th3sicknness
Member
Why do you believe so?
All the dev kit leaks we have heard about including the "final" ones have made no mention of it. Third parties and other developers have expressed their distaste for x1 and and wiiu memory pools.
Why do you believe so?
K1 is Kepler, on a 28nm process. Switch is based on Maxwell, much more power efficient than Kepler and also on a 20nm process.
Ignoring the patents for a moment because they may have things that aren't realised in a shopping product..
I thought recent rumours/leaks pointed to both a dock fan (blowing air into the switch through a vent) *and* mentioned a small fan on the system itself?
I also don't understand the need for a fan onboard at such small power use, but maybe the thermals get a little uncomfortable for Nintendo if used handheld at max screen brightness while charging - so heat coming from SoC, screen and battery? Still seems unnecessary
I don't think architecture is necessarily tied to process though. Is it?
If they were going to change process from 20nm then 16nm would make more sense.
All the dev kit leaks we have heard about including the "final" ones have made no mention of it. Third parties and other developers have expressed their distaste for x1 and and wiiu memory pools.
But Maxwell has never been on 28nm
He's probably talking about Tegra Maxwell
Yeah it did seem like Laura Kate Dale was claiming a fan inside the handheld and one inside the dock. If that were true I don't think anyone could argue there's something more to this. I suppose thats something we'll find out in a couple of weeks.
I wonder if that is a change included in the final dev kit. According to Laura, the dev kit is stated to be overall stronger.Switch definitely wouldn't use the kind of embedded memory pool used in WiiU or XBox One (which is the say not for the same purpose), those aren't needed for this kind of GPU architecture. Also the kind of embedded memory pool they may use would usually be invisible to developers (not always but very easily could be in this case). Not hidden, but just not something they need to worry about and so not something that would be put in every spec sheet. Basically it wouldn't be a framebuffer developers need to worry about manipulating, but instead a cache used to increase GPU and/or CPU data transfer efficiency .
Any recent info regarding SD vs microSD? Really hoping for the former.
Anyone read this piece of news today? Hmmm
Straight Ports To Nintendo Switch May Not Be Possible, Former Ubisoft Developer Speculates
However, he is speaking on the basis of leaked specs, as opposed to official documentation.
While it is now abundantly clear that the Nintendo Switch will categorically not be as powerful as the PS4 or the Xbox One, people have still been banking on the system getting third party games- after all, Nintendo showed off a truly impressive lineup of third parties supporting the system, and Nvidia, who have supplied the chipset for the system, have hinted that straight ports to Switch from PS4 and Xbox One may in fact be relatively easy.
However, speaking on the Beyond 3D forums, former Ubisoft senior rendering lead and co-founder of Second Order LTD Sebastian Aaltonen shared his thoughts on whether or not the Switch would be able to run direct ports from PS4 and Xbox One. In his view? The prognosis is not so rosy.
Around 50% of modern game engine frame time goes to running compute shaders (lighting, post processing, AA, AO, reflections, etc). Maxwells tiled rasterizer has zero impact on compute shaders. 25.6 GB/s is pretty low as everybody knows that 68 GB/s of Xbox One isnt that great either, he said. ESRAM is needed to reach good performance. But I am talking about the POV of down porting current gen games to Switch. Switch certainly fares well against last gen consoles, and Maxwells tiled rasterizer would certainly help older pixel + vertex shader based renderers. Too bad last gen consoles already got their last big AAA releases year ago. Easy ports between Xbox 360 and Switch are not available anymore. Xbox One is a significantly faster hardware. Straightforward code port is not possible. Content also needs to be simplified.
Of course, it is important to note that he is not speaking from any true knowledge of what the device is capable of- but rather, by speculating on leaked specs. Those specs, we have since been told by insiders, may already be outdated. And certainly, the idea that the Switch wont be able to run direct PS4 ports doesnt seem to hold when one considers that Ubisoft themselves are apparently porting their upcoming Assassins Creed game to the system. So, take this all with massive pinches of salt- well know whats what for sure come January 12 and 13, when Nintendo take the wraps off of their upcoming system in full at last.
http://gamingbolt.com/straight-port...soft-developer-speculates#7HbXYMFAybX2fqST.99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So the above article says that that the downclocked x1 specs from eurogamer wouldn't make porting easy(obviously we don't know how many cores there are for cpu and gpu, and other customizations)... But Nvidia DID say a month and a half ago(Nov 17,2016) that straight ports should be easy though.
http://gamingbolt.com/porting-ps4-xbox-one-and-pc-games-to-switch-should-be-easy-says-nvidia
Does it give more hope that switch is using pascal? Who knows.
This isn't looking good
I do hope he's wrong.
Anyone read this piece of news today? Hmmm
Straight Ports To Nintendo Switch May Not Be Possible, Former Ubisoft Developer Speculates
However, he is speaking on the basis of leaked specs, as opposed to official documentation.
While it is now abundantly clear that the Nintendo Switch will categorically not be as powerful as the PS4 or the Xbox One, people have still been banking on the system getting third party games- after all, Nintendo showed off a truly impressive lineup of third parties supporting the system, and Nvidia, who have supplied the chipset for the system, have hinted that straight ports to Switch from PS4 and Xbox One may in fact be relatively easy.
However, speaking on the Beyond 3D forums, former Ubisoft senior rendering lead and co-founder of Second Order LTD Sebastian Aaltonen shared his thoughts on whether or not the Switch would be able to run direct ports from PS4 and Xbox One. In his view? The prognosis is not so rosy.
Around 50% of modern game engine frame time goes to running compute shaders (lighting, post processing, AA, AO, reflections, etc). Maxwells tiled rasterizer has zero impact on compute shaders. 25.6 GB/s is pretty low as everybody knows that 68 GB/s of Xbox One isnt that great either, he said. ESRAM is needed to reach good performance. But I am talking about the POV of down porting current gen games to Switch. Switch certainly fares well against last gen consoles, and Maxwells tiled rasterizer would certainly help older pixel + vertex shader based renderers. Too bad last gen consoles already got their last big AAA releases year ago. Easy ports between Xbox 360 and Switch are not available anymore. Xbox One is a significantly faster hardware. Straightforward code port is not possible. Content also needs to be simplified.
Of course, it is important to note that he is not speaking from any true knowledge of what the device is capable of- but rather, by speculating on leaked specs. Those specs, we have since been told by insiders, may already be outdated. And certainly, the idea that the Switch wont be able to run direct PS4 ports doesnt seem to hold when one considers that Ubisoft themselves are apparently porting their upcoming Assassins Creed game to the system. So, take this all with massive pinches of salt- well know whats what for sure come January 12 and 13, when Nintendo take the wraps off of their upcoming system in full at last.
http://gamingbolt.com/straight-port...soft-developer-speculates#7HbXYMFAybX2fqST.99
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So the above article says that that the downclocked x1 specs from eurogamer wouldn't make porting easy(obviously we don't know how many cores there are for cpu and gpu, and other customizations)... But Nvidia DID say a month and a half ago(Nov 17,2016) that straight ports should be easy though.
http://gamingbolt.com/porting-ps4-xbox-one-and-pc-games-to-switch-should-be-easy-says-nvidia
Does it give more hope that switch is using pascal? Who knows.
We were talking about his post in the beyond3D forums the other day. He doesn't seem to be in the loop about the Switch.. otherwise he wouldn't be talking about this. Having said that, his concerns about the memory bandwidth being an issue for modern compute shaders does raise questions about the TX1's bottlenecks and what Nintendo can customize to clear it.
Going by the exploded views from the patents, micro SD cards are pretty much confirmed for Switch.Any recent info regarding SD vs microSD? Really hoping for the former.
The internals of the switch will be as much of a mystery in January 13 as it is now.Let's just wait until the 12th I know it will be hard... but I will put a lot of money on most people being satisfied... unless they want a ps4 Xbox one clone.
The internals of the switch will be as much of a mystery in January 13 as it is now.
Comparing the Switch directly to the Xbox One is a bit odd. The GCN GPU's found in the Xbone and PS4 have much higher bandwidth needs than Nvidia's recent designs, and the Switch will have more bandwidth per compute cluster than what exists in the Xbox One. We also don't know Nintendo's customizations, which may or may not be targeted at the memory subsystem.
We'll have to wait until someone actually working with the most recent dev kits is able to talk about it more openly. I have a hard time believing that the memory bandwidth will be the primary cause of strain when porting to the Switch.
The internals of the switch will be as much of a mystery in January 13 as it is now.
Comparing the Switch directly to the Xbox One is a bit odd. The GCN GPU's found in the Xbone and PS4 have much higher bandwidth needs than Nvidia's recent designs
The internals of the switch will be as much of a mystery in January 13 as it is now.
What if there will be no major third party games on January 12?
There will be one camp claiming it says nothing about the tech, and one camp saying it's so weak it's not worth the effort.
It's not just pure compute. Something as 'vanilla' as a g-buffer contains various things that don't actually resemble the entropy characteristics of a color, so those things would not benefit much from the color compressions. Nor the tiling, for that matter, since g-buffers don't exhibit read-modify-write access patterns.To be fair this is addressed directly in his quote: tiled rasterisation having no effect on pure compute shaders, so that bandwidth saving technique would have effect on other areas, but not bandwidth required to pure compute.
He's not. But he isn't talking about the actual Switch specs, he's saying "if these are the specs" referred to that tweet.This isn't looking good
I do hope he's wrong.
The marketing talk never ends in that video : )I found this video by Nvidia on the Shield TV aimed at developers, mentions it's between 2 to 5 times more powerful then the Xbox 360. Interesting to see Crysis 3 running on it.
Play from 4:30 to skip the marketing talk and dive into the tech details. Bandwidth details too.
Crysis 3 demo at 7 minute mark.
https://youtu.be/QpJ3r9FWfow
Hopefully this gives us an idea of what to expect with the Switch, with it being in the same ballpark range of power.
True hah, some cringe worthy lines in there!The marketing talk never ends in that video : )
If it was about tech, all third party games would be PC exclusive. It's never about tech, biggest example is Dead Rising coming out on Wii and not on PS3.What if there will be no major third party games on January 12?
There will be one camp claiming it says nothing about the tech, and one camp saying it's so weak it's not worth the effort.
By major third party I meant a major multiplatform game that would allow us to compare it with other versions of the same game and get a decent metric of the hardware capabilities. Battlefield 1, titanfall 2, Doom, Cod etc.If it was about tech, all third party games would be PC exclusive. It's never about tech, biggest example is Dead Rising coming out on Wii and not on PS3.
Define major third party game.
DQXI is major and is coming.
Just Dance is major and is coming.
Skyrim is major and is coming.
NBA is coming.
Minecraft, Rocket League, FIFA, Madden, etc are all major third party games.
If you expect Final Fantasy, Tomb Raider, Batman, Call of Duty, Overwatch, etc, then you'll probably be disappointed.
BG&E 2 is not a major third party game, as much as we expect it.
He's not. But he isn't talking about the actual Switch specs, he's saying "if these are the specs" referred to that tweet.
I think quite a few things you do on a G-buffer might benefit from tiling for improving cache utilization. E.g. evaluation screen space effects that sample a neighborhood.Nor the tiling, for that matter, since g-buffers don't exhibit read-modify-write access patterns.
Well, under tiling RTTs have to be resolved to main RAM before usage anyway.I think quite a few things you do on a G-buffer might benefit from tiling for improving cache utilization. E.g. evaluation screen space effects that sample a neighborhood.
By major third party I meant a major multiplatform game that would allow us to compare it with other versions of the same game and get a decent metric of the hardware capabilities. Battlefield 1, titanfall 2, Doom, Cod etc.
I don't think there is one in a couple of years.The next Assassins Creed?
It's not going to happen. Buy a ps4 and play those games there.By major third party I meant a major multiplatform game that would allow us to compare it with other versions of the same game and get a decent metric of the hardware capabilities. Battlefield 1, titanfall 2, Doom, Cod etc.
I found this video by Nvidia on the Shield TV aimed at developers, mentions it's between 2 to 5 times more powerful then the Xbox 360. Interesting to see Crysis 3 running on it.
Play from 4:30 to skip the marketing talk and dive into the tech details. Bandwidth details too.
Crysis 3 demo at 7 minute mark.
https://youtu.be/QpJ3r9FWfow
Hopefully this gives us an idea of what to expect with the Switch, with it being in the same ballpark range of power.
It's not going to happen. Buy a ps4 and play those games there.
It's not going to happen. Buy a ps4 and play those games there.
I don't think there is one in a couple of years.
It's not throwing the towel, it's understanding the market they are going for. Those games are not for Switch's market.I think it's safe to expect CoD. Any EA game is probably a "No". EA and Nintendo haven't been buddies for a long time now. Maybe new management will be able to reconcile. There's a good chance that Activision games will make it. Not sure about Blizzard. They seem to like Nintendo, but haven't really made stuff for it since Starcraft: Ghost on the Cube.
Will be interesting to see where third party support lands in a couple of weeks. I think it's still too early to throw in the towel without getting more info about who's doing what.
It's not throwing the towel, it's understanding the market they are going for. Those games are not for Switch's market.
The guy said he wanted those games released to watch a DF dick contest and compare performances. It's not going to happen.
This is Nintendo going for a new market, this is a new Wii (and the Wii was amazing, I still play mine).