Digital Foundry: Nintendo Switch CPU and GPU clock speeds revealed
- Thread starter Vashetti
- Start date
- Status
Falcom's going all in on PS4 it looks like given the Sen III announcement. Good luck to them, they'll need it in that Japanese PS4 marketplace.
sir_bumble_bee
Member
Maybe even just a month lol
Claude Augario
Member
People losing their damn minds in here. The 12th can't come soon enough.
PdotMichael
Banned
The portable expect is an explenation why the Switch could have never reach PS4 level because even picking some Tegra Pascal derivat wouldn't be able to provide the level of performance but the market doesn't care if you can pick a more powerful PS4 for a similiar price over the Switch.
Mass Appeal
Member
I personally would rather have a home Nintendo console that is the most powerful system on the market with great 3rd party support rather then a portable but I guess Nintendo wants to appeal to the portable market rather then those of us who don't care much for portable gaming. Being 33 with kids is hard to game on portables but Nintendo would rather please their younger fans which I understand.
It was a pretty big if
. God dammit Falcom, put your shit on PC, you have fans there ;-;OrbitalBeard
Member
I think a lot of Switch threads will be. Gonna' be fun.
Yes it's unreasonable. Being an hybrid can only drag specs down.
Why exactly? No handheld has ever matched consoles that were 3 years older. Even PSP and Vita didn't, they came about as close as Switch is.
Jonneh3003
Banned
Where's your evidence that people favour frame rate over visuals? Whenever we see demonstrations of games we have people going "I think this is running at 60fps!" like Breath of the Wild on Jimmy Fallon or even Majora's Mask 3D. We usually can't tell what frame rate a game is running at from a trailer whereas visuals are instantly recognisable. The average consumer will certainly favour pretty visuals over a high frame rate.
Many of our favourite games don't hit anywhere near to 60fps, I'm not seeing the evidence of high frame rate > visuals.
Was anyone asking for that 12 months ago?
The issue some have is that they want a new Nintendo home console and a new Nintendo handheld. The switch makes it seem like this is never going to happen again and that will upset some folks.
DragonSworne
Banned
It's hard for people to justify 3 generations of underpowered hardware. The Switch situation is even worse because Nintendo has actively made the system weaker than it ought to be, given it's components standard configuration.
Dude I just saw your comment about 60 FPS and thought that it's weird to single out Nintendo of all devs as someone who doesn't make games that run at 60 FPS.
I haven't even mentioned anything about the other crap? What's this about not running older games better?
I wouldn't say that. We need the near full year the Switch is on the market to see how it does during the holiday.
Then the popcorn eating can begin.
Captain Europe
Member
What? Nintendo fans are the ones that are used to 30fps?
Am I in opposite world now?
Last time I checked, my Wii U had a lot more 60fps games than my PS4.
OrbitalBeard
Member
You're definitely wrong. The one big exception being Call of Duty.
Onimusha78
Member
That's reasonable. I on the other hand commute to uni everyday so this things more like an upgrade for my 3DS if anything. I've got my PC and PS4 for the best looking 3rd party games
Shooters on console for example target 60fps for their multiplayer, that's how important framerate is to gameplay.
You can't clearly see when a video/game is 30fps compared to 60fps ?
I'm not asking it condescendingly at all trust me, I'm just curious.
sir_bumble_bee
Member
True. I forgot about sales. Those pre-release Splatoon threads are so amazing to go back to too.
Kssio_Aug
Member
I don't know if people were asking for it to come together (both handheld and home console). But I do believe that, if Nintendo thought they could deal with a direct confrontation against PS4/XB1/PC with a stronger hardware they would. If they are not doing it since 2006 that's probably cause they feel they can't. So maybe they came to conclusion that their best bet is to try to integrate their most successful formula (handheld) with their home console. If that's gonna work I don't know either, but that's probably not unreasonable in their position.
And that should be where the industry aims at.
You won't be getting many games running at 60fps on the Switch if Nintendo tries to make games look better than on the Wii U. And they will have to to sell that device, otherwise the average consumer would just think there's no point in buying a new generation console.
Lets walk in cycles again! The system is weaker, so that the games run consitans without overheating for many hours. Other devices using silmiar hardware mostly have to powerdown, since there not designed for gaming on this level.
I can see, and do agree, with instances where developers may prioritize open worlds or an engine that may make 60fps difficult. But for the most I part I do agree and wish that 60fps were more of a standard with visuals taking a back seat to that.
Jonneh3003
Banned
I've been surprised a few times to learn a game was running at 30fps or 60fps when I thought the opposite but most of the time I can tell, I just don't think it matters for the vast majority of genres. Racers, shooters and fighters should target it, I really don't mind for anything else. Halo 3 was my favourite shooter for years and it ran at 30fps, I don't favour Halo 5 over it just because it now runs at 60.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
I remember it being kind of a big deal way back when people would try and compare Nintendo's claimed 6-12 million polygons/second for GameCube with Sony's claims of something like 60?Gestault said:
The system should be able to tell whether it's plugged into a dock or just the wall. But either the dock fan (if still there) or just not wanting to make developers jump through the hoop of supporting yet another mode are reasons it might not matter.ggx2ac said:
If the rabbit does everything my old horse did and better, it's no skin off my back if it wants to be called Mr. Ed.TheMagician said:
Basically the same hardware these rumors point to, but less downclocked.Bulbasaur said:
It'll probably be close. PS4 as of early December is about 12 million behind where 3DS was at the end of September, and especially thanks to Pokémon 3DS isn't laying down to die quite yet.MacTag said:
Dude. I've been in love with 60fps games since F-Zero X. Doesn't change the fact that even with hardware a million times more powerful now, a lot of devs just don't care to design their games that way. It doesn't seem to be the norm for the remasters we've seen this generation, either. Probably won't be any different by the time of the PS6 Pro. I've had to learn to live with it (and reject most consoles in favor of PC).Manoko said:
Tertullian
Member
I see a lot of people saying "stop freaking out and just wait for January 13!", but you all know we're not gonna learn jack shit about the Switch specs on January 13, right? Nintendo isn't gonna walk out on stage and say "stock X1 28nm, 4gb of RAM, and 176 gflops." They're never gonna discuss the specs, ever. They're just gonna show games and talk about fun and mention "power" in the vaguest way possible. You're not getting real Switch specs until somebody breaks down a retail unit after launch.
Suburban Thug
Member
Dude, no matter what you are going to defend Nintendo's decision to go with underpowered hardware, it literally does not matter what is said. First you say it's more of a portable so it's not fair to compare with XBO/PS4 but the official Switch website calls it their "new home gaming system" instead of a handheld or hybrid. Now you're moving to saying it's unreasonable to ask Nintendo to make something on the level of their competitors (with 3 year old tech that wasn't cutting edge when initially released). I just don't get it.
Keep in mind this thing is still a handheld too. Wii U level graphics at 60fps on a handheld in 2017 is impressive no matter which way you cut it. People can say what they want about the console end of the spectrum but on the handheld end Nintendo is releasing an advanced piece of tech with no competition from Sony.
peterclark1985
Member
I have the same situation but feel the exact opposite, TV always in use, have no desire to disappear into another room so having a portable that can play all games that can be played on TV seems ideal in my opinion + I can play it in bed when everyone has gone to sleep + I can take to work to play on my lunch hour.
Surely it can't be attainable on all games in all situations and that's something I completely agree with and can overlook.
But 60fps should be the target otherwise, seeing how much of a difference it feels.
OrbitalBeard
Member
People are saying "wait until January" because then we'll actually see games running on the device and for most people, that's what actually matters.
I finally understand your reasoning now, took me a while but it shines a whole different light on your previous posts. Yeah if Nintendo does go the route of improving graphics to impress they might have to sacrifice 60 FPS and that'd suck, I still feel they'll target 60 the usual games though, like your Marios and the like.
But only time will tell
I might be the only one in here that would be using this thin in the dock almost exclusively. Similar to the WiiU, I would swap to gamepad mode if someone wanted the TV. I am not a fan of handhelds. I have gotten a few for some games, but prefer gaming on my PC or TV.
What I don't understand is, since this is going to be NVIDIA's first foray back into the mainstream console market (not counting Shield here) for some time, why would they do it with such a potentially gimped / under clocked hardware?
Surely if Switch fails because it is perceived to be under powered, this is not going to reflect well on NVIDIA or their future involvement with Nintendo / Sony / MS consoles?
Surely if Switch fails because it is perceived to be under powered, this is not going to reflect well on NVIDIA or their future involvement with Nintendo / Sony / MS consoles?
Onimusha78
Member
Prob isn't the right place to ask but how loud is this thing going to be? I don't wanna be sitting on the tube making a bunch of noise before I even start smashing some buttons
How many times does this need to be stated? It's an excellent handheld but it does NOT double as a home console. The home console part is what is making people upset.
Using your own analogy, if the PS5 turned out to be a slightly beefier PS4, people will definitely be upset.
This is pretty much me here. My fiancé will lay in bed and watch Netflix while I'm downstairs playing PS4. She doesn't really like that when I do it every night. When I lay in bed with her and play 3DS she is perfectly fine. Switch seems like the perfect console for me going forward.
Kssio_Aug
Member
It doesn't matter what the markt "says", it matter what the console is. Some have already pointed out that, differently from the western web-sites, Nintendo does not call it a home console in the Japanese web-site. It is a hybrid, and the concept is damn clear in their reveal trailer. The reason they call it home console for the western public is because they imagine (and maybe they're right) they will grab their attention more, since handhelds are not as popular here as they are in Japan.
This is what matters. Devs with kits say they are excited. If the games run well and on it then all is fine. IMO.
Prisoner KSC2-303
Member
It's been a crazy six months: we've gone from arguing over a PS4 Pro level machine, then maybe just PS4 level, then XB1, then a more powerful Shield TV, and now it sounds a bit like a kneecapped Shield TV?
January 12th can't come soon enough, without the games to see what you're potentially buying, the specs will always be troubling. No matter how much people downgraded their expectations, the risk was always there to be underwhelmed.
Still, hopefully this means it'll hit £199, in which case I'm fine. I see it as a powerful handheld and will use it as such.
January 12th can't come soon enough, without the games to see what you're potentially buying, the specs will always be troubling. No matter how much people downgraded their expectations, the risk was always there to be underwhelmed.
Still, hopefully this means it'll hit £199, in which case I'm fine. I see it as a powerful handheld and will use it as such.
That's why they named it PS4 Pro instead
Wishmaster92
Member
True but i do wonder when comparing each company's best how Naughty Dog managed to upgrade The Last of us which is one of the most impressive looking ps3 games that had terrible aa and the framerate was all over the place (20-30 most of the time), how they managed to upgrade it to 1080p with better aa/motion blur/better assets/textures/shadows and running 60fps most of the time on ps4? Call me crazy but i have the same expectations with Zelda. If Naught Dog can do it then why not Nintendo with the switch?
Tertullian
Member
This thread is all about specs and power. It's pretty clear that the vast majority of people posting in this thread have some interest in those things. And we aren't gonna be able to tell much about the system's power from watching a shitty compressed Youtube stream of a bunch of launch games, many of which are Wii U remasters.
Captain Europe
Member
Yeah, I wish that was the case too.
But I do think that Nintendo will continue to prioritise 60fps over visual effects for a lot of their games, it's what they've been doing for many years. It's just not gonna happen with Zelda sadly.
And that will be one of the most important things that we need to know about the Switch more so than the specs. We probably will not even get the full picture of the specs until the inevitable teardown in March.
The obvious answer here is that the Switch isn't a PS4
At least it being based on Tegra won't recquire arcane knowledge to decipher the hardware like the Wii U did
- Status