Im not very knowledgeable but the chances are zero. This thing will be less powerful than xbox one, not nearly enough for 4k even on a Wii U game.
Nintendo Switch Dev Kit Stats Leaked? Cortex A57, 4GB RAM, 32GB Storage, Multi-Touch.
- Thread starter Robert at Zeboyd Games
- Start date
- Status
Im not very knowledgeable but the chances are zero. This thing will be less powerful than xbox one, not nearly enough for 4k even on a Wii U game.
NeOak
Member
None. 0.
That "2.25x GPU" horse shit was for Sony to justify the PS4 Pro being so mild of an upgrade and using the same anemic Jaguar CPU with just 300 Mhz extra. Especially with games not even being 1080p on the base PS4, suddenly they will be "4k" on the Pro.
The reality is that you should aim at >3x increase in terms of power to have actual 4k over 1080p.
akidnamededdy
Banned
This thing Is a tablet, man.
Polygonal_Sprite
Gold Member
Sorry guys, I didn't realise it was that out there of a thought 
. I knew Switch probably wouldn't be able to push its own exclusive games at 4k but since the WiiU GPU isn't exactly impressive then I thought there might be a chance of it doing WiiU games with like for like assets at 4k.
What about 3DS ports at 4k, more possible ?
On a related subject do Nvidia have similar tech to Sony for checkerboard resolutions ? Maybe a possible way of getting the 720p Switch games to 1080p when it's docked ?
. I knew Switch probably wouldn't be able to push its own exclusive games at 4k but since the WiiU GPU isn't exactly impressive then I thought there might be a chance of it doing WiiU games with like for like assets at 4k.What about 3DS ports at 4k, more possible ?
On a related subject do Nvidia have similar tech to Sony for checkerboard resolutions ? Maybe a possible way of getting the 720p Switch games to 1080p when it's docked ?
I wish people would stop with this people buy Nintendo consoles to buy Nintendo games. I don't buy Nintendo consoles to buy Nintendo games. I buy very few Nintendo games and most of my library is 3rd party games. The problem with 3rd parties is that they don't put the same amount of love into their games on Nintendo platforms as they do on others. I'm always looking at 3rd party games and I just want them to give me a good experience. I don't think that's too much to ask for.
For example, on the Wii i was looking forward to Deadspace. The rumored game had people interested, however, they ended up making a damned rail shooter. A rail shooter? Really? Totally sabotaged their game. Then they got mad that it didn't sell well. The first question should be, "Who the hell was going to buy that?" They obviously where thinking that they were trying to get grandmas to play their game...or kids and it was crappy because they just don't play those kinds of games. The same went for Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles: The Crystal Bearers. I was totally looking forward to that game when it was announced. I must have watched that trailer over a hundred times. However, once the director started talking about they wanted a game that grandma could play, they killed all their hype and the game went on to sell like shit. Grandmas don't play Final Fantasy (well, not many of them...). These are "core" games and should be treated as such.
This is why people get mad. There's no rocket science here. Developers should make the games their good at because that's what people are expecting, instead of trying to cater to a gamer that doesn't play their games in the first place. I feel like the last couple of generations have been this way on Nintendo systems. EA was mad that no one was buying the Wii version of Madden. Well, hell, who would do that when the game as dumbed down to cater to moms and grandmas? It was dumb.
I hope that with the NS, we don't see stuff like this. Developers should just make the game they're good at. It doesn't matter if the game is on a Nintendo platform. The company has a reputation for certain types of games and when people ask for them, they really want those games and not some crappy spinoff or dumbed down version. Or a have a version of the game with all the bells and whistles as version on other consoles. I'm still salty about not getting my damned bonus map for preordering the Wii U version of CoD Black Ops. Sure, we got it...2 years later. Ugh. Annoys the hell out of me, but for some reason, I still buy these shitty versions of the games on Nintendo hardware, even though I own all of the other systems.
Haha that one, long post in particular deserves a freaking medal.
th3sicknness
Member
I would think you are one of the rare ones then.. You shouldn't reward developers for making shitty games.... I buy Nintendo consoles because I own a PC and get most multiplats and indie games that go to the other two consoles on my PC (with exception to the uncharteds and halos). I choose Nintendo because it has completely different games than what I play on PC and their first party titles are 1st rank experiences.
The problem is as you stated we get third party experience that are sub par when compared to the other platforms due to system limitations or developers mailing it in. Developers are going to do what is easy for them within the budget they have. They are not going to go out of their way to work harder for little return. This is why Sony went to every developer they could first, second, and third party and asked them "How do we make your life easier? What do you want?" and then proceeded to make the PS4 based on that feedback.
Nintendo generally doesnt take that approach. They are so secretive about their ideas because they dont want someone to steal them and they cater to their internal development more than their external. I would assume this is because of how they build their base up and primarily because they are their biggest internal developers. Reggie says they make good games and develop hardware to build up enough of a base to entice third parties to jump on and make games.
Jawbreaker
Member
Is there any specific reason why? It seems a little silly if you own hardware capable of running a better version of those games with added perks.
Nostremitus
Member
I prefer Mass Effect 3 on Wii U even though I also own it on PC.
The gamepad integration on that game was near perfect. You can hotkey powers to the edges of the screen and the screen itself was a real-time map. It was worth the graphics trade-off... Until EA decided to pull out and it didn't get any DLC beyond what was packed in...
Gamecube was the most developer friendly system of that generation. The PS2 and especially the PS3 were not easy to develop for at all. The Wii U had some troubles at launch with unfinished tools and such like most platforms, but its not a hard system to develop for. Sony trying to be developer friendly started with the PS4.
See, here's the thing. I don't care what their reasons are. As a consumer, I only see the game in front of me and I have to decide to buy it or not. If they're going to make half-assed games with missing features, then they need to expect half-assed sales. It's as simple as that. Consumers don't owe them jack and it's their job to sell their game to me. If they don't want to do that, then that's on them. They shouldn't complain that "Nintendo owners don't buy 3rd party games".
See, the reason we keep having this discussion about 3rd party games on Nintendo platforms is that people WANT to buy their games on Nintendo platforms...otherwise it wouldn't matter at all and we wouldn't even bother discussing it. There are plenty of guys like me out there. If there weren't, then CoD: Modern Warfare wouldn't have sold as well as it did. Same with Resident Evil. People wouldn't get upset whenever a new game is announced and there isn't a Nintendo console version. I think gamers just want the same thing on whatever platform they decide to play a game on. They want a good experience without missing features and good add-on content. The moment companies say, "There will be no new content in the Wii U version." Then players just say, "And here we go again. There's no point in this." It's the same damn song and dance and it's tiring.
I buy 3rd party games on Nintendo hardware in order to experience new ways to play games. I want more motion controls or something like that. If I want a dual analog game, I can get that on my PS4. I want something new or a new angle on the same game everyone else is playing. I would kill to have Red Dead 2 on the NS with IR/pointer controls. That's my dream game. I don't care about being portable, but I want more of that Wii experience on my TV. I hoped to get it with my Wii U, but that just didn't happen. I'm hoping that the NS will finally give me what I'm looking for.
I don't care about Mario, or Zelda (I can't remember the last time I finished a Zelda game). I have no interest in Kirby, Paper Mario, or even the 2D Mario games. I don't play Smash Bros and I sometimes play Mario Kart, but only because my wife likes it and we sometimes play together. That said, the collections of games I have for Nintendo systems is huge. I own more games for the Wii than I can count. I own a ton of Wii U games, too. However, in retrospect, I own only 2 games for my PS4. One of them I never finished.
Jawbreaker
Member
That's reasonable if you prefer the control method, and I think the success of 3rd party software on the Switch will hinge on how much value people place on portability given the visual trade-offs in comparison to the other consoles and PC.
th3sicknness
Member
Strange turn of events right? PS3 was a huge success yet it was a nightmare to develop for. In turn Sony turned around and asked their developers how to make it easier and built on that feedback towards the widely successful PS4.
Nostremitus
Member
I'm hoping the Switch will offer similar control enhancements in portable mode.
th3sicknness
Member
If those 1st party games didnt exist then Nintendo would have closed shop ages ago and you wouldnt be getting your "new ways to play".
Everyone gets something different from their systems. I've been playing games since the late 70s and I've tried all kinds of stuff. I'm tried of the same stuff over and over again. I have no interest in dual analog shooters or third person games. They're hard to play for me and I end up getting frustrated. Trying to play CoD on the 360 was a lesson in frustration, but gamers, for some reason, swear by these controls and I feel like that's just not for me. It's too imprecise and trying to line up to shoot anything drives me crazy. Once I tried out Red Steel on the Wii, I was sold and have never gone back to the dual analog style of play. I played through the whole Mass Effect trilogy on my PC because mouse and keyboard is a good way to aim if there's no IR option. I was drooling over the possibility of playing Mass Effect 3 with IR controls, but Straight Right hate IR controls so it was only dual analog. No reason to even bother with that. I ended up going against my better judgement and purchased Deus Ex Director's Cut, but with no IR, it was too frustrating to play so I haven't gotten past the first area with in the warehouse. *sigh* Such a waste of money.
On top of that, I'm all about getting new experiences in play control. My favorite game of last gen was The Godfather: Blackhand Edition. Man, that game was sooooo damn fun. I commend EA for even trying it, because I tried the game on my friend's Xbox before the Wii version came out and I hated it. My friend hated it, too. Once I got the Wii version he went on to put in over 100 hours into that game. I have no idea how much I put in, but it was a lot. That's the kind of stuff I want to see, because it's awesome when done well. For this reason, I tend to buy games on Nintendo hardware over the Playstation or Xbox.
That's fine. You can buy them. They don't interest me at all. I respect that Nintendo makes those games and are good at it. They're just not for me. Don't get me wrong, I played a ton of Super Mario Bros. back in the day. I have no interest in them now. Other people do, and that's fine. I hope they enjoy them.
test_account
XP-39C²
That statement had nothing to do with CPU power though. Same thing that "PC" alone doesnt say anything about power. I agree that " super charged PC" alone might sound like its more powerful that a higher spec PC, but my 486DX2 66MHz from 1994 is still a PC. Is it false that the PS4 hardware design has (or had i 2013) had no advantage?
Starchasing
Member
Gc, wii and wii u were difficult because their controls were not standard. That makes development very hard. In the case of wii u to make a worthwile game for it you would have to design the game around the concept and that is too much to ask.
What do you mean?
Also in this case the gimmick benefits all the games. In this mobile age having a console that can be played on the go is a perfect market fit. The other gimmick (2 player console by default ) benefits almost all games, specially sports games.
And there is the other gimmick that we do not know.
th3sicknness
Member
I would assume custom joy cons are going to be the gimmick we dont know about that was essentially confirmed by the new Nintendo CEO. Maybe we will see a gamecube joy con at some point?
LordOfChaos
Member
I think that particular Bullspeak was about getting around the limits of PCI-E on PCs, not saying the CPUs were super awesome, if I recall what he said right.
My first assumption was also that Matt meant as a relative ratio between CPU and GPU, but if it's as an objective standard between all platforms and not relative that's very interesting indeed, and would rule out 4 A57s if true (per-core they're not far from Jaguar, but not 4 vs 7ish)
I think PS4 might just struggle to run Breath of the Wild in 4K so no chance Switch will and its the wrong way to go anyway. Better to just go to 1080p and increase framerate or texture quality and effects, more people will see a improvement that way. Breath of the Wild runs at 720p 30fps on WiiU. So perhaps 1080p 60fps on Switch while docked could be possible, if a decent amount of shader code can be translated to fp16. With the game running 720p 60fps in handheld mode.
lwilliams3
Member
Hmm. I would like to believe also backs up LCGeek's info, but it simply means that CPU to GPU balance is closer than with the other consoles. That is to be expected, but it's definitely a departure to how the Wii U and 3DS was designed.
I don't think Nintendo designed Zelda games for 60fps (except for ALBW due to their concerns about the 3D), so they may decide just to make sure the frame rate at a steady 30fps.
I don't notice it. It doesn't look bad to me. Maybe I need to get my eyes check out. The only thing I saw was some of the lines shimmering a maybe less than a second.
Nostremitus
Member
Always listen to Matt. When he posts, it's safe to assume his words aren't guesses.
PS3 was a huge success? I thought it was a moneypit that lost an incredible degree of audience (and dev support) to to the cheaper and easier Xbox 360?
lwilliams3
Member
I am not doubting him. I was just saying that his statement does not necessarily backs up LCGeek's info.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
It's a semi-custom AMD APU with atypically fast shared RAM and an extra bus. It surely was the fastest APU for some time. How 'supercharged' a PC that was? As supercharged as a semi-custom APU circa 2012 would be - IOW quite a few PCs of its time outperformed it handily. The entire issue, as you note, stemmed from the notion that 'supercharged PC' implies 'a better PC', and that's how plenty a people understood it - it was a non-accidental marketing spin. Whereas in reality it was a supercharged mid-level laptop APU, with all implications from that.
Milly Osworth
Member
I hope Switch is strong enough to fix Zelda.
Yeah, as long as it can run Zelda at 720p and 60fps I will extremely satisfied.
PdotMichael
Banned
They have options that at least bring them into XBO memory performance range.
PdotMichael
Banned
What is the possible system ram option?
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Good thing they said employing a supercharged pc architecture and not just it is a supercharged PC.
.. as the former implied it was a semi custom architecture you could not find on PC yet while the latter, as you demonstrated, means little. Then again it was also a better PC than some other PC's (a laptop is a PC... I just love how malleable the definition of a PC is btw 
) and at launch and even now PS4 players pitted against commonly available $299-399 PC boxes fare pretty good.Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Do you see the performance ratio between CPU and GPU being much closer than the other systems?
Your definition of CPU limited in quotes does not clarify if you mean the CPU chosen does not hold the chosen GPU back because... 1.) the CPU is insanely fast or 2.) the GPU is not too much faster than the CPU is thus not causing it to be a bottleneck
. We will see what this hybrid will be, I am setting my sights on a much much faster PSVita that also docks to the TV and is allowed to run at top speed when doing that
.Do you see the performance ratio between CPU and GPU being much closer than the other systems?
Your definition of CPU limited in quotes does not clarify if you mean the CPU chosen does not hold the chosen GPU back because... 1.) the CPU is insanely fast or 2.) the GPU is not too much faster than the CPU is thus not causing it to be a bottleneck
We will see what this hybrid will be, I am setting my sights on a much much faster PSVita that also docks to the TV and is allowed to run at top speed when doing that
So are we talking Turbo Vita? Double the FLOPS but still weaker than Wii U?
PdotMichael
Banned
Another point would be that the Switch needs to provide 100% of its power at all times.
Peak performance and throtteling like on other mobile devices with so "impressive stats" can't be accepted on a dedicated gaming device.
Peak performance and throtteling like on other mobile devices with so "impressive stats" can't be accepted on a dedicated gaming device.
KratosEnergyDrink
Member
That's obvious. Like every Nintendo handheld before.
PdotMichael
Banned
I don't see the point of your post.
More like >10x the floating point throughput, but nowhere near 10x the bandwidth.
EDIT: Using 14 GFLOPS and vram bandwidth of 12.8 GB/s as basis of comparison.
They don't currently but they could if Nintendo explicitly paid them to. Reduce the number of cuda cores to 128 and clock it ridiculously low. Such a device could potentially be capable of some pretty epic battery life.
Of course, that's not going to happen. Nintendo is positioning the Switch as a home console first. They're not going to intentionally take a step backwards from the Wii U. Nintendo is crazy but they're not that crazy.
yes but indeed, i see many people thinking the nvidia leaks means the Switch HAS to be stronger than the WiiU. But they really could have a custom version that just does the job, which would makes perfectly sense when you think they seem to want to reuse WiiU games and that level of graphics is good enough for them.
LordRaptor
Member
it... really doesn't make a lot of sense to think Nintendo would pay extra to specifically make something worse than they would have not paying any extra
PdotMichael
Banned
Well, a pricesensetive dedicated mobile gaming device is not the typical type of device the standard Tegra series is aimed to.
LordRaptor
Member
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Yeah that's not going to happen on a count of that pesky thing inside called a battery.
I'm not ruling out the possibility of a sideways step (or a tiny forward step GCN -> Wii style), but it definitely won't be weaker.
The problem with this is that there are cheaper off-the-shelf chips that they could go with if that's their goal. If they're targeting something weaker than or even on-par with Wii U and paying Nvidia for a custom chip to do so, they are literally throwing away money. There is no justifiable reason for it, and even less when we consider that the dev kits were actively cooled. I know that you're trying to keep your expectations in check because Nintendo has, understandably, lost the benefit of the doubt, but it's not realistic to expect something weaker than Wii U based on what we know no matter how you attempt to justify it.
Nostremitus
Member
I don't see Nintendo paying extra to have Nvidia redesign their GPU specifically to intentionally nerf it...
- Status