• 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.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

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

Reader mode
Thraktor said:
What about the other options? TSMC 6nm or Samsung 5nm/4nm?

Honestly the more I think about it the less I think these other possibilities are viable. Even aside from the issue that these aren't processes Nvidia is using for anything else, I just don't think a 12 SM GPU would make sense on either of them. Even on TSMC 4N it's a stretch. Evidence suggests that it would achieve a 2x efficiency improvement, but we would be looking for 2.5x in reality. There's enough wiggle room there, in terms of Ada having some additional features not in T239 and not having hard data on Ada's power consumption, so the actual improvement in T239's case may be 2.5x, but even that would mean that Nintendo have gone for the largest GPU possible within the power limit.

With 4N just about stretching to the 2.5x improvement in efficiency required for a 12 SM GPU to make sense, I don't think the chances for any other process are good. We don't have direct examples for other processes like we have for Ada, but from everything we know, TSMC's 5nm class processes are significantly more efficient than either their 6nm or Samsung's 5nm/4nm processes. If it's a squeeze for 12 SMs to work on 4N, then I can't see how it would make sense on anything less efficient than 4N.

But what about cost, isn't 4nm really expensive?

Actually, no. TSMC's 4N wafers are expensive, but they're also much higher density, which means you fit many more chips on a wafer. This SemiAnalysis article from September claimed that Nvidia pays 2.2x as much for a TSMC 4N wafer as they do for a Samsung 8nm wafer. However, Nvidia is achieving 2.7x higher transistor density on 4N, which means that a chip with the same transistor count would actually be cheaper if manufactured on 4N than 8nm (even more so when you factor yields into account).

Are there any caveats?

Yes, the major one being the power consumption of the chip. I'm assuming that Nintendo's next device is going to be roughly the same size and form-factor as the Switch, and they will want a similar battery life. If it's a much larger device (like Steam Deck sized) or they're ok with half an hour of battery life, then that changes the equations, but I don't think either of those are realistic. Ditto if it turned out to be a stationary home console for some reason (again, I'm not expecting that).

The other one is that I'm assuming that Nintendo will use all 12 SMs in portable mode. It's theoretically possible that they would disable half of them in portable mode, and only run the full 12 in docked mode. This would allow them to stick within 3W even on 8nm. However, it's a pain from the software point of view, and it assumes that Nintendo is much more focussed on docked performance than handheld, including likely running much higher power draw docked. I feel it's more likely that Nintendo would build around handheld first, as that's the baseline of performance all games will have to operate on, and then use the same setup at higher clocks for docked.

That's a lot of words. Is this just all confirmation bias or copium or hopium or whatever the kids call it?

I don't think so. Obviously everyone should be careful of their biases, but I actually made the exact same argument over a year ago back before the Nvidia hack, when we thought T239 would be manufactured on Samsung 8nm but didn't know how big the GPU was. At the time a lot of people thought I was too pessimistic because I thought 8 SMs was unrealistic on 8nm and a 4 SM GPU was more likely. I was wrong about T239 using a 4 SM GPU, but the Orin power figures we got later backed up my argument, and 8 SMs is indeed unrealistic on 8nm. The 12 SM GPU we got is even more unrealistic on 8nm, so by the same logic we must be looking at a much more efficient manufacturing process. What looked pessimistic back then is optimistic now only because the data has changed.
Click to expand...
I think as long as TSMC's N6 process node or newer is used for the fabrication of Drake, I think I'm happy.

⋮
"Breath" became most successful title in the series, with about 30 million copies sold, creating especially high expectations for "Tears." It was supposed to be out by last year, but in March 2022, Aonuma had to announce its delay, "to make sure that everything in the game was 100 percent to our standards," he said. Big video games these days have been launching with bugs and poor graphical performance, while "Tears" as released with no issues, despite more complex physics than even the most expensive PlayStation 5 title.
⋮
Click to expand...
 
Thraktor said:
To be clear, I think the original plan (up until mid-2022 at least) was a launch in holiday 2023, but I wouldn't rule out a delay into 2024. If it does get pushed into 2024, though, I would expect it early in the year, not late.



On the CPU front, eight A78C cores seems almost certain. It's a bit more difficult to extract CPU power curves from Nvidia's Jetson tool (and the A78AE isn't exactly the same as the A78C), but from what I can see I'd guess around a 1.7 or 1.8Ghz clock speed. For 8N that would be around 1.2GHz. Unlike the GPU, though, an 8 core A78C is very much viable on 8nm.



Just curious, but when you're looking at Tflops to bandwidth ratios of Ampere cards, are you using the official Tflops figure for the cards, or calculating it from the actual clock speed the cards achieve in game? The reason I ask is that Nvidia's official figures actually underestimate the Tflops by a bit, as the GPUs typically run at a higher clock than the advertised boost clock. For example, the RTX 3070 advertises a boost clock of 1,725MHz, for 20.31 Tflops, but in game clock speeds average around 1,890MHz, which would give 22.26 Tflops. With 448GB/s of bandwidth, the former would come out at 22.06GB/s per Tflop, but the latter would give us 20.13GB/s per Tflop.

With standard LPDDR5 at 102GB/s and 25GB/s for the CPU, that would give a cap of 3.5Tflops if we're using official figures, or 3.8Tflops if we're basing it off actual in-game clocks. In either case I think they could manage 3.4Tflops without being any more bandwidth constrained than other Ampere GPUs. Of course any additional bandwidth on top of that would surely help, so I definitely wouldn't complain if it were LPDDR5X.



Do any games actually use a 307MHz clock on Switch? My understanding is that it was replaced prior to launch with the 384MHz clock, which has a 1:2 ratio with the 768MHz docked clock (and then a 460MHz portable clock was added too, reducing the ratio further).

In any case, my reasoning for the 1.1GHz docked clock is partly the clean 1:2 ratio like the 384MHz/768MHz clocks Switch launched with, but also power consumption and bandwidth limits. A 1.1GHz clock would put power consumption at around 10W for the GPU, so maybe around 15W for the full system. They're not concerned about battery life in docked mode, but they still have to cool the system, and with a similar thickness and small fan setup it would be tricky to cool much more than 15W without the fan becoming distractingly loud.

On the memory bandwidth side, as discussed by @Look over there above, there's only so much performance they can get before they become bandwidth-starved. Comparing to desktop Ampere GPUs, a 1.1GHz clock would put them in a similar bandwidth per Tflops ratio. Maybe they could get away with 1.2GHz if we're looking at in-game Ampere clocks for our comparison.



We don't know if they'll ship with binned GPU cores, but personally I don't think it's very likely. Binning GPU cores is common on console chips as a way to improve yields, but those chips are typically pretty large. The PS5 SoC is around 300mm² and the XBSX SoC is 360mm², and yields get worse the bigger the chip, so you basically need to disable something to get decent yields on a chip that big. By comparison, if T239 is on TSMC 4N, then it's going to be a tiny chip, well under 100mm². Yields should be good enough with a die that small that there's no need for binning out any cores.

On disabling the SMs, I don't think it would need a restart, but it would require much more careful management than the current change from docked to handheld. The SMs being disabled would have code running on them at the time, so that in-flight code and data would need to be migrated to other SMs. Developers would also have to account for the two different GPU configurations when working on handheld and docked modes, which would be more work than the current "identical GPU at different clocks" paradigm.

Regarding taping out in 2022, here are a list of products Nvidia taped out in 2022:

Hopper: TSMC 4N
Lovelace: TSMC 4N
T239: ?
Grace: TSMC 4N

It's not exactly a difficult game of fill-in-the-blank.
Click to expand...
When I first heard chatter last year about Drake/T239 possibly coming out on TSMC 4N, I dismissed it as excitable fanboi fantasy. But you've got me totally convinced now. My only concern is when Nvidia will have capacity on that node for Nintendo, considering their enterprise/AI business still seems to be going gangbusters! Hopefully we'll find out more clues in a few days when Nvidia's next financials come out.
 
Armoured_Bear said:
No idea why you write that tbh, everyone on this forum will buy a REDACTED to play Nintendo games so Series S is irrelevant.
Click to expand...
There is a class of commenter who pipes up about 4 TF being what needs to be achieved in order to get third party support, because of the Series S. There is a strong overlap between that class, and the folks who don't care about handheld mode. I was speaking to those people specifically.
 
0
boodream said:
That's why I see a balance between cross-gen titles and some exclusives. Because in the short term, it's fine to sell tons of copies of Totk, but at some point in the life cycle of the next console, people will wonder where their next-gen Zelda or Mario are. And I don't know if remakes and remasters will be attractive enough in the meantime.But perhaps the market has changed and I may be wrong.
Click to expand...
Here's my take on this...

No matter how amazing the successor is, they can't convince their entire 130+ mi userbase to upgrade. Some with change platform, others change hobbies, others grow bored, etc. It's inevitable.

They need to convince most Switch users to upgrade AND convince people who didn't buy a Switch as well. That's why "new ways to play" is so important to Nintendo, as 3rd parties are unlikely to put the next hits like Skyrim, Minecraft, Dark Souls, PUBG, etc day 1 on Nintendo consoles.

And in order to do that consistently, they won't be afraid to leverage the new hardware and do games which won't be possible on the Switch. I'm sure there will be exclusives in the first year, if not day 1. I wouldn't be surprised by a exclusive 3D Mario using RT cores for new gameplay, for example.

OTOH, games which can be done on the Switch will be there until the system is readily available or the active base gets too low to be worth it. And when TotK can run on Switch, I don't expect many "the Switch wouldn't run it" games. So I wouldn't be surprised if the next 3D Mario was cross-gen either.
 
DariliumA said:
You're telling me you think the SDK will somehow be released to devs between now and Holiday 2024 and they will have time enough to develop something in that time frame? Huh.
Click to expand...

You can... disagree... and make points... without being sardonic and rude
 
0
Thraktor said:
Do any games actually use a 307MHz clock on Switch? My understanding is that it was replaced prior to launch with the 384MHz clock, which has a 1:2 ratio with the 768MHz docked clock (and then a 460MHz portable clock was added too, reducing the ratio further).
Click to expand...
If I recall correctly, all three portable GPU clocks were present (and probably used) at launch, but most didn't realize 460MHz was a possibility until Mortal Kombat used it. Reading between the lines, I suspect it was a last minute addition to run BotW better, and Nintendo probably didn't tell third party devs about it right away, since it wasn't present in the leaks.

I believe certain first party games with more disappointing handheld resolutions were noted to be using 307MHz, but I could be misremembering.
 
Last edited:
kasparov77 said:
First off: do we know if Drake won't ship with software-binned GPU cores? (maybe even CPU cores too). The info from leaks we got so far could be pointing out to 1536 CUDA cores and 8 CPU cores but those could be disabled software wise even if they do exist on silicon.
Click to expand...
The hack wasn't a chip design, it was software. NVN2 expects there to be 12 SMs. Which is not to say that there may not be some level of binning/floor-sweeping going on, but Nvidia was building the SDK around having 12 SMs available.
 
I think in a non-covid world, TOTK was probably a late 2021/early 2022 title. Maybe it could have been squeezed with OLED launch.

And likely next HW was aiming a 2023 release.

Man, its amazing how COVID delayed all nintendo internal plans lol.
 
LoneRanger said:
I think in a non-covid world, TOTK was probably a late 2021/early 2022 title. Maybe it could have been squeezed with OLED launch.

And likely next HW was aiming a 2023 release.

Man, it's amazing how COVID delayed all nintendo internal plans lol.
Click to expand...
It pretty much delayed all of Japan (to a larger degree than the west).
 
JoshuaJSlone said:
At that point it's basically a waste making developers program for two separate modes.
Click to expand...
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
 
Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
Click to expand...
Why does that even matter, when Drake is going to be a massive leap from the Switch? At that point, its specs will be adequate.
 
Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
Click to expand...
Switch already is PS3 pro+.
 
Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
Click to expand...
Nintendo don't aim for high performance but they have been pushed before by Capcom to up the performance of a console. I have to imagine that third parties close with nintendo have already told them that they want it powerful enough for easy ports of PS4/Deck-optomized versions of games.
 
Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
Click to expand...
Why is a piece of hardware from 2011 the only baseline for "high performance"? I think if you're going call anyone delusional, you need to have some backings like a bunch of previous posts have or shove off with that attitude.

Btw, switch is well above the ps3 so idk why they'd go backwards in power.
 
Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
Click to expand...
The tx1 launched on a bad node granted, but the tx1 is a great chip. If they had launched with Mariko and clocked it to its potential, it would have been fantastic. And what we know about Drake all sounds fantastic.

I would say post Nvidia, they are aiming for high performance. Albeit on a portable power budget.
 
oldpuck said:
The hack wasn't a chip design, it was software. NVN2 expects there to be 12 SMs. Which is not to say that there may not be some level of binning/floor-sweeping going on, but Nvidia was building the SDK around having 12 SMs available.
Click to expand...
I feel like T239 could possibly have 14 SMS and it’s already binned to only use 12SMs. Maybe.

Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
Click to expand...
I’m rather confused by this comment. I’m not sure it’s possible for them to even deliver PS3 Pro+ level of power.

What does that even mean?
 
Giancarlo said:
you expecting too much for Nintendo next hardware, expect 1.5 teraflops on handheld mode and 1.8 in TV mode or if we are luck 2 Teraflops
Click to expand...
Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube,
Click to expand...
You misunderstood @JoshuaJSlone ’s point. 1.5 and 1.8 teraflops are so close to each other you’re asking developers to test two modes without actually getting two modes worth of difference.

If you can hit a target with decent battery life in handheld, then you should be able to roughly double it in docked mode before hitting heat problems, with any sane design. So either your expectation for handheld mode is way too high, or your expectation for docked mode is way too low.
 
0
TSR3 said:
When I first heard chatter last year about Drake/T239 possibly coming out on TSMC 4N, I dismissed it as excitable fanboi fantasy. But you've got me totally convinced now. My only concern is when Nvidia will have capacity on that node for Nintendo, considering their enterprise/AI business still seems to be going gangbusters! Hopefully we'll find out more clues in a few days when Nvidia's next financials come out.
Click to expand...
Given Drake was probably designed for 4N, Nvidia probably prepared a slice of their allocation for Nintendo. Given how small Drake would end up being, that might be fewer wafers than one expects.
 
ILikeFeet said:
Given Drake was probably designed for 4N, Nvidia probably prepared a slice of their allocation for Nintendo. Given how small Drake would end up being, that might be fewer wafers than one expects.
Click to expand...
I think 10 wafers can give you 500 Drakes while 10 wafers would only give you 50-60 of their DC/high end GPU

(a guess)
 
ReddDreadtheLead said:
I think 10 wafers can give you 500 Drakes while 10 wafers would only give you 50-60 of their DC/high end GPU

(a guess)
Click to expand...
ILikeFeet said:
Given Drake was probably designed for 4N, Nvidia probably prepared a slice of their allocation for Nintendo. Given how small Drake would end up being, that might be fewer wafers than one expects
Click to expand...

I think the issue isn’t so much the size of the SoC but rather the quantity needed in total. Even if REDACTED isn’t as successful as the Switch in the long run, you’re looking at producing 20 million plus SoCs for the first year. I don’t have details of the 4N node capacity, but that’s got to be a seriously big slice of total production once it gets going
 
TSR3 said:
I think the issue isn’t so much the size of the SoC but rather the quantity needed in total. Even if REDACTED isn’t as successful as the Switch in the long run, you’re looking at producing 20 million plus SoCs for the first year. I don’t have details of the 4N node capacity, but that’s got to be a seriously big slice of total production once it gets going
Click to expand...
Well, you’re not making 20M the first year so they’ll worry about that after, which would be when 3nm is on the market and 5nm is decreasing in price.

I believe this year or next year is the last year where most major customers are on 5nm, after that they’ll be moving to better nodes and slowly reducing their older nodes.
 
Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
Click to expand...
If Nintendo had stuck with the original plan of using what was basically half a Wii U for a portable, then maybe, but they didn't. Nvidia convinced them to go with what was considered the strongest mobile SoC for its time, and the T239 is very promising on continuing with high performance for its purpose. With all the handheld PCs coming out that aren't even hitting Series S, it's a limitation of portability. It's high performance in a portable package.

Switch already exceeds the PS3 in portable mode, and one could consider it a PS3 Pro+ in docked mode. Exceeding PS4 levels in portable mode will be easy (and PS4 Pro levels in docked certainly possible) thanks to the newer architecture, DLSS, and the fact that PS4 had some of its own problems, like a poor CPU. If we compared the Cortex A57 in the Switch vs PS4's Jaguar, core for core and running at the same clock frequency, the A57 beats out Jaguar. What Switch lacked was double the cores and a push up of the clock frequency. The T239's 8-core A78C will runs laps around PS4's CPU like it was nothing.
 
Thraktor said:
.
Click to expand...
Not exactly doubting your original post, I agree with most of it but I still have some questions in my mind which I'll get to later.
First off, a bit of historical context to explain why I agree Nintendo picking 8nm as a node makes no sense:

Back in 2015, Switch's Tegra X1 chip release date, it's manufacturing process was 20nm. Taking a look at other mobile SoC's released at a similar timeframe, 20nm seems to be a common node, for example: the Snapdragon 810. But some were already being manufactured under 14nm like the Exynos 7420.
Of course, in 2015 if we look at any budget phone, we'll see that ~28nm was widely used.
But the Switch had a 2015 chip for a product released in early 2017, a year in which 10nm was becoming more common with chips like the Exynos 8895 on the higher end and 14nm on mid range phones with chips like the Exynos 7885 and Snapdragon 821.
Sure, you would still see 20+nm phones releasing in 2016 through 2017 in the low to very low end of the market but overall, 14nm and under was quite common. Now, one could question Nintendo on why they picked 20nm in 2017 instead of shipping 16nm early. And well, I think this relates to how the hardware was taped out for mass production back in a time where 20nm was the best option available to them.

Now, the more recent context for mobile chips released from 2022 through mid 2023 is: "low end" to mid range phones commonly use 5nm SoCs eg: Exynos 1330 and 1280. But, higher end actually expensive phones are shipping with 4nm chips such as: the Snapdragon 8 gen 2 and Exynos 2200.
But those are reaally fresh phone releases. I'm talking < 4 months ago. If we take a look just a while back, 7nm was quite common in some mid-range Sammy and Qualcomm chips like the Snapdragon 865.

In conclusion:
Considering previous historical context but, taking Thraktor's efficiency analysis into account, I'm not really questioning whether or not sub 8nm is what Nintendo will pick. Instead, I'm wondering whether or not they'll go 7nm with a die shrink later to 5nm or even 4nm or, if they'll wait until manufacturing under 5nm becomes cheaper.
But I'm starting to believe that they'll go with 5nm anyways because I believe they're aware of what happened to some 2017 switches by now.
And considering the hardware tapeout for drake took place around 2022 then I think there's no doubt.

But I'm still skeptical about how high they'll clock the SoC.
 
Kazuyamishima said:
Why does everyone keep saying tears has 0 problems? My switch lite is constantly chugging on any sky island with like 20fps it's insane
Click to expand...
Digital or physical? In either case, if you downloaded something, like the game or a patch, have you restarted your console? Sometimes after downloading on my V1, things get sluggish because of a possible memory leak. As for performance on mine, it's generally okay, but it mainly depends on how much is happening. Sky islands that aren't doing a lot of effects on-screen tend to run smooth enough.
 
Kazuyamishima said:
Why does everyone keep saying tears has 0 problems? My switch lite is constantly chugging on any sky island with like 20fps it's insane
Click to expand...
From what I understand, it might be because of a different type of RAM being used compared to the V2 and OLED models. While the specs are more or less the same, games will still run differently, depending on the model. I could be wrong, though.
 
0
ReddDreadtheLead said:
Well, you’re not making 20M the first year so they’ll worry about that after, which would be when 3nm is on the market and 5nm is decreasing in price.

I believe this year or next year is the last year where most major customers are on 5nm, after that they’ll be moving to better nodes and slowly reducing their older nodes.
Click to expand...
That’s where my wondering is leading to, that nvidia won’t have enough spare capacity on 4N until next year anyway. However why do you think the demand will be less than 20 million in the first year of REDACTED?
 
Kazuyamishima said:
Why does everyone keep saying tears has 0 problems? My switch lite is constantly chugging on any sky island with like 20fps it's insane
Click to expand...
That's odd. Don't get me wrong I have framedips occasionally, more particularly when using abilities with a lot of things on screen. But they're more of a rarity than dips I've run into on most other Switch games I've played.

I don't think I've ever run into any "chugging", and I'm pretty sensitive to even minor framepacing issues in games.

I was under the impression the Lite ran just as well as any other V2 system, is there something going on that I'm unaware of?
 
Giancarlo said:
you know very well Nintendo dont aim for high perfomance on they consoles, they dont do this since the Game Cube, why become delusional, expecting a high poweful console, knowing the Switch sucessor will not be this, if you want a powerful console better play a PS5 or Xbox Series X, i expecting a PS3 pro+ level of power for Switch sucessor, not a base PS4 or PS4 Pro for Switch sucessor, as many as you expect.
Click to expand...
Nintendo doesn't prioritize high performance as much as their competitors do, but that doesn't mean they're aiming for low performance. The TX1 is one of the fastest chips you could find at that power envelope in 2016, and is already capable of outperforming a PS3 in most real world workloads that get thrown at it. It stands to reason they'll probably maximize performance for their power budget again, as being within porting range, even if just barely, from PlayStation and Xbox has served them well and helped to really sell the Switch as a console you can take with you rather than just a portable.
 
Sin Drive said:
Why is a piece of hardware from 2011 the only baseline for "high performance"? I think if you're going call anyone delusional, you need to have some backings like a bunch of previous posts have or shove off with that attitude.

Btw, switch is well above the ps3 so idk why they'd go backwards in power.
Click to expand...
because the jump in graphical/techinal power between PS3/PS4 was considerable
 
Boxle said:
That's odd. Don't get me wrong I have framedips occasionally, more particularly when using abilities with a lot of things on screen. But they're more of a rarity than dips I've run into on most other Switch games I've played.

I don't think I've ever run into any "chugging", and I'm pretty sensitive to even minor framepacing issues in games.

I was under the impression the Lite ran just as well as any other V2 system, is there something going on that I'm unaware of?
Click to expand...
I have no idea what I'm doing wrong
 
Discostew said:
Digital or physical? In either case, if you downloaded something, like the game or a patch, have you restarted your console? Sometimes after downloading on my V1, things get sluggish because of a possible memory leak. As for performance on mine, it's generally okay, but it mainly depends on how much is happening. Sky islands that aren't doing a lot of effects on-screen tend to run smooth enough.
Click to expand...
Yeah i turn it on and off all the time idk what is causing it
 
0
When do you guys expect leaks of the actual hardware to happen? like the console T239 is going in I mean, say PS5 dev kit style leak, or like a switch lite factory shell leak, etc etc, also is it possible to find stuff about T239 software through a data mine of a pre-existing or upcoming game? say parameters for BC or something along those lines, or is that completely impossible? I am new, sorry if either was answered already and I missed it
 
AshiodyneFX said:
When do you guys expect leaks of the actual hardware to happen? like the console T239 is going in I mean, say PS5 dev kit style leak, or like a switch lite factory shell leak, etc etc, also is it possible to find stuff about T239 software through a data mine of a pre-existing or upcoming game? say parameters for BC or something along those lines, or is that completely impossible? I am new, sorry if either was answered already and I missed it
Click to expand...
August this year; assuming that the reason Nintendo is going to Gamescom this year is to show off the new dev kits in private.
 
TomNookYankees said:
August this year; assuming that the reason Nintendo is going to Gamescom this year is to show off the new dev kits in private.
Click to expand...
Is it confirmed Nintendo will have a physical presence at Gamescom? given they have "attended E3" and just had a direct associated with it at the time, has Nintendo shown dev kits at events before? i know other companies have but i am not quite aware if Nintendo did
 
TSR3 said:
That’s where my wondering is leading to, that nvidia won’t have enough spare capacity on 4N until next year anyway. However why do you think the demand will be less than 20 million in the first year of REDACTED?
Click to expand...
I don’t think the SoC would be the limiting factor here, but something else of the system.


And consoles start slow and then they pick up to a peak and then drift off into death.


To take an example from an old hat of a bygone era that still applies today, the PS2 first year sales as in the total year 1 of it on the market, it did about 10M or so. It was coming off a massive 102M install base for its time.

But that was a staggered release.

so I’ll use another incredibly popular console that didn’t really have that staggered of a release. FY05 and FY06 combine only net about 16M in sales.

Ok but it was still a staggered release.


PS4 was also a staggered release, it did 13.5M in its full year on the market (thereabout).


The ones who buy the consoles that early on are the core gamers, unless you believe that Nintendo has +20M core gamers ready day 1 to get the system, something they didn’t have even in the Wii U era to make it more successful, I don’t see 20M year one as a thing.


I think the only one that was barely able to do it was the Wii. But no one else was able to do it again.


And it’s not that I think demand will be less than 20 million, it’s that I think supply is going to be less than 20 million. 20m is a difficult number to hit year one, it’s actually very rare to hit 20 million year one.
 
Dekuman said:
So according to this TOTK was mostly done last March and they spent a year polishing and working out the bugs.
I would imagine the core team has probably moved on and finished the DLC planning at this point (if DLC is coming) and they would have plenty of time to prep any cross gen patches since March of last year for if that's in the cards.

Click to expand...
That's already mentioned here, as shown below.
Dakhil said:
I think as long as TSMC's N6 process node or newer is used for the fabrication of Drake, I think I'm happy.

⋮
"Breath" became most successful title in the series, with about 30 million copies sold, creating especially high expectations for "Tears." It was supposed to be out by last year, but in March 2022, Aonuma had to announce its delay, "to make sure that everything in the game was 100 percent to our standards," he said. Big video games these days have been launching with bugs and poor graphical performance, while "Tears" as released with no issues, despite more complex physics than even the most expensive PlayStation 5 title.
⋮
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
i said this all along but seems like the Zelda delay was to release or at least have it be an option as releasing as a Switch Pro/2/Boogaloo launch title. Hardware ends up being delayed but Zelda is already delayed at this point so the extra time is used for 'polish'. money is on the enhanced version being deep in development at that point, maybe they moved onto DLC too as suggested.
 
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