Maybe I'm dumb, but I don't quite understand this. How would performance not be impacted? It would have to be Maxwell at 16nm for that to be true no?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Ventura Beat: Nintendo Switch graphics are based on Nvidia's Maxwell Architecture
- Thread starter jbug617
- Start date
Maybe I'm dumb, but I don't quite understand this. How would performance not be impacted? It would have to be Maxwell at 16nm for that to be true no?
Skittzo0413
Member
You're correct that performance will indeed be impacted, although this article says nothing about what the process node is (beyond the author's clearly poor speculation). So it could easily be Maxwell on 16nm process but we don't know at this point.
16nm gains power efficiency over 20nm by 60% at the same clock rates, according to Nvidia. It also gains 40% performance at the same power draw also according to Nvidia. This is two ways of saying that it gains increased performance per watt, which definitely indicates that a 20nm Maxwell product likely wouldn't be able to perform as well as a 16nm Pascal (or Maxwell) product.
In portable mode, we might not notice a difference beyond battery life because we really don't know where they plan to clock it, but when docked having the chip be on a 20nm process will indeed limit the upper end of its possible clock speed, which in turn limits its performance. Now, you can have 3SMs on a 20nm Maxwell device which should outperform 2SMs on a 16nm Pascal or Maxwell device, but in the context of this thread, if the only differences are 20nm or 16nm then yes, 16nm can perform better than 20nm.
Switch (Portable Mode) - NVidia Shield TV
Switch (Console Mode) - 1.5x NVidia Shield TV
Xbox One
PS4
This is how I reckon the power levels will be. Basically Switch can handle ports due to familiar architecture and support for major engines but games will need to be downgraded so much where not many devs will want to spend the time to bother porting such a inferior version so high end games like Battlefield 1 won't get Switch ports even though its possible.
Switch (Console Mode) - 1.5x NVidia Shield TV
Xbox One
PS4
This is how I reckon the power levels will be. Basically Switch can handle ports due to familiar architecture and support for major engines but games will need to be downgraded so much where not many devs will want to spend the time to bother porting such a inferior version so high end games like Battlefield 1 won't get Switch ports even though its possible.
Maybe I expressed my idea wrongly. The performance will be impacted, especially for the console mode, but the battery will be more directly affected.
We have a fixed target resolution for the handheld. Which is 720p, the resolution of the screen. And a 20nm SoC would consume more power than a 16nm SoC to render the same thing. Which means the battery will drain faster. But the performance difference might not be that obvious for the handheld mode.
DrROBschiz
Member
Bleh I dont care
I have PS4 for that stuff
Switch is a big upgrade over my 3DS and Vita while giving me access to game that I couldnt be bothered to put on my WiiU
Super excited
I think that is what 16nm gains over 28nm, not 20nm process Maxwell Tegra was based on.
It's under 9000
But I thought part of the reason it was delayed out of Holiday 2016 was because they wanted the newer chip? Maybe this is why Nvidia is still bringing out their new shield?
megabytecr
Member
Question would be, does the latest Devkit have a very noticeable fan noise too, like the first Eurogamer report?
Could the devkits be using cheaper tech? I mean they should be used for development, the handheld part could only be used for quick testing the handheld mode.
It doesn't make sense to use Maxwell, and I know the yeah but Nintendo arguments, but Ninty is always looking for power draw efficiency so seems akward.
Could the devkits be using cheaper tech? I mean they should be used for development, the handheld part could only be used for quick testing the handheld mode.
It doesn't make sense to use Maxwell, and I know the yeah but Nintendo arguments, but Ninty is always looking for power draw efficiency so seems akward.
Ugh. No way, man. The difference won't be that pronounced, so ports won't be a problem. There will definitely be some cutbacks here and there, but nothing like you guys are imagining. Put that particular worry to rest. Whether or not they make games for the system won't have much to do with it's power. If you want more of those games, then buy them on the NS. I think Battlefield 1 on the NS will look great.
Neat. At least here's something to show why it doesn't make sense that Nintendo would apparently have been forced to use 20nm nodes when Nvidia skipped it very shortly after production for a reason.
Prestokidd
Neo Member
When it comes to Nintendo consoles, specs are not a big deal for me. It comes down to what games the system have and its price point.
Skittzo0413
Member
Is that true? I've seen that report thrown around here a lot and I thought it was always referring to the gains Parker got over TX1, which was on a 20nm process.
ShadowFox08
Member
Fusion with kami brah
From X1 to Parker there is a 50% performance increase in terms of Tflops, so I guess either way there is no big difference.
Beerman462
Member
Die shrinks are important. 20nm to 16nm is not a huge jump. Even so people asking for Pascal don't really seem to understand what that means. If anything they will just shrink the current X1 Maxwell SOC.
LabouredSubterfuge
Member
Looks like Nvidia found someone stupid enough to buy their old garbage. Well played.
michaelius
Banned
That how you called it garbage when made with 28nm process matches power efficiency of AMD 14nm cards. And Tegra is actually 20nm.
Battlefield 1...on Switch?
I see.
Would be so so cool to see visuals of that quality on a portable system, though.
JinjoUnchained
Member
Ventura Beat sounds like a SoCal middle school news paper. How'd they get this scoop?
If we believe this article, then it's as powerful as an Xbox One...which mean we can expect the same sort of performance as we do the Xbox One version. When docked, we know it gets a resolution and power "boost" via overclocking, so getting a nice looking Battlefield 1 wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility. If we believe this article.
sir_bumble_bee
Member
BF1 is already 720 on Xbox, what would it be on Switch? 480p mobile, 540p docked?
And nvidia is also apparently stupid enough to describe the same technology as cutting edge? That would do nothing but hurt their rep.
The system isnt going to be "old garbage".
Edit: looks like they only say something along the lines of - same architecture as the top performing graphics cards
amstradcpc
Member
mmm RSX?...
RPGCrazied
Member
So Breath of the WIld won't look that much better on Switch than Wii U?
Same
Yes, and by that claim we can also make the conclusion that it's basically a Wii U rebranded, that it will only render games in 720p, that nobody besides Nintendo will support it, that it will cost 350$ and that it's doomed.
Probably not, but that won't have too much to do with system power, its still much more capable than Wii U. It will perform a lot better and probably have higher resolution, but its a cross gen game.
Such a statement shouldn't be made, without being accompanied my hard numbers.
family_guy
Member
I'm just wondering the reason for not waiting until the fall of 2017 if it mean getting more efficient architecture that could extend battery life and performance. Are they that desperate for some revenue before the fiscal year is over?
Jose92
[Membe
Exactly!
It doesn't really state that, so I figure since people are taking this article as gospel, then we should look at all that it tells us. Still, the Xbox One does Battlefield 1 at 900p generally, the NS should be able to do the same when docked with some missing effects here and there. If we believe this article.
If we go by this video, it seems like there is very little difference between the two architectures in performance, once they are at the same clock. It's pretty much due to the clockspeed of Pascal that it has a higher performance.
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
You are just setting yourself up for disappointment. Look at the Shield TV and then look at the Switch in terms of enclosure volume. Shield TV don't also have a battery inside. You will be lucky to get Shield TV levels of power on the Switch when docked let alone 1.5X.
one thing I am not sure how to ask is whether Switch will be able to run OG PS4/X1 games. I've tried and people have been kind and explained but answers always are like "yeah, but with major compromises"
to that, my question would be.
Is porting a PS4 game to Switch
A.- like porting the Gamecube's Resident Evil 4 to mid-2000's cel-phones (which happened)??
or
B.- is it like porting it to a PS2 (like, textures are lower res, less enemies but basically the same game)?
Tech-savy GAF, please choose A or B.or explain if none of the above apply.
to that, my question would be.
Is porting a PS4 game to Switch
A.- like porting the Gamecube's Resident Evil 4 to mid-2000's cel-phones (which happened)??
or
B.- is it like porting it to a PS2 (like, textures are lower res, less enemies but basically the same game)?
Tech-savy GAF, please choose A or B.or explain if none of the above apply.
For what it's worth, alot of the space inside the Shield TV is used up by the hard drive.
It's not.
Just_myles
Member
This is the approach i'm going to take. I like 3ds but this could very well replace it.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Pls explain this to me using better anime.
Heh, yeah. I think so, too. However, I don't think the difference between the Xbox One and the NS is all that huge. Which means the game should still run fine, even if it's not as beefy as this article makes it out to be.
Though, if we're doubting the power aspect of this article, then we should doubt everything else as well. Why people are accepting this as gospel is beyond me.
foxuzamaki
Doesn't read OPs, especially not his own
I wouldn't even say major compromises, its basically like ps2 compared to gcn and xbox, at worse dream cast compared to the other 3
Damn, people thinking this is going to be Xbox One levels? That seems really unlikely. Honestly for me at least getting a fully portable Wii U would pretty awesome in itself (especially if it happened to hit the $199 mark). Expecting it to be a super-charged Wii U, anything more will be a good surprise.
foxuzamaki
Doesn't read OPs, especially not his own
Its already basically at xb1 levels, it's only a little bit weaker xb1
I think basically the same game with lower settings and resolution. Going from Xbox one to switch will be something Like going from PS4 to Xbox one I think of course depending on how well done the port is.
ss_lemonade
Member
Are performance increases becoming less prominent with each new Nintendo hardware release? Which one of the following has the biggest gap in performance?
Xbox -> Gamecube/Wii (gamecube felt like a really strong console after playing games like the RE titles and the Rogue Leader games. Wii just felt like a sidegrade with a different control scheme)
Xbox 360 -> Wii U (never owned a wii u, but I always felt like they were pretty much equal in capability, despite releasing several years after the 360)
Switch -> Xbox One (might be weaker(?) despite releasing a couple of years after the Xbox)
Xbox -> Gamecube/Wii (gamecube felt like a really strong console after playing games like the RE titles and the Rogue Leader games. Wii just felt like a sidegrade with a different control scheme)
Xbox 360 -> Wii U (never owned a wii u, but I always felt like they were pretty much equal in capability, despite releasing several years after the 360)
Switch -> Xbox One (might be weaker(?) despite releasing a couple of years after the Xbox)
Agreed.
It is too bad that apparently N is going to market it as a home console that happens to have some on-the-go stuff as a value added bonus. Marketing will be messy: a new console with less than half the power of the competition, fewer games, and the same price.
It would make more sense if they positioned it as a portable with the home part being the value add, because that is what it looks to be. 50 times (or whatever) more powerful than the 3DS! 10 times (or whatever) more powerful than the Vita! 3 times (or whatever) more powerful than iPad pro! Now there is some marketing that will get people excited.