Support NeoGAF

[ethomaz]

Well, the Tegra X1 was targeting a market, as well... and we know how that turned out. So you'll forgive me if I don't believe all of Nvidia's bluster when you consider that the Switch is the first widely-marketable product to use the X1 chipset. The only automotive company using Tegra right now is Tesla Motors, and they have such a small percentage of automobile sales that betting the chipset's future on it is questionable with several competing options.

That goes against that where they said in 2015.

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/38412-nvidia-tegra-chips-in-30-million-cars

 

[mazillion]

People keep saying this quote is arrogant.

Why? Nvidia's business model definitely doesn't demand that they do most of the things that are typically required to market and sell consoles. It's literally not their business.

Their business is to make chips that other companies think are suitable architectures for those companies own businesses.

Agreed, to me that's just sounds like their (slightly weird) way of saying they left their comfort zone to deliver the Switch hardware

 

[ggx2ac]

It's rather doubtful that console h/w financials will be able to justify anything for a future Tegra evolution. Tegra is basically targeted at automotive/AI/IOT now, and I don't think that this will change in the future. It does put Nintendo in an interesting position though as they may not have any "off the shelf" h/w options from NV for a Switch 2 which may prompt them to fund a development of custom SoC for them next time.

So was the following just lip service for investors?

Jen-Hsun Huang - NVIDIA Corp.
I guess you could also say that Nintendo contributed a fair amount to that growth. And over the next – as you know, the Nintendo architecture and the company tends to stick with an architecture for a very long time. And so we've worked with them now for almost two years. Several hundred engineering years have gone into the development of this incredible game console. I really believe when everybody sees it and enjoy it, they're going be amazed by it. It's really like nothing they've ever played with before. And of course, the brand, their franchise and their game content is incredible. And so I think this is a relationship that will likely last two decades and I'm super excited about it.

http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1312746

Edit: I can see what you're saying. The Tegra line will still be around due to automotive/IoT etc. I guess it depends on whether Nvidia gets more clients for Tegra for gaming applications.

If not, I can see how a custom SoC could still be an option but I thought we were proven wrong that Nvidia would do anything custom which was why Switch ended up with a stock Tegra X1.

On the other hand, maybe they won't bother with gaming applications for Tegra anymore and focus on other areas as you say. Which means making a custom SoC could be problematic if they haven't been improving power consumption of the Tegra line for mobile powered devices.

 

[ThoseDeafMutes]

It's rather doubtful that console h/w financials will be able to justify anything for a future Tegra evolution. Tegra is basically targeted at automotive/AI/IOT now, and I don't think that this will change in the future. It does put Nintendo in an interesting position though as they may not have any "off the shelf" h/w options from NV for a Switch 2 which may prompt them to fund a development of custom SoC for them next time.

As long as the margins are good, Switch might become a fairly important part of Nvidia's revenue stream if the platform continues to be successful.

It's hard to think how potent the Switch 2 might be in 5-6 years time. Presumably it'll be 1-2 gens after Xavier, assuming Nvidia and Nintendo maintain a business relationship. And by then, 4k adoption might be high enough to warrent a platform that targets reconstructed-4k for TV output, similar to PS4 pro, although probably with not quite as much overall perf.

 

[ggx2ac]

The estimate of revenue from Switch that can be made for now is that the Tegra processor business revenue looks to be split into automotive and gaming when looking at the revenue by market segment.

We know since at least Q3 FY2017 that Switch has contributed to revenue for gaming.

For the current quarter the Tegra processor business revenue is $332 million, $140 million of that revenue is from automotive.

That leaves $192 million which should be for gaming so the Switch accounts for anywhere up to that amount but we don't know the exact amount when Nvidia makes money from their Shield products etc.

 

[Calm Mind]

This quote is amazingly arrogant and awesome.

I respect his honesty.

 

[Polygonal_Sprite]

This quote is amazingly arrogant and awesome.

So arrogant they needed Nintendo to save their shitty mobile gaming device business

 

[brad-t]

People keep saying this quote is arrogant.

Why? Nvidia's business model definitely doesn't demand that they do most of the things that are typically required to market and sell consoles. It's literally not their business.

Their business is to make chips that other companies think are suitable architectures for those companies own businesses.

Exactly ... I have no idea how others are interpreting it to conclude that it's arrogant.

 

[Cels]

I mean my boy Jen Hsun flexes on stage. He has become too powerful.

you might say he has...irresponsible levels of power...

he's always been kind of a loose cannon, i first took note of this when intel was developing larrabee and then he said that they were ready to open a can of whoop ass to counter intel

"how much faster can you render the blue screen of death?"

 

[NewGame]

People keep saying this quote is arrogant.

Why? Nvidia's business model definitely doesn't demand that they do most of the things that are typically required to market and sell consoles. It's literally not their business.

Their business is to make chips that other companies think are suitable architectures for those companies own businesses.

I agree, can someone please unpack this statement?

 

[E-phonk]

It's hard to think how potent the Switch 2 might be in 5-6 years time. Presumably it'll be 1-2 gens after Xavier, assuming Nvidia and Nintendo maintain a business relationship. And by then, 4k adoption might be high enough to warrent a platform that targets reconstructed-4k for TV output, similar to PS4 pro, although probably with not quite as much overall perf.

I think the first hardware revision of the Switch chipwise could introduce a new "console" mode, and make the current console mode the new portable mode.
That would give them 100% compatibility, and still introduce a higher power mode. If I'm not mistaken even current switch units can run in console mode while portable, but it just drains the battery like crazy (and let's the fans kick in).

So currently
Portable: TX1 Portable
Console: TX1 console mode

Future:
Portable bc mode: TX1 portable with longer battery life
Portable: TX2 portable = TX1 console mode
Console: TX2 console mode

 

[Angel Whispers]

That quote continues the idea that Nvidia put a lot of effort into the Switch. Wasn't it concluded it's just a stock X1? Are there other elements of Switch's chips that Nvidia would have had to work a lot on?

Nope - I don't wish to pick on you here, but the only thing that's accurate about your post is that it was a fast conclusion, and the rest should be disregarded. What you had was a bunch of fancy die shots and fast conclusions based on speculations and rumour mills, but they never actually confirmed anything. The Switch doesn't have a Tegra X1; That much has been confirmed on multiple occasions by Nintendo, Nvidia and "third party" developers before and after launch, and there are very word-specific details which are widely available on the Internet - The biggest disgrace in this entire discussion is that the collective horse's mouth (all consistent with each other, no less), has been dismissed as "PR fluff" in favour of rumour mills. Your favourite publications let have you down big time, because they've been nowhere near as robust in reporting it. Nvidia literally told you here, too, and on top of that, there are a host of technicalities, existing software, and even legal reasons why the "Tegra X1" proposal isn't possible.

 

[cw_sasuke]

As long as the margins are good, Switch might become a fairly important part of Nvidia's revenue stream if the platform continues to be successful.

It's hard to think how potent the Switch 2 might be in 5-6 years time. Presumably it'll be 1-2 gens after Xavier, assuming Nvidia and Nintendo maintain a business relationship. And by then, 4k adoption might be high enough to warrent a platform that targets reconstructed-4k for TV output, similar to PS4 pro, although probably with not quite as much overall perf.

Dont think anyone is waiting that long - expect ,ore powerful hardware and new gens with full BC every 2-3 years.On the mobile space we have companies doubling specs while improving battery life every 12 months - Nintendo doesnt need follow that extreme...but they wont wait 3-4 years either.

They wont repeat the Wii mistake again where they waited too long to upgrade the Hardware while they were on top - they need to keep the Switch train and not give people any reasons to leave their consoles. So yeah - the 300 main Switch SKU should get a hardware update in the next 24 months - they can still sell the current Switch SKU as a entry level Switch by this point.

 

[Skittzo0413]

Nope - I don't wish to pick on you here, but the only thing that's accurate about your post is that it was a fast conclusion, and the rest should be disregarded. What you had was a bunch of fancy die shots and fast conclusions based on speculations and rumour mills, but they never actually confirmed anything. The Switch doesn't have a Tegra X1; That much has been confirmed on multiple occasions by Nintendo, Nvidia and "third party" developers before and after launch, and there are very word-specific details which are widely available on the Internet - The biggest disgrace in this entire discussion is that the collective horse's mouth (all consistent with each other, no less), has been dismissed as "PR fluff" in favour of rumour mills. Your favourite publications let have you down big time, because they've been nowhere near as robust in reporting it. Nvidia literally told you here, too, and on top of that, there are a host of technicalities, existing software, and even legal reasons why the "Tegra X1" proposal isn't possible.

Errr... Those die shots have been out for months now, has anyone been able to find any difference from a Tegra X1? It's one thing to have a rumor saying it's the same thing, but this is photographic evidence which seems to contradict Nvidia's statement of it being a custom chip.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

I think the first hardware revision of the Switch chipwise could introduce a new "console" mode, and make the current console mode the new portable mode.
That would give them 100% compatibility, and still introduce a higher power mode. If I'm not mistaken even current switch units can run in console mode while portable, but it just drains the battery like crazy (and let's the fans kick in).

So currently
Portable: TX1 Portable
Console: TX1 console mode

Future:
Portable bc mode: TX1 portable with longer battery life
Portable: TX2 portable = TX1 console mode
Console: TX2 console mode

Considering as-is some things are barely or not at all different in Switch's docked and undocked mode (CPU speed, memory bandwidth, RAM itself), I think treating current docked mode as a new in-between mode would be a bit troublesome. Do those things that were already not improved still not get improved for the new console mode to keep things as simple as they are now? Or do games that want to take advantage of the new console mode further have to take into account newly introduced differences in CPU?

 

[Cow Mengde]

So was the following just lip service for investors?



http://m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=1312746

Edit: I can see what you're saying. The Tegra line will still be around due to automotive/IoT etc. I guess it depends on whether Nvidia gets more clients for Tegra for gaming applications.

If not, I can see how a custom SoC could still be an option but I thought we were proven wrong that Nvidia would do anything custom which was why Switch ended up with a stock Tegra X1.

On the other hand, maybe they won't bother with gaming applications for Tegra anymore and focus on other areas as you say. Which means making a custom SoC could be problematic if they haven't been improving power consumption of the Tegra line for mobile powered devices.

When were the investors' comment delivered?

It's possible that things change as it progresses. Maybe they were planning on working together long term. It's possible that Nintendo's disappointed that they couldn't deliver the custom Tegra and had to use a off the shelf part.

Based on all the rumors before the system was launched, it sounds like they were trying to use a more efficient chip, but somehow ended up using something less efficient and power hungry.

 

[RootCause]

they better do a powerful X2 for the future switch right now

I'd rather they go for a powervr instead of another Nvidia gpu. More efficient, while providing better performance. Just look at the A9X.

 

[ggx2ac]

When were the investors' comment delivered?

The one you're quoting? It's in the link, around November last year.

Based on all the rumors before the system was launched, it sounds like they were trying to use a more efficient chip, but somehow ended up using something less efficient and power hungry.

Err what rumours specifically, especially since you could be citing any rumour as fact.

 

[UnemployedVillain]

I'd rather they go for a powervr instead of another Nvidia gpu. More efficient, while providing better performance. Just look at the A9X.

Is this a joke? It will 100% be another Nvidia chip. That was literally the entire point of partnering with them

 

[Mifec]

you might say he has...irresponsible levels of power...

he's always been kind of a loose cannon, i first took note of this when intel was developing larrabee and then he said that they were ready to open a can of whoop ass to counter intel

"how much faster can you render the blue screen of death?"

Oh I know, I got a lot of nvda shares so I follow Jen-Hsun "memes" closely.

 

[ggx2ac]

Is this a joke? It will 100% be another Nvidia chip. That was literally the entire point of partnering with them

This.

It wasn't just getting hardware, Nvidia gave them software support too including development tools seeing as how Nintendo really fucked up with getting good development tools for third parties with the Wii U.

I don't expect Nintendo to just drop Nvidia in the short term unless they are planning to not rely on third parties as well.

 

[RootCause]

Is this a joke? It will 100% be another Nvidia chip. That was literally the entire point of partnering with them

I'm saying what I would prefer. Not what needs to happen. Come on. 🙄

 

[Cow Mengde]

Err what rumours specifically, especially since you could be citing any rumour as fact.

I never stated it as fact. I even used the word rumor. They were from the GAF insiders that have been saying it's a 16nm chip. Plus, it is extremely strange to use a 20nm chip now. It's not about being more powerful, but rather something that's smaller, and runs cooler, and lower power draw to benefit its portable design.

 

[ggx2ac]

I never stated it as fact. I even used the word rumor. They were from the GAF insiders that have been saying it's a 16nm chip. Plus, it is extremely strange to use a 20nm chip now. It's not about being more powerful, but rather something that's smaller, and runs cooler, and lower power draw to benefit its portable design.

So who said this?

 

[Hermii]

I never stated it as fact. I even used the word rumor. They were from the GAF insiders that have been saying it's a 16nm chip. Plus, it is extremely strange to use a 20nm chip now. It's not about being more powerful, but rather something that's smaller, and runs cooler, and lower power draw to benefit its portable design.

It's a standard x1. Accept it. Techinsight proved it once and for all.

 

[llien]

That goes against that where they said in 2015.

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/38412-nvidia-tegra-chips-in-30-million-cars

Welp, they said:

Jen-Hsun Huang confirmed in company's financial Q2 conference call that the Tegra found its way under the bonnet of 30 million cars.

Which is quite a number, considering that 90 million cars have been produced back in 2015.
Not clear to how many years does the 30 million figure appl, though, and then they also stated:

More than 50 automotive companies are interesting in Nvidia's deep leaning capable Drive PX platform in order to make their car more autonomous.

It's hard to think how potent the Switch 2 might be in 5-6 years time. Presumably it'll be 1-2 gens after Xavier, assuming Nvidia and Nintendo maintain a business relationship. And by then, 4k adoption might be high enough to warrent a platform that targets reconstructed-4k for TV output, similar to PS4 pro, although probably with not quite as much overall perf.

No offence, but this reminds me the expectations that Switch would be more powerful, hardware wise, than Xbone/PS4.

 

[Durante]

Nope - I don't wish to pick on you here, but the only thing that's accurate about your post is that it was a fast conclusion, and the rest should be disregarded. What you had was a bunch of fancy die shots and fast conclusions based on speculations and rumour mills, but they never actually confirmed anything. The Switch doesn't have a Tegra X1; That much has been confirmed on multiple occasions by Nintendo, Nvidia and "third party" developers before and after launch, and there are very word-specific details which are widely available on the Internet - The biggest disgrace in this entire discussion is that the collective horse's mouth (all consistent with each other, no less), has been dismissed as "PR fluff" in favour of rumour mills. Your favourite publications let have you down big time, because they've been nowhere near as robust in reporting it. Nvidia literally told you here, too, and on top of that, there are a host of technicalities, existing software, and even legal reasons why the "Tegra X1" proposal isn't possible.

Are you joking?

Die shots don't lie, PR does.

(Although in this case I don't think there is even any official PR out there that denies it being X1)

 

[Rodin]

I'd rather they go for a powervr instead of another Nvidia gpu. More efficient, while providing better performance. Just look at the A9X.

"Just look at a worse performing custom chip by Apple that will never exist outside of Apple products"

There's a reason they went with Nvidia, and it's keeping the same ARM+Nvidia "architecture" with every new iteration/form factor for native compatibility with older games.

 

[Hermii]

"Just look at a worse performing custom chip by Apple that will never exist outside of Apple products"

There's a reason they went with Nvidia, and it's keeping the same ARM+Nvidia "architecture" with every new iteration/form factor for native compatibility with older games.

Not to mention full dx12 featureset and pc devs familiarity with hardware and toolsets.

I think the software/ tools part was a much bigger factor in Nintendos decision making choosing Nvidia than people give credit for.

Are you joking?

Die shots don't lie, PR does.

(Although in this case I don't think there is even any official PR out there that denies it being X1)

The official PR says "customized Tegra", but I guess thats such a loose term they can change the clockspeeds and technicly be right.

 

[Cow Mengde]

So who said this?

Nathan Drake in the GAF NX threads. They're closed by now.

It's a standard x1. Accept it. Techinsight proved it once and for all.

Never said I didn't accept it. I agree it's an X1.

The reason I brought this up is that perhaps Nvidia failed to deliver a chip that Nintendo wanted, so they had to shove an X1 into it because they had no other choice.

Perhaps behind the scenes, Nintendo is already unhappy with what Nvidia delivered, that's why Nvidia is now changing tunes. Nvidia seems to have a habit of pissing off console makers with the GPUs.

For all we know, Switch 2 or whatever the next gen will be will go back to AMD for a portable Ryzen chip.

This is all just pure speculation of course.

 

[conpfreak]

Nathan Drake in the GAF NX threads. They're closed by now.



Never said I didn't accept it. I agree it's an X1.

The reason I brought this up is that perhaps Nvidia failed to deliver a chip that Nintendo wanted, so they had to shove an X1 into it because they had no other choice.

Perhaps behind the scenes, Nintendo is already unhappy with what Nvidia delivered, that's why Nvidia is now changing tunes. Nvidia seems to have a habit of pissing off console makers with the GPUs.

For all we know, Switch 2 or whatever the next gen will be will go back to AMD for a portable Ryzen chip.

This is all just pure speculation of course.

It sure is and irresponsible as well. It's been stated multiple times why it's likely a standard X1 was included in the Switch over a Pascal-based Tegra chip. At least that speculation is based on facts and not wild guesses about Nvidia and Nintendo's business relationship.

 

[Hermii]

Nathan Drake in the GAF NX threads. They're closed by now.



Never said I didn't accept it. I agree it's an X1.

The reason I brought this up is that perhaps Nvidia failed to deliver a chip that Nintendo wanted, so they had to shove an X1 into it because they had no other choice.

Perhaps behind the scenes, Nintendo is already unhappy with what Nvidia delivered, that's why Nvidia is now changing tunes. Nvidia seems to have a habit of pissing off console makers with the GPUs.

For all we know, Switch 2 or whatever the next gen will be will go back to AMD for a portable Ryzen chip.

This is all just pure speculation of course.

Its very probable that at some point they considered a pascal chip, but for one reason or another ended up with an X1. There is no reason to think Nintendo is unhappy with Nvidia however. Nvidia invested hundreds of man years into creating a dev environment which so far devs and I bet Nintendo are extremely happy with. I highly doubt they are going to throw all that away for switch 2 instead of just going with an X2, or maybe they get a custom soc next time.

 

[Graphics Horse]

That goes against that where they said in 2015.

http://www.fudzilla.com/news/processors/38412-nvidia-tegra-chips-in-30-million-cars

Nvidia processors are in a lot of cars infotainment systems without them having any autonomous driving features.

 

[ggx2ac]

Nathan Drake in the GAF NX threads. They're closed by now.



Never said I didn't accept it. I agree it's an X1.

The reason I brought this up is that perhaps Nvidia failed to deliver a chip that Nintendo wanted, so they had to shove an X1 into it because they had no other choice.

Perhaps behind the scenes, Nintendo is already unhappy with what Nvidia delivered, that's why Nvidia is now changing tunes. Nvidia seems to have a habit of pissing off console makers with the GPUs.

For all we know, Switch 2 or whatever the next gen will be will go back to AMD for a portable Ryzen chip.

This is all just pure speculation of course.

You understand right? It was only him. No one else ever got info that NX was going to run on Pascal.

The only people that ever got the NX specs correct were Emily Rogers and Eurogamer.

You took a rumour that never ended up being true and you are still trying to make sense out of it with hardware fanfiction.

How did Nvidia fail to deliver a chip if this is what Nintendo ordered? That doesn't make sense.

Because it wasn't Pascal? That's doesn't make sense. We know Nintendo rejected Nvidia once before and that was when the 3DS was rumoured to use a Tegra 2 but then Nintendo changed to DMP for the GPU. (Don't forget, that one also came from Eurogamer whom have a pretty solid track record.)

 

[lensoftruth]

And of course, there's more to the system than the x1 chip.