelds and home consoles. You end up with a relatively underpowered home console, but a really powerful handheld that COULD end up being expensive and/or terrible in battery life. Hope they can pull this off
I'd like to know this as well!
(I'm liking this thread better than reading through the other one...ugh.)
Jen-Hsun Huan said:
(From Q4 2015 Earnings Call)
Jen-Hsun Huang said:
(From Q3 2015 Earnings Call)
Working my way back!
ArchedThunder
Banned
Nintendo wants to build an ecosystem with a single OS, there is no way they don't do iterative systems. We'll probably get stronger revisions of the different NX hardware every 3 years or so.
NeOak
Member
I love how pages 3 to 8 in 50ppp has a bunch of armchair engineers with a degree from the Trump Google Search university.
Also, it is SA. While I love how Charlie bashed NVIDIA for their fake Fermis, sometimes he is wrong, hence "SemiAccurate".
As for the people that think that NVIDIA wouldn't give the Tegras away: See Ouya. NVIDIA needs to have a reliable client after their performance-per-watt fiasco with previous Tegras. Even more if they need to fill the 20nm wafer orders.
They didn't stay within the TDP they specified, and that's a big no-no in the embedded world. You would be surprised how much people who design embedded devices remember about false numbers that made them waste time.
It wasn't the modems that killed mobile Tegra, even with the Icera modem, no one cared after getting burned with the T2 and T3 higher than originally specced TDP with less performance.
LOL at the TT article though. Smells like he was copying the SA info, and the guy saying that we should get more info at E3 made me chuckle.
Also, it is SA. While I love how Charlie bashed NVIDIA for their fake Fermis, sometimes he is wrong, hence "SemiAccurate".
As for the people that think that NVIDIA wouldn't give the Tegras away: See Ouya. NVIDIA needs to have a reliable client after their performance-per-watt fiasco with previous Tegras. Even more if they need to fill the 20nm wafer orders.
They didn't stay within the TDP they specified, and that's a big no-no in the embedded world. You would be surprised how much people who design embedded devices remember about false numbers that made them waste time.
It wasn't the modems that killed mobile Tegra, even with the Icera modem, no one cared after getting burned with the T2 and T3 higher than originally specced TDP with less performance.
LOL at the TT article though. Smells like he was copying the SA info, and the guy saying that we should get more info at E3 made me chuckle.
Dark Cloud
Member
There's also the SCD which could play a role.
I read the first couple pages and still can't get a feeling of overall.... Feelings. Haha. I think this is good, though.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
He's a Zelda fan.
ArchedThunder
Banned
If the rumor is true the nx handheld could be really impressive.
Or maybe it isn't a console...?
I still have this funny feeling we're getting a handheld and a set top box/supplementary/streaming unit style setup.
Eolz
Member
Or maybe it isn't a console...?
I still have this funny feeling we're getting a handheld and a set top box/supplementary/streaming unit style setup.
Don't trust your feelings.
Soapbox Killer
Grand Nagus
I'm thinking that the hardware and architecture have been built from the ground up with expansion in mind, which I believe would be a first for a console.
I don't see what's so outrageous in Nvidia offering a good price for Tegra. Tegra line is maybe the less successful product line of all Nvidia offerings and yet it has quite a good potential, so powering a handheld that could potentially sell some 40-50 millions devices it's not a business to really neglect (from Tegra point of view, not for Nvidia as a whole).
Yup, I agree.
James Scott
Banned
I'm not sure if the handheld will, but it seems doable on the console.
Would be interesting if they can release a $100 peripheral that can boos the hardware and supply a new SKU with the upgraded built in so fans wouldn't have to drop $300-400 if they want the best performance.
(Didn't Nintendo patent something like that?)
Dark Cloud
Member
Yeah sounds like it makes sense.
Schnozberry
Member
I think people resisted the idea that Nvidia would sell it at a loss, but I don't think they'd be selling the hardware for a loss. They might be providing support and software at less than market value, which could be construed as a loss even though it's simply a margin hit because they have no associated cost.
I have a hard time believing Nintendo would go with a Maxwell based SOC for the handheld. The power consumption in tablets was never that great and it would likely require them to put a larger lithium cell than they would want to pay for in a sub $300 handheld. 16nm and Pascal make more sense on that front.
If Nvidia and Tegra are in the console, which is no guarantee, then things could get pretty interesting. TX1 was pretty powerful for a STB SOC, so a newer 16nm successor with A72 cores and a Pascal GPU could very well scale to the console performance of the Xbox One and PS4.
Yeah, I think "at a loss" is taken too literally or it's an exaggeration from SA, but they could sell it at a much lower margin for a big enough contract. Plus Tegra already powers devices that are quite cheap, so I don't really see an issue in terms of pricing.
As for console, yes, A72 cores and a custom Tegra could actually provide good value for money and a cheap console at the same time. We'll see if this really happen.
audio_delay
Neo Member
The only portable tegra x1 i'm aware of is the pixel c. But how much does it cost and how is the battery life?
IIRC all the other tegra chips aren't using the 20nm node, described in the OP.
IIRC all the other tegra chips aren't using the 20nm node, described in the OP.
Schnozberry
Member
TX1 is the only one that is on 20nm. The question came up as to whether Nvidia would be willing to give fire sale prices to Nintendo for a variant of the TX1 because they had made commitments to buy 20nm wafers that they have essentially only produced one poorly selling product from.
We don't really have any hard information on how large their 20nm commitment is or was.
No they haven't. They've made proclamations about Intel's ultra mobile initiative failing and Nvidia's Tegra going away but that's specific projects. They don't rant about companies dying. Get real.
NeOak
Member
God no. He has said that some of Nvidia's "initiatives" are going to die, like their "graphics licensing program" that was just rubish, and that ridiculous IP lawsuit against Samsung, how Tegra is dead in the water (and it is, who uses it?) plus how they lie to the press (dat Fermi card and supposed Pascal with HBM when it had external memory).
But not that Nvidia is going to die as a company.
Nvidia does like to lie. Goddamn, that PX2 BS about using Pascal and then "clarifying" it later on that it wasn't Pascal. http://wccftech.com/nvidia-pascal-gpu-drive-px-2/
NVIDIA Announces Pascal GPU Powered Drive PX 2 – 16nm FinFET Based, Liquid Cooled AI Supercomputer With 8 TFLOPs Performance
then
Update — June 5 2016 2 PM ET — : NVIDIA showed off both Tegra and MXM flavors of their Drive PX2 module. While the Drive PX 2 didn’t feature an actual Pascal GPU, NVIDIA did infer that these GPUs housed on the back of the board will be offered in MXM form factor. Being packed in a MXM type solution means that this GPU will be housed in a range of desktop and mobility solutions and confirms that NVIDIA will have both HBM2 and GDDR5X GPUs when Pascal hits the market. The GPU shown in the pictures above is presumably based on the Maxwell architecture and looks quite similar to the GeForce GTX 980M graphics chip that is also offered in the MXM package.
I'll never forget this:
And this is from http://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/event/20091001_318660.html
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
I'm not saying any of these rumors are real. I'm just commenting based on the idea of if it is true.
K1 isn't 20nm, and there is no reason to go with that anyways. X1 isn't exactly new now let alone in March of 17.
The bigger question would be is this the X1 or is this the mobile version of Parker (ie not the car version of this chipset).
Samsung doesn't exactly make full chipsets. I mean they do, but they rely on mali for GPU.
While it's true performance was an issue and tdp hampered the chips especially in phones, the modem was and is a big issue. It's an issue for all of the manufacturers. That's the whole reason Nvidia did that big presentation on having a software programmable modem to try and say hey this might save costs.
Tegra always had to have a separate modem where as Qualcomm modems were integrated in their chipset. That has always been a big deal. Samsung bailed on the 810 cause of heat concerns but still has to pay Qualcomm for the modem in the S6.
Shit like that matters in the phone space yet has no baring on the NX.
Pixel C was $499, but Google is running a 25% off deal right now which shows they probably were just charging $500 as that's the going rate for a device such as the Surface 3, iPad Air 2, Pixel C ect...
NeOak
Member
Tegra for phones died before integrated LTE modems were the norm. Phones back then still used Qualcomm SoCs with external modem chips for LTE. TDP killed it.
Apple still uses a external modem today anyway.
Edit: According to Wikipedia, these phones use the Tegra 4i (Tegra 4 GPU with Tegra 3 CPU cores): Blackphone, LG G2 mini LTE, Wiko Highway 4G, Explay 4Game, Wiko Wax QMobile Noir LT-250
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
S4 chipset from Qualcomm had an integrated LTE modem. That's of the same gen as the Tegra 3 which was used in devices like the One X+.
Call it confirmation bias if you want, but I'm starting to believe that this new information confirms my previously held beliefs
Seriously, though, if both this rumour and Emily Rogers' rumour are true (and I'm taking both with a healthy dose of salt), then they both tie into a theory that I had that Nintendo's most sensible route to take with NX hardware is to design a home console that's on the low end of the XBO/PS4 ballpark, and a handheld with a low-res screen but an SoC that's as powerful as possible. Here are a couple of snippets from my posts on the matter over the past year or so:
(Link to full post)
(Link to full post)
(Link to full post)
While writing those I was under the assumption that AMD would be providing the chips, but the logic still stands if Nvidia is providing the SoCs for each machine (although you can replace 14nm with 16nm). It may even explain why Nintendo would choose Nvidia over AMD. Even if Tegra didn't work out with 3DS, Nvidia still has a much better history than AMD in this market segment, and if Nintendo's primary goals were the three above, then Nvidia may have been the better option purely on the basis of being able to offer a higher-performance handheld part, or Nintendo having more faith in them being able to deliver a higher-performance handheld part.
As an example, consider the TX1. Test silicon would have been available around the time Nintendo were making these decisions, so it's reasonable to believe Nintendo could have been given it as an example part of what Nvidia could do in this kind of thermal envelope. Of course, Nintendo would have to clock down the TX1 considerably from the 1GHz GPU clock you see in the Shield TV, but when clocked down to around 500MHz the GPU reportedly draws just 1.5W (just the GPU, not the full chip), which puts it within handheld territory, and even within the ballpark of one quarter of Xbox One's performance. Compared to that, AMD would have handed them Mullins, a binned part which would have provided a fraction of the performance when clocked down to fit a handheld power draw. This isn't to say AMD couldn't put together a competitive chip with Polaris on 14nm if they really tried, but Nintendo may well have seen Nvidia as the lower-risk option at the time, and if their entire strategy with NX hinges on them getting as much performance as possible out of their handheld SoC then I can see them switching vendors to Nvidia to ensure that they get that performance.
Why would their entire strategy hinge on getting as much performance as possible out of their handheld SoC? Well, as much as many people on GAF might like to think, Nintendo's best strategy for bringing more third parties to their consoles and convincing players to move over to their hardware isn't just to bring out the most crazy-powerful home console hardware possible. It didn't work for them with the N64 and Gamecube, and there's no reason to believe it would work for them now. Nintendo should leverage the one advantage they have over their competition; a line of successful handhelds with healthy install bases. Nintendo shouldn't be trying to convince third parties to develop games which run on the successor to a console which sold under 15 million, they should be trying to convince third parties to develop games which run across two devices, the predecessors of which sold over 70 million. And unlike Nintendo's home consoles, where EA, Activision, etc, can reasonably claim that any sales of their games are simply cannibalising sales on other platforms, handhelds would be a genuinely expanded market for them, as many people pretty much only play games on handhelds.
To actually convince third parties, though, they'd need to make porting a game to both devices as simple and cheap as possible. This means making a console that's powerful enough to easily port PS4/XBO games to and making a handheld that's able to play those games with as little work as possible at 480p/540p. Making a console competitive with PS4 and XBO isn't an issue, you just go to AMD and say "build me one of those". Making a handheld that can play games with XBO quality graphics at around a quarter the resolution for $200 isn't. Assuming your home console has precisely XBO performance and games run at 1080p on it (though most multiplats don't) you're looking at a mobile GPU with 325 AMD Gflops of performance to "easily" scale down the games to run at 540p on the handheld. If you're looking to compete with PS4 in home console performance, then 450 AMD Gflops is your target with the handheld. God help you if you try to compete with PS4K.
The point of this is that the higher the performance you can squeeze out of your handheld SoC, the better this strategy works. Pretty much the only limit on home console performance is cost, but handheld performance is intrinsically limited by architecture and manufacturing processes, so the performance of the handheld becomes the variable; the more you push it up the closer you can get to XBO and PS4 with your home console while keeping a small relative performance gap between the two devices. If your handheld is barely more powerful than the Vita, then the strategy simply doesn't work, whereas if you can somehow push it up to one quarter of PS4's performance you'll probably be swimming in third party support. Some games are going to be too CPU limited to run on the handheld no matter what (eg Assassin's Creed), but getting versions of CoD, FIFA, Battlefront, etc. which run on both home console and handheld (in non-gimped form) would be the best chance Nintendo's got of winning over gamers who would choose MS or Sony's consoles by default.
Now, within one day, we have one rumour which indicates the home NX is closer to XBO than PS4 in performance and that there's "a good reason" why Polaris rumours are unfounded, and we have a second rumour saying that Nintendo is using a Tegra chip on the handheld, which in its currently available off-the shelf forms (even clocked down to fit Nintendo's TDP) would provide substantially higher levels of performance than most people would have expected from the handheld. It ties in pretty much exactly with what I had been arguing Nintendo's approach should be, but for the switch from AMD to Nvidia. I'm still hesitant to put too much faith in these rumours, but if they were true it would definitely seem like Nintendo is going all-in on the shared ecosystem between home console and handheld.
Seriously, though, if both this rumour and Emily Rogers' rumour are true (and I'm taking both with a healthy dose of salt), then they both tie into a theory that I had that Nintendo's most sensible route to take with NX hardware is to design a home console that's on the low end of the XBO/PS4 ballpark, and a handheld with a low-res screen but an SoC that's as powerful as possible. Here are a couple of snippets from my posts on the matter over the past year or so:
Thraktor said:
(Link to full post)
Thraktor said:
(Link to full post)
Thraktor said:
(Link to full post)
While writing those I was under the assumption that AMD would be providing the chips, but the logic still stands if Nvidia is providing the SoCs for each machine (although you can replace 14nm with 16nm). It may even explain why Nintendo would choose Nvidia over AMD. Even if Tegra didn't work out with 3DS, Nvidia still has a much better history than AMD in this market segment, and if Nintendo's primary goals were the three above, then Nvidia may have been the better option purely on the basis of being able to offer a higher-performance handheld part, or Nintendo having more faith in them being able to deliver a higher-performance handheld part.
As an example, consider the TX1. Test silicon would have been available around the time Nintendo were making these decisions, so it's reasonable to believe Nintendo could have been given it as an example part of what Nvidia could do in this kind of thermal envelope. Of course, Nintendo would have to clock down the TX1 considerably from the 1GHz GPU clock you see in the Shield TV, but when clocked down to around 500MHz the GPU reportedly draws just 1.5W (just the GPU, not the full chip), which puts it within handheld territory, and even within the ballpark of one quarter of Xbox One's performance. Compared to that, AMD would have handed them Mullins, a binned part which would have provided a fraction of the performance when clocked down to fit a handheld power draw. This isn't to say AMD couldn't put together a competitive chip with Polaris on 14nm if they really tried, but Nintendo may well have seen Nvidia as the lower-risk option at the time, and if their entire strategy with NX hinges on them getting as much performance as possible out of their handheld SoC then I can see them switching vendors to Nvidia to ensure that they get that performance.
Why would their entire strategy hinge on getting as much performance as possible out of their handheld SoC? Well, as much as many people on GAF might like to think, Nintendo's best strategy for bringing more third parties to their consoles and convincing players to move over to their hardware isn't just to bring out the most crazy-powerful home console hardware possible. It didn't work for them with the N64 and Gamecube, and there's no reason to believe it would work for them now. Nintendo should leverage the one advantage they have over their competition; a line of successful handhelds with healthy install bases. Nintendo shouldn't be trying to convince third parties to develop games which run on the successor to a console which sold under 15 million, they should be trying to convince third parties to develop games which run across two devices, the predecessors of which sold over 70 million. And unlike Nintendo's home consoles, where EA, Activision, etc, can reasonably claim that any sales of their games are simply cannibalising sales on other platforms, handhelds would be a genuinely expanded market for them, as many people pretty much only play games on handhelds.
To actually convince third parties, though, they'd need to make porting a game to both devices as simple and cheap as possible. This means making a console that's powerful enough to easily port PS4/XBO games to and making a handheld that's able to play those games with as little work as possible at 480p/540p. Making a console competitive with PS4 and XBO isn't an issue, you just go to AMD and say "build me one of those". Making a handheld that can play games with XBO quality graphics at around a quarter the resolution for $200 isn't. Assuming your home console has precisely XBO performance and games run at 1080p on it (though most multiplats don't) you're looking at a mobile GPU with 325 AMD Gflops of performance to "easily" scale down the games to run at 540p on the handheld. If you're looking to compete with PS4 in home console performance, then 450 AMD Gflops is your target with the handheld. God help you if you try to compete with PS4K.
The point of this is that the higher the performance you can squeeze out of your handheld SoC, the better this strategy works. Pretty much the only limit on home console performance is cost, but handheld performance is intrinsically limited by architecture and manufacturing processes, so the performance of the handheld becomes the variable; the more you push it up the closer you can get to XBO and PS4 with your home console while keeping a small relative performance gap between the two devices. If your handheld is barely more powerful than the Vita, then the strategy simply doesn't work, whereas if you can somehow push it up to one quarter of PS4's performance you'll probably be swimming in third party support. Some games are going to be too CPU limited to run on the handheld no matter what (eg Assassin's Creed), but getting versions of CoD, FIFA, Battlefront, etc. which run on both home console and handheld (in non-gimped form) would be the best chance Nintendo's got of winning over gamers who would choose MS or Sony's consoles by default.
Now, within one day, we have one rumour which indicates the home NX is closer to XBO than PS4 in performance and that there's "a good reason" why Polaris rumours are unfounded, and we have a second rumour saying that Nintendo is using a Tegra chip on the handheld, which in its currently available off-the shelf forms (even clocked down to fit Nintendo's TDP) would provide substantially higher levels of performance than most people would have expected from the handheld. It ties in pretty much exactly with what I had been arguing Nintendo's approach should be, but for the switch from AMD to Nvidia. I'm still hesitant to put too much faith in these rumours, but if they were true it would definitely seem like Nintendo is going all-in on the shared ecosystem between home console and handheld.
NeOak
Member
Hmm, true. I may have my timelines skewed then.
Bravo.
Tbh, i've been tempted in trying to get a TX1 with a educational discount. Thing is, I have no use for it lol
NeOak
Member
James Scott
Banned
Good post, Thraktor.
For the time being, all Nintendo really needs is a system that performs like the Xbox One+ and the portable at decent strength.
With that power it's enough to get any AAA multiplatform game so that eliminates that barrier with the only one being Nintendo's relationships with 3rd parties. And, if Nintendo doesn't get 3rd parties they're not stuck with a very expensive machine that's hard to give full support to.
If the handheld is a 3DS-like success once again or more (being conservatively priced at launch with a better line up that's very possible) that's really all Nintendo needs this gen to survive even if the NX console faces a Wii U like situation sales wise.
Worst case scenario, repeat of the gen hardware sales wise but they can invest more into games knowing that the install base for these games is considerably larger than just making a Wii U game was this gen.
Best case scenario, the NX console becomes a very big success with every major AAA multiplatform release alongside nintendo's biggest 1st party output ever.
It's a long shot, but that sounds possible and pretty good to me.
Just need to be easy enough to develop for and at least slightly better than Xbox One to not be the "worst port of x game".
There shouldn't be any need to worry about NX competing with PS4.5 or the PS5/Xbox 2.
If the time comes Nintendo can just release an upgrade to the hardware to match the needs of consumers.
For the time being, all Nintendo really needs is a system that performs like the Xbox One+ and the portable at decent strength.
With that power it's enough to get any AAA multiplatform game so that eliminates that barrier with the only one being Nintendo's relationships with 3rd parties. And, if Nintendo doesn't get 3rd parties they're not stuck with a very expensive machine that's hard to give full support to.
If the handheld is a 3DS-like success once again or more (being conservatively priced at launch with a better line up that's very possible) that's really all Nintendo needs this gen to survive even if the NX console faces a Wii U like situation sales wise.
Worst case scenario, repeat of the gen hardware sales wise but they can invest more into games knowing that the install base for these games is considerably larger than just making a Wii U game was this gen.
Best case scenario, the NX console becomes a very big success with every major AAA multiplatform release alongside nintendo's biggest 1st party output ever.
It's a long shot, but that sounds possible and pretty good to me.
Just need to be easy enough to develop for and at least slightly better than Xbox One to not be the "worst port of x game".
There shouldn't be any need to worry about NX competing with PS4.5 or the PS5/Xbox 2.
If the time comes Nintendo can just release an upgrade to the hardware to match the needs of consumers.
LordOfChaos
Member
Huh. After Nintendo dumped them for the 3DS when Nvidia under delivered?
Heck, after every console maker who partnered with them ditched them the following generation, likely due to the same thing as Intel, both wanting to retain control of their chips?
But...It's SemiAccurate....Their title is a fair self description.
Jen-Hyun Huang, taking a loss? Nvidia defends their margins like Intel or Apple.
Heck, after every console maker who partnered with them ditched them the following generation, likely due to the same thing as Intel, both wanting to retain control of their chips?
But...It's SemiAccurate....Their title is a fair self description.
Jen-Hyun Huang, taking a loss? Nvidia defends their margins like Intel or Apple.
LordOfChaos
Member
Knowing the chip designer tells you nothing about its performance. I'd *hope* something so much newer would look down on the Vita from a mountain, but just knowing it's Nvidia isn't proof of that.
I noticed OP also says it doesn't know which generation of Tegra processors...But does the article even know for sure it's a Tegra, and nothing semicustom?
I just don't see much value in the console if this is the case. If the handheld can do everything the console can do, I am going to imagine most people will just buy the handheld. It is not too far off from the hybrid idea if you ask me.
Now I'm not saying it won't be the case, but that strategy is all but getting out of the console space IMO.
Does the existence of the iPad mean Apple will stop selling iPhones?
Eolz
Member
Great post as usual Thraktor. Lots of good info and speculation, even if opinions are different.
Tegra from 2 gens ago, even semi custom, would still be a great leap above the Vita.
That said, yes, it doesn't tell much on the final performance until we know more about it, just that it might be modern enough and better for cross platform ports basically.
Tegra from 2 gens ago, even semi custom, would still be a great leap above the Vita.
That said, yes, it doesn't tell much on the final performance until we know more about it, just that it might be modern enough and better for cross platform ports basically.
LordOfChaos
Member
It sure would. Nintendo also released a 200Gflop GPU console in 2012 and a ARM11 handheld in 2011. They can always, err, impress. I'm very much in wait and see mode here, not making any such assumptions after the Wii U speculation.
Other way around? It's 500Gflops in a comparable measure to the Vita, and it claims 1Tflop by counting half precision rate (FP16).
No, but that isn't really a great analogy. Nintendo's consoles have been trending down for a while, and now you will give consumers another reason not to get it. You certainly cannot assume that if it works for the iPhone/iPad, it will work for Nintendo. If what you predict is true, the amount of people who want to play their NX handheld games on a TV so badly that they would pay an additionally ~$300 will be less than the amount of people who got a Wii U IMO.