• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

Reader mode
ShadowFox08 said:
I at least think that clock speed is more than doable. Just hard to imagine if 8nm Samsung can fit in a switch case. Maybe it can. Or a bit larger.
Click to expand...
the 6800U is massive and that fits in a switch sized system

The-ONEXPLAYER-2-gaming-console-with-AMD-Ryzen-7-6800U.jpg
 
Last edited:
ShadowFox08 said:
Assuming the clock speed profiles from post #31,559 are true... I feel pretty confident in saying that the power parameters of 4.2 W, 9.3 W and 12.0 W pertain to the GPU clock speeds alone (660Mhz, 1.125GHz, and 1.38 GHz). How much would the total power draw be
Click to expand...
Again, it depends on the node and the CPU clock speed. A smaller node would also reduce CPU draw. We have pretty decent power draw numbers of A78 on 8nm from power tests on phones, so we can guess half a watt per core at the 1.5GHz range.

The wattage numbers are interesting but they aren't definitive at all. I realize that if your background is on the hardware side more than the software side that it can seem pretty damn suggestive, but I cannot emphasize enough that their are lots of possible interpretations of those numbers. That's not me being pessimistic, that's me saying that there are missing puzzle pieces.

DLSS integration with NVN2 began before DLSS was released. The wattage number could be for an A100 in the testing farm. Or for a clocked down Xavier used for development. Or the power draw for just the tensor cores. Or the estimated power draw for Drake, which isn't necessarily reflective of Nintendo's final choices for the hardware. Or it could all be right on the money!

It's totally reasonable to speculate from - or even hope for - those clocks and power draw numbers. But to say confidently that node doesn't matter because we know the power draw for the GPU is, I think, overconfident.
 
Skittzo said:
Yeah that's what I'm thinking. If we have no official announcement by the end of February and no new rumblings I'd think H1 2023 is probably off the table.
Click to expand...

That’s where I’m at. But if that comes to pass I want off this damn train. Tears deserves better.
 
If Nintendo does announce a new Switch, they won't reveal the name right away. They will just call it "The Sequel to the Nintendo Switch".
 
Derachi said:
So what are we thinking? Something like “if we don’t hear anything, official or otherwise, by the February direct, it’s not out by Zelda” or something? I know nothing has changed but I’m just trying to work out what we’re thinking in terms of timelines/announcement “deadlines”
Click to expand...
I have since given up on Zelda. Everyone knows that by now.
 
ILikeFeet said:
the 6800U is massive and that fits in a switch sized system

1_e2eac498-7799-4cee-8ac1-464485c9cc89.gif
Click to expand...
This doesn’t load but I do hope it’s accounting for the substrate as well. Otherwise it’s missing a lot of the info.

With the speculated specifications, the chip should occupy about 7B transistors at least.
 
Raccoon said:
oh shit why?
Click to expand...
Because I’m a
ILikeFeet said:
coward
Click to expand...


And I see a holiday with 2D and 3D Mario as more realistic in my mind than a Zelda at this point in time. Probably the earliest I’d see them. And with Nintendo and nVidia and what they are working on, I cannot make any guarantee of these circumstances to line up beautifully (or horrifically?) for a May launch.

Not enough has convinced me of otherwise, and I’ve been burned numerous times that this time I am choosing to simply go with my gut rather than any logical or illogical commentary by the cavalry in the tech barracks.

More convinced me against it than for it…. but it’s small things, small things are enough to make things seem… off for me.



Like, uh, how do I put it? Like when you notice the seams have some loose thread, but like in a prank and you caught on that it’s a prank but go along even though you already know that it’s likely a prank? Or have that feeling that you’re being pranked?


Something like that…
 
honestly I wasn't super into botw like most so I can wait half a year or more for it

pikmin, if it comes early, will be much harder...
 
Codename_Steam said:
Will 12SM even be possible on 8NM in portable mode? (460MHZ 1.4TFLOPS)
Click to expand...
I at least think that clock speed is more than doable. Just hard to imagine if 8nm Samsung can fit in a switch case. Maybe it can. Or a bit larger.
ILikeFeet said:
the 6800U is massive and that fits in a switch sized system

The-ONEXPLAYER-2-gaming-console-with-AMD-Ryzen-7-6800U.jpg
Click to expand...
how big is the die on 6800U

Edit: nvm. It's like 200mm squared or something
oldpuck said:
Again, it depends on the node and the CPU clock speed. A smaller node would also reduce CPU draw. We have pretty decent power draw numbers of A78 on 8nm from power tests on phones, so we can guess half a watt per core at the 1.5GHz range.

The wattage numbers are interesting but they aren't definitive at all. I realize that if your background is on the hardware side more than the software side that it can seem pretty damn suggestive, but I cannot emphasize enough that their are lots of possible interpretations of those numbers. That's not me being pessimistic, that's me saying that there are missing puzzle pieces.

DLSS integration with NVN2 began before DLSS was released. The wattage number could be for an A100 in the testing farm. Or for a clocked down Xavier used for development. Or the power draw for just the tensor cores. Or the estimated power draw for Drake, which isn't necessarily reflective of Nintendo's final choices for the hardware. Or it could all be right on the money!

It's totally reasonable to speculate from - or even hope for - those clocks and power draw numbers. But to say confidently that node doesn't matter because we know the power draw for the GPU is, I think, overconfident.
Click to expand...
Right. I do think the node matters a lot. Because it does help determine power draw and handheld battery life, which will affect clock speed. And if Nintendo wants to fit a similar power profile and battery as v1 Switch, I have some doubt that 8nm can match that. I said confident because given the information we have from those profiles that were tested on a windows NVN2 apparently, it seems to imply that it's GPU alone power draw, and those powers from 8nm Samsung sound about right I guess.

Kind of surprised it would take close to 4 watts for 1.5Ghz CPU though. Think I remember Zombie listing an estimation of 2.5 watts for A78s at 1.5 GHz on September 21st or something.
 
0
Hermii said:
I believe other examples of devices that does this, requires a reboot to do it. Which is a dealbreaker for Switch. So not very realistic, unless they engineered a seamless solution for it.
Click to expand...

It would require to restart the graphics driver every time you dock and undock the switch and it would require x amount of seconds to do so. i think the way Switch does it now is better but it requires all available SM and down/up clock it
 
So I've been thinking back to Emily's "Nintendo's been sitting on quite a few games" remark from a while back. When does Nintendo usually hold back games/content? For the launch of new hardware, whether it's a revision, a peripheral, or a successor. Even during the Switch era, there were multiple "slower first halves" (or entire years in the case of the Wii U) that picked up in the second half of the year once new hardware was on its way. SM Odyssey was held back for a holiday 2017 launch and it seems likely to me that less critical content was cut for later games/versions (battle mode for MK8) or pushed into a sequel on Switch (Splatoon 2). Additionally, I believe Chris Dring, who reports on UK games sales, has stated that next year seems to be pretty quiet after Zelda according to his sources.

My point regarding all the above is that all this talk of held back games reminds a lot of the Switch launch and even its revisions. I think it's in Nintendo's best interests to get this thing out earlier rather than later, unless third parties don't have any game ready for 2023. Better to start building that install base ASAP an keep sales momentum high. I mean if this thing is 8nm, then what does Nintendo gain from releasing it holiday 23 or later? That would be such a double whammy- Samsung 8nm AND another further 6 month delay. What would Nintendo be waiting for? What did we do to deserve this?
 
mariodk18 said:
So I've been thinking back to Emily's "Nintendo's been sitting on quite a few games" remark from a while back. When does Nintendo usually hold back games/content? For the launch of new hardware, whether it's a revision, a peripheral, or a successor. Even during the Switch era, there were multiple "slower first halves" (or entire years in the case of the Wii U) that picked up in the second half of the year once new hardware was on its way. SM Odyssey was held back for a holiday 2017 launch and it seems likely to me that less critical content was cut for later games/versions (battle mode for MK8) or pushed into a sequel on Switch (Splatoon 2). Additionally, I believe Chris Dring, who reports on UK games sales, has stated that next year seems to be pretty quiet after Zelda according to his sources.

My point regarding all the above is that all this talk of held back games reminds a lot of the Switch launch and even its revisions. I think it's in Nintendo's best interests to get this thing out earlier rather than later, unless third parties don't have any game ready for 2023. Better to start building that install base ASAP an keep sales momentum high. I mean if this thing is 8nm, then what does Nintendo gain from releasing it holiday 23 or later? That would be such a double whammy- Samsung 8nm AND another further 6 month delay. What would Nintendo be waiting for? What did we do to deserve this?
Click to expand...

Bloomberg’s 2021 reporting on the “4K Switch” also mentioned that they were preparing a slate of new games to release with it. Can’t dig up the statement because of the paywall but I recall the wording. I didn’t think 2021’s line up was anything to write home about vs previous years, so it’s always made me wonder if there’s a good chunk of other content they’re holding off on. The statement could have also been around third party planning as well tho
 
mariodk18 said:
So I've been thinking back to Emily's "Nintendo's been sitting on quite a few games" remark from a while back. When does Nintendo usually hold back games/content? For the launch of new hardware, whether it's a revision, a peripheral, or a successor. Even during the Switch era, there were multiple "slower first halves" (or entire years in the case of the Wii U) that picked up in the second half of the year once new hardware was on its way. SM Odyssey was held back for a holiday 2017 launch and it seems likely to me that less critical content was cut for later games/versions (battle mode for MK8) or pushed into a sequel on Switch (Splatoon 2). Additionally, I believe Chris Dring, who reports on UK games sales, has stated that next year seems to be pretty quiet after Zelda according to his sources.

My point regarding all the above is that all this talk of held back games reminds a lot of the Switch launch and even its revisions.
Click to expand...
Switch had a big batch of titles partially because Nintendo moved Wii U exclusives over. The current reserving of games is at least partially because of a Nintendo changing how they run their QA department
 
0
I've said late 2023 or 2024 for the longest time and I stand by that; I also believe that 8nm Samsung would be quite outdated by that time, and that choice would resemble the weird 20nm choice from 2017. I personally believe that Nintendo will use a more recent node.
Had a more powerful console released in 2021-22, like many here thought it would, then 8nm would have been the most logical choice. Not for a console releasing 2 years after, in my opinion.
 
Truno said:
Zelda comes out in ~5 months and it's too quiet imo
Click to expand...
It's also too quiet for Zelda information in general. If it wasn't coming out around the same time Totk, I think we would have gotten way more information by now. But not exactly a blow out.
Nintendo also definitely doesn't want other 1st party games in the spotlight have their thunder stolen from them.
A leak as early as January is possible, but kinda wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't any next month--cause Nintendo seems to be way stricter on NDAs and leaked information coming out, and will punish those who do. An official direct of Zelda and Drake has to be after FE. Late January-February is the earliest. But yeah, I would get kinda worried if we don't get a direct in February for Drake.
 
0
Bosintang said:
I've said late 2023 or 2024 for the longest time and I stand by that; I also believe that 8nm Samsung would be quite outdated by that time, and that choice would resemble the weird 20nm choice from 2017. I personally believe that Nintendo will use a more recent node.
Had a more powerful console released in 2021-22, like many here thought it would, then 8nm would have been the most logical choice. Not for a console releasing 2 years after, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
node is pretty irrelevant if it hits the performance targets they want
 
Truno said:
Zelda comes out in ~5 months and it's too quiet imo
Click to expand...
It's quiet right now because leaks don't happen in November/December when the entire supply chain is crazy busy.

I'd give it until mid January until we could maybe start hearing more rumblings. Before then it's much harder to get information from contacts.
 
Skittzo said:
It's quiet right now because leaks don't happen in November/December when the entire supply chain is crazy busy.

I'd give it until mid January until we could maybe start hearing more rumblings. Before then it's much harder to get information from contacts.
Click to expand...

January... LET'S GO!!!

ON.jpg
 
karmitt said:
Bloomberg’s 2021 reporting on the “4K Switch” also mentioned that they were preparing a slate of new games to release with it. Can’t dig up the statement because of the paywall but I recall the wording. I didn’t think 2021’s line up was anything to write home about vs previous years, so it’s always made me wonder if there’s a good chunk of other content they’re holding off on. The statement could have also been around third party planning as well tho
Click to expand...
Is easy to pass these type of paywalls if yo know a few of tech.
 
mariodk18 said:
Just put the link on the archive website
Click to expand...
Or in the wayback machine

web.archive.org

Nintendo Plans Upgraded Switch Console and Major Games for 2021

Nintendo Co. plans to debut an upgraded model of its Switch console next year along with a lineup of new games, people familiar with the matter said, ceding 2020’s holiday spotlight to rival devices from Sony Corp. and Microsoft Corp.
web.archive.org web.archive.org

Edit. You can also see the article in the code if you go to "development tools" in your navegator, but the wayback machine is more easy to usw
 
Bosintang said:
I've said late 2023 or 2024 for the longest time and I stand by that; I also believe that 8nm Samsung would be quite outdated by that time, and that choice would resemble the weird 20nm choice from 2017. I personally believe that Nintendo will use a more recent node.
Had a more powerful console released in 2021-22, like many here thought it would, then 8nm would have been the most logical choice. Not for a console releasing 2 years after, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
What choices did/does Nintendo have?

Nvidia purchased too many 20nm wafer starts from TSMC so they gave Nintendo a deal on the Tegra X1. This saved Nvidia from having to completely write off the capacity that they bought. The only alternative at this time was the weaker and older Tegra K1 on 28nm.

In 2019 TSMC closed the 20nm fab so Nintendo had to move to the Tegra X1+. This also lined up with the end of LPDDR4 manufacturing so Nvidia changed that to LPDDR4X. Nvidia had the Tegra X2 available but the CPU was problematic (and not an ARM reference design).

In 2023 there are better offerings from other competitors (Mediatek, AMD) but backwards compatibility is going to better with an Nvidia solution.
Whatever new hardware is coming will use a fab process that Nvidia has lined up already. Doing something like porting Ampere to 5nm will cost hundreds of millions of dollars - it would make more sense to just use Ada instead.
 
Nvidia gets good deals on process nodes by having multiple products on the same node. Right now, Nvidia manufactures chips on three nodes - TSMC 7nm (datacenter ampere), Samsung 8nm (desktop Ampere), TSMC 5nm (Ada). Nvidia has no major new product lines to manufacture. It would be very strange to have a product not on one of those three nodes, and would drive up costs.

20nm wasn't a weird choice by Nintendo, it was Nvidia building an integrated SOC out of their mature GPU tech. Kepler was on 28nm, so the K1 was on 28nm.

Hardware testing with Nvidia GPUs by Thraktor, Orin documentation, and power tests by third parties all suggest an 8W minimum for Drake's GPU at 620+Mhz. The listed power ranges are a 50% reduction in power.

Drake has a new power saving technology called FLCG. However, FLCG is also in Ada chips according to internal documentation. Nvidia reports a 50% reduction in power usage for Ada at the same performance level as Ampere, with both FLCG and the node shrink together. Early power tests with 4090 suggest that power reduction is actually optimistic.

Either
  1. Nvidia and Nintendo are spending extra money to be on a process node with no other shared products, or...
  2. They're on the same node as Lovelace, releasing after Lovelace, but still not running Lovelace ,or...
  3. Drake has power saving magic that is not on any other device in the Nvidia product line, including their top of the line cards, but is so simple that it's still the same Ampere architecture, or...
  4. The wattage numbers in the test don't mean what we think they mean.
1) Has happened before, when Nvidia went with 20nm for the TX1, but it's worth noting they planned on moving Maxwell over to it, and were very unhappy with the yields and didn't make the move. 2) Is insane, but I've theorized it was possible myself. 3) I simply do not believe. 4) Seems likely
 
oldpuck said:
Nvidia gets good deals on process nodes by having multiple products on the same node. Right now, Nvidia manufactures chips on three nodes - TSMC 7nm (datacenter ampere), Samsung 8nm (desktop Ampere), TSMC 5nm (Ada). Nvidia has no major new product lines to manufacture. It would be very strange to have a product not on one of those three nodes, and would drive up costs.

20nm wasn't a weird choice by Nintendo, it was Nvidia building an integrated SOC out of their mature GPU tech. Kepler was on 28nm, so the K1 was on 28nm.

Hardware testing with Nvidia GPUs by Thraktor, Orin documentation, and power tests by third parties all suggest an 8W minimum for Drake's GPU at 620+Mhz. The listed power ranges are a 50% reduction in power.

Drake has a new power saving technology called FLCG. However, FLCG is also in Ada chips according to internal documentation. Nvidia reports a 50% reduction in power usage for Ada at the same performance level as Ampere, with both FLCG and the node shrink together. Early power tests with 4090 suggest that power reduction is actually optimistic.

Either
  1. Nvidia and Nintendo are spending extra money to be on a process node with no other shared products, or...
  2. They're on the same node as Lovelace, releasing after Lovelace, but still not running Lovelace ,or...
  3. Drake has power saving magic that is not on any other device in the Nvidia product line, including their top of the line cards, but is so simple that it's still the same Ampere architecture, or...
  4. The wattage numbers in the test don't mean what we think they mean.
1) Has happened before, when Nvidia went with 20nm for the TX1, but it's worth noting they planned on moving Maxwell over to it, and were very unhappy with the yields and didn't make the move. 2) Is insane, but I've theorized it was possible myself. 3) I simply do not believe. 4) Seems likely
Click to expand...
Yeah I think this is a good analysis. To give a percentage on each case IMO I'd say 90% 4, ,6% 1, 3% 2 and 1% 1.
 
0
oldpuck said:
Nvidia gets good deals on process nodes by having multiple products on the same node. Right now, Nvidia manufactures chips on three nodes - TSMC 7nm (datacenter ampere), Samsung 8nm (desktop Ampere), TSMC 5nm (Ada). Nvidia has no major new product lines to manufacture. It would be very strange to have a product not on one of those three nodes, and would drive up costs.

20nm wasn't a weird choice by Nintendo, it was Nvidia building an integrated SOC out of their mature GPU tech. Kepler was on 28nm, so the K1 was on 28nm.

Hardware testing with Nvidia GPUs by Thraktor, Orin documentation, and power tests by third parties all suggest an 8W minimum for Drake's GPU at 620+Mhz. The listed power ranges are a 50% reduction in power.

Drake has a new power saving technology called FLCG. However, FLCG is also in Ada chips according to internal documentation. Nvidia reports a 50% reduction in power usage for Ada at the same performance level as Ampere, with both FLCG and the node shrink together. Early power tests with 4090 suggest that power reduction is actually optimistic.

Either
  1. Nvidia and Nintendo are spending extra money to be on a process node with no other shared products, or...
  2. They're on the same node as Lovelace, releasing after Lovelace, but still not running Lovelace ,or...
  3. Drake has power saving magic that is not on any other device in the Nvidia product line, including their top of the line cards, but is so simple that it's still the same Ampere architecture, or...
  4. The wattage numbers in the test don't mean what we think they mean.
1) Has happened before, when Nvidia went with 20nm for the TX1, but it's worth noting they planned on moving Maxwell over to it, and were very unhappy with the yields and didn't make the move. 2) Is insane, but I've theorized it was possible myself. 3) I simply do not believe. 4) Seems likely
Click to expand...
Well if they go with 8nm, that means they would have to go for the drastic design departure for a die shrink since it's a dead end node, right? What would a theoretical Drake lite be on? Maybe it'd be so good that they actually release a mid-gen refresh this time, so we get both the lite and "new" models? Would it be on 4N or Samsung 5nm?
 
Bosintang said:
I've said late 2023 or 2024 for the longest time and I stand by that; I also believe that 8nm Samsung would be quite outdated by that time, and that choice would resemble the weird 20nm choice from 2017. I personally believe that Nintendo will use a more recent node.
Had a more powerful console released in 2021-22, like many here thought it would, then 8nm would have been the most logical choice. Not for a console releasing 2 years after, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I've mentioned this before and I stand on this premise, Nintendo in this situation are really probably benefiting from the fact that everyone had jumped ship from Samsung Foundries and SEC needs to be aggressive in order to bring back customers.

Landing an extremely high volume product like "Drake Switch" would not only show Nvidia that Samsung has made major improvements to their manufacturing (especially on newer nodes), but also allows Samsung to upsell Nintendo on UFS storage and RAM for a package deal. As much as Nvidia has raved about Switch business every year since its existence, this will be a production partnership that will likely continue for the next 4-6 years in which all parties will benefit from continuous high demand that will greatly outstrip supply.
 
At least the past 2 times (Switch and Drake), it seems like any deficiencies will not be because of "Nintendo gonna Nintendo", like with the Wii U or 3DS. If Drake ends up on 8nm (which it most likely will), it will have made sense because Orin is on that node and is also difficult to move away from or shrink. Same with the X1; Nintendo and Nvidia went with the best option they had at the time. But this time, DLSS is here to save the day and will be the difference maker. Do I have the gist of it?
 
mariodk18 said:
At least the past 2 times (Switch and Drake), it seems like any deficiencies will not be because of "Nintendo gonna Nintendo", like with the Wii U or 3DS. If Drake ends up on 8nm (which it most likely will), it will have made sense because Orin is on that node and is also difficult to move away from or shrink. Same with the X1; Nintendo and Nvidia went with the best option they had at the time. But this time, DLSS is here to save the day and will be the difference maker. Do I have the gist of it?
Click to expand...

I get the ties people make with Orin but we also have to take into account that by the time Drake gets into full production speed to meet demand, Nvidia will be about ready to launch their next generation Thor SoC in 2025. Samsung needs a product like Switch in their portfolio, because if it is 5nm and they can consistently supply a volume of 20-25 units per year, that in of itself is a statement to the industry...
 
slsk said:
For a successor, there are lots of options that are better than the Tegra X1+ right now. Unlikely to beat the T239 but definitely better than what Nintendo is currently using.
Click to expand...
the problem is that you have to answer why they wouldn't go back to Nvidia. the only logical reason is because Nintendo wants to go off-the-shelf again and Nvidia doesn't have anything that suits
 
0
oldpuck said:
Nvidia gets good deals on process nodes by having multiple products on the same node. Right now, Nvidia manufactures chips on three nodes - TSMC 7nm (datacenter ampere), Samsung 8nm (desktop Ampere), TSMC 5nm (Ada). Nvidia has no major new product lines to manufacture. It would be very strange to have a product not on one of those three nodes, and would drive up costs.

20nm wasn't a weird choice by Nintendo, it was Nvidia building an integrated SOC out of their mature GPU tech. Kepler was on 28nm, so the K1 was on 28nm.

Hardware testing with Nvidia GPUs by Thraktor, Orin documentation, and power tests by third parties all suggest an 8W minimum for Drake's GPU at 620+Mhz. The listed power ranges are a 50% reduction in power.

Drake has a new power saving technology called FLCG. However, FLCG is also in Ada chips according to internal documentation. Nvidia reports a 50% reduction in power usage for Ada at the same performance level as Ampere, with both FLCG and the node shrink together. Early power tests with 4090 suggest that power reduction is actually optimistic.

Either
  1. Nvidia and Nintendo are spending extra money to be on a process node with no other shared products, or...
  2. They're on the same node as Lovelace, releasing after Lovelace, but still not running Lovelace ,or...
  3. Drake has power saving magic that is not on any other device in the Nvidia product line, including their top of the line cards, but is so simple that it's still the same Ampere architecture, or...
  4. The wattage numbers in the test don't mean what we think they mean.
1) Has happened before, when Nvidia went with 20nm for the TX1, but it's worth noting they planned on moving Maxwell over to it, and were very unhappy with the yields and didn't make the move. 2) Is insane, but I've theorized it was possible myself. 3) I simply do not believe. 4) Seems likely
Click to expand...
5. Getting multiple components from Samsung, would give them enough leeway to negotiate better prices from them (screen, storage, ram, soc?). So 1. woudnt be so expensive anyway.

Considering Orin and the rest of Ampere (pretty much) is on Samsung, I imagine its simpler to move Drake to another Samsung node, than moving it to TSMC.
 
Truno said:
Zelda comes out in ~5 months and it's too quiet imo
Click to expand...
When we see proper Tears of the Kingdom gameplay it will be running on Drake imo. We were never going to see anything about Zelda or Drake until late January because in part they still want to sell people the current Switch, Lite and OLED models as much as possible in the run up to Christmas.

Nintendo’s marketing cycle is based around their next big first party release and their next big release is Fire Emblem Engage on January 20th.

My bet is we see a huge Nintendo Direct in the third week of January (probably Thursday the 26th) which reveals Drake and uses TotK gameplay as its main selling point aswell as showcasing a few third party Drake exclusives and “4k” patches to older titles.

If for some reason we get to March or April well before the TotK release without them revealing Drake (please no) then it will have been pushed back to November 2023 and the next 3D Mario game will be the game that they use to sell it imo.

I’m 99% sure we will see Drake before their next financial report in March because it will be used in their forecasting for the next few quarters.
 
ILikeFeet said:
node is pretty irrelevant if it hits the performance targets they want
Click to expand...
Wouldn't it make sense for nintendo to base performance targets and battery life on the node first? If Nintendo goes 8nm, then its something they went with all along, and most likely as a cost saving measure if anything.
 
ShadowFox08 said:
Wouldn't it make sense for nintendo to base performance targets and battery life on the node first? If Nintendo goes 8nm, then its something they went with all along, and most likely as a cost saving measure if anything.
Click to expand...
Nintendo would have a list of targets, Nvidia does their best to meet them. if Nvidia can do it on 8nm, then 8nm it is. all of this is simulated before being committed to silicon so if it wasn't possible on 8nm, Nvidia could tell them early and Nintendo would either have to make concession for the sake of a cheap chip or make the jump to a better node to hit their targets
 
0
It's fair to assume we're getting a bigger battery too, right? Switch V1, V2 and OLED all seem to share the same 4310mAh battery, so getting a larger battery for Drake would at least help in getting some extra leeway with a more power-hungry chip and for battery estimates to be at least better than Erista
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom