Nintendo Switch Dev Kit Stats Leaked? Cortex A57, 4GB RAM, 32GB Storage, Multi-Touch.
- Thread starter Robert at Zeboyd Games
- Start date
- Status
4K/60fps/VR gaming all for the low price of $149.99. Death Stranding will look like an N64 when compared to Switch software.
You can't be serious, or you have no idea how charging electronics works.
Didn't sold much on the Wii U.
Skittzo0413
Member
But there were far fewer third party games even from the outset.
I think this conversation started because we were trying to determine how much the lack of third party support on the Wii U had to do with the hardware and development environment versus how much it had to do with those games potentially selling or not. And when even the launch efforts are quite poor I think we can reasonably assume that the hardware was the primary problem, and that this will be at least greatly improved with the Switch.
th3sicknness
Member
Because the last two years of the Wiis life was awful for third parties and they carried that negative momentum to the Wii U (roughly 5 or so years of bad third party support). I'm not trolling I'm just pointing out reality. The Wii had a really good start but started to show its age when the 360 and ps3 hit their stride.
Yeah.
All I want are some significant yet somewhat modest improvements for Zelda: BotW on Switch, over Wii U
- Locked 30fps in handheld & home console mode.
- 720p in handheld, native 1080p on TV
- Improved textures and AA.
Astral Dog
Member
The difference between SMASH U ,Twiliggt Princess ,Wind Waker HD and top tier Wii U games like Mario Kart 8, Bayonetta 2 and Xenooblade is HUGE, i wonder how easy it will be, if Zelda U runs at 1080p without problem that would be reasurring i guess.
JaseMath
Member
This is really my number one want. As good as BotW looks in screens (despite some jaggies), in motion it looks like a shimmering, somewhat blurry, aliased mess.
I'm sorry, at first I was going to just write this off; but, no the only reason the PS3 and Xbox 360 had though so call "good legs" was due to the industry trying to salvage their bets that they had made in 2006. The Wii didn't get any high profile investments from a third party to the extent that PS3 and Xbox 360 did. Looking at the historical trends of the first 3 years of the Wii, that is utterly ridiculous. The Wii near was outselling the Xbox 360 and PS3 combined. The industry had no choice but to make it look like the PS3 and Xbox 360 was a success. One would have had expected with all the marketing and high profile titles that the PS3 and Xbox 360 received and all of the bitching that third parties did about "Nintendo gamers don't buy our games" one would have had assumed that every third party release on the Xbox 360 and PS3 was selling like NSMB Wii or even on the level of Super Smash Bros Brawl. But when looking at the data this isn't clearly the case. But, yet all I read when it comes to support on Nintendo platforms is nothing but patented bullcrap.
Gotdatmoney
Member
With 2.5-3X the GPU strength and more modern features I would find it odd if Switch didn't run Zelda at 1080p. This is if they keep the assets mostly the same bar maybe a more aggressive AA solution.
Xenoblade, Mario KArt, Bayonetta etc all run decently well for the hardware at 720p. Running these titles at 1080p shouldn't a huge issue if the assets and technology mostly stays the same. If they start moving towards more advanced affects you're gonna see the resolution tank though obviously.
Not really? It looks way better in motion than it does in screens like basically every Wii U game ever as most of them don't have any AA.
The effects and lightning is what makes it look great in motion and you can't really see that in screens.
Hero of Legend
Member
I'm wondering if there's no change between docked and handheld mode and games might even be required to do support native 1080p but no AA, so that you can get smoother 720p anyway on the handheld screen.
Since if a game supports 720p only, it won't look as good on the TV, but from what I recall, a 1080p image downscaling (or downsampling, I think the term may be) to a 720p screen sort of is pseudo AA anyway, correct?
And doesn't AA require a lot of processing power anyway? I asked before but never got a response, but would 1080p with no AA at all require less or more out of the system than 720p with AA to make up for the lower-res?
Since if a game supports 720p only, it won't look as good on the TV, but from what I recall, a 1080p image downscaling (or downsampling, I think the term may be) to a 720p screen sort of is pseudo AA anyway, correct?
And doesn't AA require a lot of processing power anyway? I asked before but never got a response, but would 1080p with no AA at all require less or more out of the system than 720p with AA to make up for the lower-res?
Polygonal_Sprite
Gold Member
Let me be clear, I'm not in anyway, shape or form suggesting Switch will be more powerful than Scorpio or PS4 Pro or even the standard PS4. I just think a lot of people are too quick to accept that it will be around half of XB1 in terms of GPU power. I accept that there are limitations to the device on the go in terms of heat and battery life but when it's beside an HDTV in the dock I think there are a lot of possibilities.
I don't know exactly how much the consoles power could be boosted with the dock or how that power could be boosted with an even more expensive dock in the future but given Nintendo are working with Nvidia and have seemingly explored the possibility of SCD's as recently as this year then I think anything is possible.
Maybe the standard dock has technology to boost the portable devices rendering resolution from 720p to 1080p. Maybe there will be an even more powerful dock released in late 2017 to boost the resolution to 4k or even to enable AAA VR gaming.
With this new direction Nintendo are taking I think it would be foolish to judge them using the old Wii/WiiU hardware expectations. That Nintendo wouldn't have allowed the Western team to design the hardware, wouldn't have went near Nvidia for final hardware, wouldn't have courted third parties as hard as they appear to be doing and would not have revealed the device in the manner it was.
All I'm saying basically is to keep an open mind. I know that is difficult after the WiiU hardware.
JaseMath
Member
The lighting is good, but what really makes the game stand out is the art direction. That doesn't keep it from being an aliased, shimmery mess as art direction is still beholden to the technology it's presented on. Mind you, I'm not saying the game looks bad—it's just clearly limited by it's hardware.
Liabe Brave
Member
What I gave you are official numbers. I linked to GAF threads because the info is usually in OP and there's also explanatory text. But if you want the raw data, it's still all there on Sony's site. (Note that their FY ends in March of the next calendar year. So FY06 ends March 31, 2007, FY07 on March 31, 2008, etc.)
Code:
PS3 software sales
FY06 13m
FY07 58m
FY08 104m
FY09 116m
FY10 148m
FY11 156m (not counting 8m PS2)
FY12 154m (including ??? PS2)
FY13 higher than FY12
FY14 less than FY13
FY15 less than FY14The exact numbers become unavailable in FY13 because Sony began summing everything in the Playstation family. This is also when they added digital sales; all numbers FY12 and earlier are solely retail.
So everything is as I previously said. Yes, there's some estimation in there, but it's grounded and overall conservative. It's pretty reasonable to assume that the PS3 software tally is close to or over 1b units. Thus, an attach rate well over 10, and quite possibly over 11.
See above; the split I propose is not dubious, but based on official numbers from Sony. They combined PS2 and PS3 not to hide software sales of the newer machine, but hardware sales. Software imprecision was collateral damage.
Of course Wii sold a lot of third party software, it was the leading console of its generation (and possibly the fastest-selling console ever). But given how successful the hardware was, and how successful Nintendo software was, it underperformed for third parties.
Despite selling less hardware, PS3 seems to have sold more software than Wii, full stop. And since Sony's first party was a far lower percentage of the whole, third parties sold much more software on PS3 than on Wii. Combined with other factors, this makes it clear that for some third parties, skipping Wii was a reasonable decision.
PdotMichael
Banned
If Nintendo limits hardware performance in mobile mode because of battery concerns it could mean the NX could get a boost in performance in console mode. But the would be more in line of bringing the hardware closer to nVidia's specs than "supercharging" them.
There are also limits to provide additional cooling for a closed system so there aren't many options to overclock the system. The dock also lacks sich a feature based what we have seen in the video.
Another theory would be that the dock contains another Tegra Parker chip, something that would increase the price quite a bit and the NX lacks any form of effective connection to make it work.
There are also limits to provide additional cooling for a closed system so there aren't many options to overclock the system. The dock also lacks sich a feature based what we have seen in the video.
Another theory would be that the dock contains another Tegra Parker chip, something that would increase the price quite a bit and the NX lacks any form of effective connection to make it work.
Of course it is and I wasn't saying anything different but screens of the game looking better than video is downright bollocks. In screens you can clearly make out jaggies and low-res textures while lightning, animation and effects are almost a non-factor when it's the main reason the artstyle is so good.
If the SCD is being used to do say increased graphics processing akin to an external GPU. There is nothing in the design of the Switch that indicates it having an PCI-e port or NVlink equivalent to have an external GPU connected to the Switch.
I don't even see how a new dock would work when the Switch has only 1 USB-C port which has to connect to the TV via HDMI to USB-C cable to do video output.
Maybe you could explain how you could get it to work with a new dock.
I don't keep an open mind, I use critical thinking, scrutiny and scepticism when people make claims. The problem with keeping an "open mind" is that when people say to keep an open mind they mean, "agree with my viewpoint you biased person."
I have no problem with looking at other viewpoints, it's that it doesn't mean I can be gullible and agree with someone if they don't have a good argument for their position.
I already argued with other people a lot when it came to the NX speculation threads with people who didn't believe Eurogamer by claiming the NX would be a Polaris powered home console as powerful as PS4 or the fanatic that pointed at any meaningless statement as "proof" that the NX would be powered by DMP and be handheld only while there would also be an AMD console version.
Then there was also the people that needed to improve their interpretation of statements because they were claiming Iwata said the NX wouldn't be a hybrid by using an out of context statement.
Doubt that the dock will have something in it that would provide additional computing capabilities.
You are reaching. Assuming the PS2 sold less software in 2012 than it did in 2011 isn't dubious in the slightest. Its all but certain to be true.
The obvious answer to your question is to be consistent when they were trying to hide the Vitas performance by combining it with PSP.
PdotMichael
Banned
JoshuaJSlone
Member
Wii software shipments (all, not just third) through six years. It is flatter than I'd expect from a system gaining userbase, but it's not like the first two years were its biggest and then it fell off a cliff. Didn't really slow down until they tried to make it last a sixth year.
Spyder_Monkey
Banned
Even if the Switch is theoretically capable of 4K I doubt Nintendo will allow 4K output.
AA isn't any one thing, there are multiple techniques. The most common one for consoles right now is simple post-processing edge AA, which costs basically nothing. It's quite possible BotW is using this already, but it has aliasing problems that can't be solved with such a simple technique. You can't fix sub-pixel and temporal aliasing with edge anti-aliasing, and BotW has lots of that thanks to all its foliage. Supersampling or Multisampling would dramatically improve the iq, but they're way too expensive for the Wii U. One modern and cheap AA technique that would easily fix it is temporal AA; I doubt the Wii U has any support for this, but the Switch should. The biggest drawback to TAA, a slightly blurred image, shouldn't matter as much in a game like BotW which emphasis large swatches of flat color
Couldn't a game like Super Hexagon easily play in 4K/60fps? That game plays at 60fps on an iPad 3rd gen.
Why so?
Worst case scenario?
We are certain that the GPU is going to be underclocked when in portable mode.
A Tegra GPU designed at 16nmFF running at 700 MHz is what would be efficient at power consumption to run at a low wattage for the Switch at portable mode.
Tegra X1, 20nm, is at roughly 10W+ when running at stock 1GHz. If it was die shrunk to 16nmFF it would have 60% reduced power consumption at that stock speed so 4W consumption at 1GHz
PdotMichael
Banned
Yes, it would. It would mean NX's baseline isn't the theoretical speed in console mode but the significan't downclocked portable mode.
The narrative that the NX gets a boost in docking mode is misleading when in reality it would only mean the NX just doesn't get downclocked anymore.
lwilliams3
Member
I believe that will heavily depend on how powerful the Switch is in portable mode relative to "dock mode" The Switch in portable mode is capped at 720p, for example, so the dock mode extra power may be only designed to boost up the resolution.
I see what you are trying to get to, though: if developers were told that the system a certain power but Nintendo later clarified that the power can only be constantly maintained or reached in "dock-mode", that would suck. I doubt that it happened that way, though. From what is sounds, the performance of the system does improve in dock mode, but Nintendo may not have even told devs what was boosted. Perhaps they are trying to prevent some issues that came up with the PS4Pro. *shrug*
ShadowFox08
Member
Of course it can. Any HD console can achieve 1080p with 6-fps. But graphical effects and fidelity has to be sacrificed in order to achieve that vs ps4 and xbone. It probably won't happen with 3rd party games, but it will be more likely with 1st party games. It all in the discretion of the developers.
So you're saying the baseline is the one where it has to run on battery power? That's pretty obvious.
An increase in clock speed is misleading?
You mean, it would be misleading if someone said the Switch is overclocked when docked but only returns to its stock clockspeed? That would be misleading.
However, no one has ever said the Switch becomes overclocked when it is docked.
PdotMichael
Banned
Sure~
They can also use a bit of sharpening to counter the blurriness of the TAA. If well balanced with the right amount of it, the game would look incredible. I really hope every Nintendo game will use a combination of these two techniques, without overdoing the sharpening, to have the best iq possible without compromising performances too much.
It was hinted at. Honestly going at full speed to reach 900p on TV and 1080p on less intensive titles would be more than enough to enjoy games on the big screen, the most important thing is that frame rates are stable when used standalone so the underclock in portable mode needs to be well balanced.
Okay. There are people that are driving the narrative as you say, that the Switch is overclocked when docked which is misleading.
Who are those people?
Are you saying it was hinted at that the Switch would be overclocked when it is docked or that it would increase its clockspeed to be at its stock speed?
There is a difference between the two.
The latter, which i also suggested months ago. When people were focusing on "will the Switch be overclocked when docked" i said "what if it's underclocked when used standalone to target 720p". Edited my other post to clarify, it could be a bit confusing.
Technically there is a difference, because expecting components to reach a higher clock than what they were designed to reach is particularly difficult in a mobile environment due to thermal constraints, so it wasn't realistic and people expected the exact same performances when docked or standalone. Running at full speed and then being downclocked is very different.
Glass half full/ glass half empty, overclocked / underclocked, there is no difference though.
PdotMichael
Banned
It is if people operate with the Parker chip at +10w and then still going with the even more powerful when docked narrative.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Well, that I the same thing yet it does indeed sound more ludicrous than the NX running at a lower clock when in handheld mode (just like your iPhone does of it gets too hot
). As a HW designer, it would make sense to prioritise battery life when in portable mode if you have to make tough choices and the screen resolution and type does. It punish you much for them.Edit: sorry missed the bit about GPU pushing 10+ Watts there
.PdotMichael
Banned
Well, that I the same thing yet it does indeed sound more ludicrous than the NX running at a lower clock when in handheld mode (just like your iPhone does of it gets too hot
Edit: sorry missed the bit about GPU pushing 10+ Watts there
The problem is indeed that a dedicated gaming device operates on a different performance profile than a smartphone or tablet where short peak power is more important than staying constant at all times.
And that's the problem for ports. Not just they just need to port their games to a ~700gflops system in docked mode but that same game must also run when the chip runs at 5-6watt at best.
A 720p to 1080 p would require more than twice the upclock all other things being the same. If anything i'm expecting the standard to be something like 900p upscaled (300 to 500 gflops) when docked for slightly better IQ on modern TVs, with some games reaching 1080p like Smash.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
or Nintendo can get their users to accept either a 3 hours peak battery life or as someone said quite few 1080p games in docked mode (not likely).
It is more likely we would see a Switch optimised more for console use and then a Mobile Switch more optimised for handheld use, but it would do nothing to help developers having to cater to two different performance profiles.
Since engineering is not magical yet, if you truly wanted to make it easy for programmers you would limit yourself in docked mode.
Truth be told, that performance delta you were speaking of could mostly go in the resolution upgrade, better shadows, better texture filtering, not expensive ambient occlusion, higher resolution effects, etc...
Edit: unless the delta is insane.
The delta probably is nowhere near insane and I assume it's just enough for slightly better resolution and image quality. I doubt 720p to 1080p leap exept for select exclusive titles.
And downvlocked mobile, full speed docked sounds more likely than overclocked.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Which isn't different from the psp pro and Scorpio situation right now or pc gaming I general. By all accounts during development it's not half as difficult as your implying
It's still a closed system with two output specs rather than one.
4GB Ram is insane at this point.
They need to use 6GB or 8GB. Shield TV uses 3GB LPDRR4 so they could just double it and call it a day.
If devs have to cut content to port then it's a bad idea. At least this way things will port over easily.
720p is fine. 900p/1080p on a TV is fine too since ordinary people struggle to tell the difference between 1080p and 720p anyways.
Not too worried about the FLOPS either at 720p. It's the RAM that's an issue for porting.
They need to use 6GB or 8GB. Shield TV uses 3GB LPDRR4 so they could just double it and call it a day.
If devs have to cut content to port then it's a bad idea. At least this way things will port over easily.
720p is fine. 900p/1080p on a TV is fine too since ordinary people struggle to tell the difference between 1080p and 720p anyways.
Not too worried about the FLOPS either at 720p. It's the RAM that's an issue for porting.
D
Deleted member 465307
Unconfirmed Member
I don't think there was ever any doubt it could run games at 1080p/60fps since those qualities are always dependent on the developer and the goals they set for their games. I mean, the NES Classic Mini runs games at 1080p/60fps. I don't think Smash 4 running like that on Switch would be any more of an indication of what to expect on Switch than it was on Wii U.
- Status