• 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
Why some of you think there is a possibility of having a home console instead of a hybrid system? For the nm? Or for the power consumption ?
 
Eos said:
Why some of you think there is a possibility of having a home console instead of a hybrid system? For the nm? Or for the power consumption ?
Click to expand...

That's not what's being suggested.

The hope is that Nintendo slams the system with power (20w+) to crank the GPU/CPU clocks as high as they can feasibly go, giving an extra boost when using it docked.

Some users argue Nintendo will keep a 2:1 power ratio of docked to handheld, others like myself hope Nintendo allows for a fair bit more docked power as the chip is certainly capable of it.
 
I know there's no way to know the node until a tear down is performed and we take a look ourselves.

But if they reveal this thing and it's yet again another tiny tablet except this time it's housing an 8 inch screen. Is it safe to assume it's 4nm since 8nm would get really hot with such a form factor? Or does this not matter because it comes down to the clocks as well as the power draw and not just the node?

Same way we will probably guess 8nm if it's on the bulkier side with the Deck and Ally.
 
Ooh interesting, I’m trying to think how it could work in practice though.
I’m reminded of the Asus ROG Phone cooler, which can open up a vent on the back to allow heat dissipation through surface cooling of the phone body and the airflow for the vapour chamber directly.

I think nintendo will still use a similar thermal solution they have now, but could use a wider or split heatpipe to allow more heat to be saturated , but perhaps like the steam deck there will be additional set of mesh grill on the back, or a vent like the phone to allow airflow to be ingested, when docked liiking at the patent images :p.

gsmarena_026.jpg
b3b488de-c227-44b8-8999-301def05cee7.__CR0,0,970,600_PT0_SX970_V1___.jpg
Click to expand...

Cooling through surface is not going to happen as it’ll be made with metal + can’t pick it up if heat is transferred that way. Moreover, you don’t want exposed heatsinks near the surface of the device.


edit; scratch that, I think I’m thinking wrong xd.... I’m viewing from the docked housing, as in the dock will accommodate the additional cooling fan.

Looking at again it reminds me of Aya Neo’s and other handheld cooling solutions
 
Last edited:
redmutineer75 said:
It’ll either be Samsung 8nm used in Ampere chips or TSMC 4nm used in Ada Lovelace chips.
Click to expand...
TSMC's N7 process node family can't be completely discounted since Nvidia's currently using that for fabricating several datacentre products (e.g. A100 (here, here, and here), BlueField-3 (here and here), etc.).
redmutineer75 said:
Are there any concrete statistics on node yields out there? That'd be very helpful in future node debates.
Click to expand...
Not really, since foundry companies don't publicly disclose process node yield rates. Most of the information about process node yield rates come from unofficial sources, which can vary in terms of reliability. This article from Anandtech lists the estimated yield rates of TSMC's and Samsung's 4 nm*/3 nm* process nodes from unofficial source(s), which should be taken with a healthy grain of salt.
* → a marketing nomenclature used by all foundry companies
mjayer said:


Oh snap yaw! They may actually be taking docked mode up to home console territory like I've been hoping! Fingers crossed we're getting a 20w+ home console mode pushing boundaries of what Drake can achieve!
Click to expand...

Here's the actual patent.
 
MadMarvainy said:
I know there's no way to know the node until a tear down is performed and we take a look ourselves.

But if they reveal this thing and it's yet again another tiny tablet except this time it's housing an 8 inch screen. Is it safe to assume it's 4nm since 8nm would get really hot with such a form factor? Or does this not matter because it comes down to the clocks as well as the power draw and not just the node?

Same way we will probably guess 8nm if it's on the bulkier side with the Deck and Ally.
Click to expand...

They could have it in a tiny thin tablet, but they'd have to downclock it so bad it would be a huge disappointment.
 
ns156 said:
That's not what's being suggested.

The hope is that Nintendo slams the system with power (20w+) to crank the GPU/CPU clocks as high as they can feasibly go, giving an extra boost when using it docked.

Some users argue Nintendo will keep a 2:1 power ratio of docked to handheld, others like myself hope Nintendo allows for a fair bit more docked power as the chip is certainly capable of it.
Click to expand...
Well... that's true. It would be a bit sad if the chip does not reach its maximum power as possible in docked mode.
 
ns156 said:
They could have it in a tiny thin tablet, but they'd have to downclock it so bad it would be a huge disappointment.
Click to expand...

Yeah it would be.

I just don't see the point in going with a sleeker form factor if you're not going to go with 4nm.

Unless there's some huge logistics hurdle I'm unaware of, I don't see the point in going 8nm over 4nm if they're making a hybrid successor that is carrying over some of the best things about the Switch.

Their next main console going from Switch size to Deck size would be weird to me.
 
0
It's a patent for a heat sink, I think people are getting ahead of themselves. There's the matter of the "rule of patents", sure, but this is a patent to place the heat sink directly over the SOC... And that's pretty much it! It's a miniaturised cooling system for a device like Nintendo Switch.

I'm not sure removing the heat pipe will get us 5-10W additional heat dissipation, y'know?

However, yeah, improved cooling is a plus, whether or not they go with it, but this isn't indicative of power consumption.

Given the size of the example motherboard, compared with the existing Switch, this is, in my view, more likely to be related to the various "Switch micro" type patents we've been seeing, like in-line shoulder buttons.
 
ns156 said:
They could have it in a tiny thin tablet, but they'd have to downclock it so bad it would be a huge disappointment.
Click to expand...
It's already been established that the 12SMs on 8N, even if downclocked to hell, would draw double the energy of the 2 Maxwell SMs on 20nm (a la Erista), so having it also be thin would be unfeasible unless cores are being disabled in handheld (be it through FLCG or whatever other means). If GA10F is actually fabbed on 8N, I'm more than likely waging on its SoC being more comparable to the Steam Deck's power draw & accordingly being shaped as such.
 
Last edited:
Dakhil said:
TSMC's N7 process node family can't be completely discounted since Nvidia's currently using that for fabricating several datacentre products (e.g. A100 (here, here, and here), BlueField-3 (here and here), etc.).

Not really, since foundry companies don't publicly disclose process node yield rates. Most of the information about process node yield rates come from unofficial sources, which can vary in terms of reliability. This article from Anandtech lists the estimated yield rates of TSMC's and Samsung's 4 nm*/3 nm* process nodes from unofficial source(s), which should be taken with a healthy grain of salt.
* → a marketing nomenclature used by all foundry companies

Here's the actual patent.
Click to expand...


here we go!... 1.21 giga watts!! 😎

 
Last edited:
mjayer said:


Oh snap yaw! They may actually be taking docked mode up to home console territory like I've been hoping! Fingers crossed we're getting a 20w+ home console mode pushing boundaries of what Drake can achieve!
Click to expand...

Who is he that are communicating with in those tweets? His content is interesting.

De la Switch 2 va a necesitar más que eso por lo que tengo entendido, ya que creo que lo que hemos visto filtrado fue un test arm+turing sin Tensor y he oído comentar que la versión final será otra con arm+ampere con Tensor, ya que las pruebas con DLSS no fueron bien.

From the Switch 2 it's going to need more than that from what I understand, as I think what we've seen leaked was an arm+turing test without Tensor and I've heard comment that the final version will be another one with arm+ampere with Tensor, as the DLSS tests didn't go well.
Click to expand...

Esto último ya digo que he escuchado y no sé si la fuente sería fiable o no, pero al parecer Nintendo originalmente quería la GPU sin Tensor, pensando que su modelo de reescalado iría bien solo con los CUDA.

NVIDIA parece haber intervenido ofreciendo un segundo SOC con Tensor.

This last I say I've heard and I don't know if the source would be reliable or not, but apparently Nintendo originally wanted the GPU without Tensor, thinking that their rescaling model would go well with just the CUDAs.

NVIDIA seems to have stepped in by offering a second SOC with Tensor.
Click to expand...
 
It isn't sound to make assumptions about power consumption or target based on a patent that's basically just "one particular way to dissipate heat." Besides the usual rule -- the most likely scenario is that Nintendo didn't choose to use this design in their upcoming hardware, because if they had, there would not be a published patent for us to see before the hardware has even been announced -- this patent doesn't have anything in anything in it that implies a certain level of power or heat.

Here are the distinct things about the patent as I understand them:
  • Plastic protrusions inside the housing are used to create a channel for improved airflow.
  • The heat transfer assembly is pressed together and connected with the heat generating components in a particular way.
There are other things in the example embodiment that make it noticeably different from the current Switch's cooling setup, so I do think it's very likely that this is basically a patent for "a device like the Switch with potentially increased heat dissipation needs." But that doesn't mean it's the approach Nintendo ultimately decided on, and it certainly doesn't imply any given wattage.

Dakhil said:
Here's the actual patent.
Click to expand...
Thank you for actually linking to the source instead of just a tweet.
 
ns156 said:
That's not what's being suggested.

The hope is that Nintendo slams the system with power (20w+) to crank the GPU/CPU clocks as high as they can feasibly go, giving an extra boost when using it docked.

Some users argue Nintendo will keep a 2:1 power ratio of docked to handheld, others like myself hope Nintendo allows for a fair bit more docked power as the chip is certainly capable of it.
Click to expand...

The memory bandwidth would put something of a limit on how much more powerful you could go, unfortunately. Though it does seem like the RT and DLSS acceleration wouldn't be quite as bandwidth-hungry as the shader rendering, so pushing a chip like this higher may well be a little more efficient.

Concernt said:
It's a patent for a heat sink, I think people are getting ahead of themselves. There's the matter of the "rule of patents", sure, but this is a patent to place the heat sink directly over the SOC... And that's pretty much it! It's a miniaturised cooling system for a device like Nintendo Switch.

I'm not sure removing the heat pipe will get us 5-10W additional heat dissipation, y'know?

However, yeah, improved cooling is a plus, whether or not they go with it, but this isn't indicative of power consumption.

Given the size of the example motherboard, compared with the existing Switch, this is, in my view, more likely to be related to the various "Switch micro" type patents we've been seeing, like in-line shoulder buttons.
Click to expand...

Well, from what some have said the launch Switch cooling was already overbuilt, so it might not need that much extra.
 
Hartmann said:
Who is he that are communicating with in those tweets? His content is interesting.

De la Switch 2 va a necesitar más que eso por lo que tengo entendido, ya que creo que lo que hemos visto filtrado fue un test arm+turing sin Tensor y he oído comentar que la versión final será otra con arm+ampere con Tensor, ya que las pruebas con DLSS no fueron bien.

From the Switch 2 it's going to need more than that from what I understand, as I think what we've seen leaked was an arm+turing test without Tensor and I've heard comment that the final version will be another one with arm+ampere with Tensor, as the DLSS tests didn't go well.
Click to expand...

Esto último ya digo que he escuchado y no sé si la fuente sería fiable o no, pero al parecer Nintendo originalmente quería la GPU sin Tensor, pensando que su modelo de reescalado iría bien solo con los CUDA.

NVIDIA parece haber intervenido ofreciendo un segundo SOC con Tensor.

This last I say I've heard and I don't know if the source would be reliable or not, but apparently Nintendo originally wanted the GPU without Tensor, thinking that their rescaling model would go well with just the CUDAs.

NVIDIA seems to have stepped in by offering a second SOC with Tensor.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

1) There's no Arm based SoC with a Turing based GPU from Nvidia. (There's Xavier, but that has a Volta based GPU.)
2) The only Arm based SoC that doesn't have a GPU with Tensor cores after the Tegra X1 is the Tegra X2. And considering the Tegra X2 doesn't have DP4a instructions support, despite Nvidia advertising the Tegra X2 having a Pascal based GPU, and Nvidia advertising Pascal GPUs being the first to have DP4a instructions support, the Tegra X2's GPU's probably very similar, if not identical, to the Tegra X1's GPU, practically speaking.

Basically, GamerBits comes off as very questionable.
 
BreakAtmo said:
The memory bandwidth would put something of a limit on how much more powerful you could go, unfortunately. Though it does seem like the RT and DLSS acceleration wouldn't be quite as bandwidth-hungry as the shader rendering, so pushing a chip like this higher may well be a little more efficient.
Click to expand...
Also have to take into account the other advantages of the tech. The Switch was able to do what it could with its limited RAM bandwidth because of Maxwell's ability to do tile-rendering, which splits the final buffer into small tiles that can fit and be processed/rendered in cache, which is faster than main RAM. How much faster, I don't know (anyone have those numbers?), and one can expect that to be the case with the Switch 2.
 
0
Dakhil said:
1) There's no Arm based SoC with a Turing based GPU from Nvidia. (There's Xavier, but that has a Volta based GPU.)
2) The only Arm based SoC that doesn't have a GPU with Tensor cores after the Tegra X1 is the Tegra X2. And considering the Tegra X2 doesn't have DP4a instructions support, despite Nvidia advertising the Tegra X2 having a Pascal based GPU, and Nvidia advertising Pascal GPUs being the first to have DP4a instructions support, the Tegra X2's GPU's probably very similar, if not identical, to the Tegra X1's GPU, practically speaking.

Basically, GamerBits comes off as very questionable.
Click to expand...
Maybe what happened is Nintendo was in fact originally planning on a Tegra X2 Switch Pro (not just Mariko with increased clocks) but Nintendo was not liking the upscaling results for Tegra X2 so it, and with it plans for a Switch Pro in general, was scrapped in favor of T239 Drake that NVidia has been pushing as their full on Switch 2. Would likely mean they have had to suddenly spend a lot more time and resources in 2021, 2022, and 2023 to shift to Drake, including figuring out how to get Backwards Compatibility working on Drake.

Also seems notable that NIntendo has at least been looking at ways to do more cooling. Suggests that whatever they have been working on will likely need much better cooling than the Switch has.
 
TomNookYankees said:
Maybe what happened is Nintendo was in fact originally planning on a Tegra X2 Switch Pro (not just Mariko with increased clocks) but Nintendo was not liking the upscaling results for Tegra X2 so it, and with it plans for a Switch Pro in general, was scrapped in favor of T239 Drake that NVidia has been pushing as their full on Switch 2. Would likely mean they have had to suddenly spend a lot more time and resources in 2021, 2022, and 2023 to shift to Drake, including figuring out how to get Backwards Compatibility working on Drake.

Also seems notable that NIntendo has at least been looking at ways to do more cooling. Suggests that whatever they have been working on will likely need much better cooling than the Switch has.
Click to expand...
none of that sounds likely. the Tegra X2 has even more useless silicon than the TX1 with the denver cores. die shrinking the TX1, which was compatible with the 12nm node, was the right call.

what upscaling would have been done on the tx2? it does nothing that the tx1 can't do.

drake isn't a replacement for a pro. it was always the successor and began earlier than 2021. if there was a Switch Pro, it was gonna be an upclocked Mariko, nothing else
 
TomNookYankees said:
Maybe what happened is Nintendo was in fact originally planning on a Tegra X2 Switch Pro (not just Mariko with increased clocks) but Nintendo was not liking the upscaling results for Tegra X2 so it, and with it plans for a Switch Pro in general, was scrapped in favor of T239 Drake that NVidia has been pushing as their full on Switch 2.
Click to expand...
DLSS 1.0 used Tensor cores (here and here). (DLSS 1.9, which used CUDA cores instead of Tensor cores, was only used in Control.)

So Nintendo couldn't use the Tegra X2 to test out DLSS 1.0 since the Tegra X2's GPU doesn't have Tensor cores.
 
MadMarvainy said:
I know there's no way to know the node until a tear down is performed and we take a look ourselves.

But if they reveal this thing and it's yet again another tiny tablet except this time it's housing an 8 inch screen. Is it safe to assume it's 4nm since 8nm would get really hot with such a form factor? Or does this not matter because it comes down to the clocks as well as the power draw and not just the node?

Same way we will probably guess 8nm if it's on the bulkier side with the Deck and Ally.
Click to expand...
4nm and 8 NM Are most likely because Nvidia already have products there, but we can't completely rule out something in between.
 
Last edited:
ILikeFeet said:
drake isn't a replacement for a pro. it was always the successor and began earlier than 2021. if there was a Switch Pro, it was gonna be an upclocked Mariko, nothing else
Click to expand...
Considering the recent Switch pocket patent, I don't rule out that a second tx1 die shrink has ever been on the table.
 
0
mjayer said:


Oh snap yaw! They may actually be taking docked mode up to home console territory like I've been hoping! Fingers crossed we're getting a 20w+ home console mode pushing boundaries of what Drake can achieve!
Click to expand...


I'd so be down for Nintendo allowing something like that.

I'd like to see Nintendo attempt more of an actual "portable console" rather than just a tablet style handheld.
 
I thought Nash Weedle was decided to be pretty unreliable? I feel like this thread has covered his track record before.
 
snoota said:
It's already been established that the 12SMs on 8N, even if downclocked to hell, would draw double the energy of the 2 Maxwell SMs on 20nm (a la Erista), so having it also be thin would be unfeasible unless cores are being disabled in handheld (be it through FLCG or whatever other means). If GA10B is actually fabbed on 8N, I'm more than likely waging on its SoC being more comparable to the Steam Deck's power draw & accordingly being shaped as such.
Click to expand...
That’s why Samsung 8nm completely dosent make sense
 
0
Pokemaniac said:
Unless every single manufacturer colludes, at least tacitly, to keep the prices high, it seems pretty unlikely that the current prices could hold with the introduction of a new customer base that is both far larger than the current one and much more price sensitive. Being used in a device like a Switch could even be the tipping point that leads to mass adoption of the format.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t involve collusion at all, just arriving at a similar conclusion. Each manufacturer has the same problem in isolation of one another as there is in aggregate, that higher volume and lower prices can only at best match their current profiteering on these cards. Producing more to earn the same amount of money is a losing proposition, every single time, and that means even if prices go down, they will not do so far enough to be affordable from a cost per GB perspective, because more production will mean these companies will want to make more money, not the same amount.

Like, even despite CFe cards being physically incompatible without jury-rigging a solution and therefore not able to influence the regular CF Express market with lower pricing, Xbox Series using CF Express for storage upgrades hasn't made them cheaper (despite being produced in a higher volume than the entire pre-existing CF Express card market as was mentioned), 1TB is USD$150. And it's not like we can say it's locked behind the platform holder like Vita cards, either, WD and Seagate are competing brands offering the same storage and connection method.
 
Lelouch0612 said:
I am not sure I see the issue here. His rumors might be sketchy at best, but the patents he reports are not rumors, they are public information.
Click to expand...
Well typically the parents don't mean anything for stuff that will actually release, this thread has discussed this a lot. Nintendo isn't going to show their hand before they play it. So for him to report on the parents isn't wrong or anything, but him connecting them to the Switch 2 is for clicks.
 
Terrell said:
It doesn’t involve collusion at all, just arriving at a similar conclusion. Each manufacturer has the same problem in isolation of one another as there is in aggregate, that higher volume and lower prices can only at best match their current profiteering on these cards. Producing more to earn the same amount of money is a losing proposition, every single time, and that means even if prices go down, they will not do so far enough to be affordable from a cost per GB perspective, because more production will mean these companies will want to make more money, not the same amount.

Like, even despite CFe cards being physically incompatible without jury-rigging a solution and therefore not able to influence the regular CF Express market with lower pricing, Xbox Series using CF Express for storage upgrades hasn't made them cheaper (despite being produced in a higher volume than the entire pre-existing CF Express card market as was mentioned), 1TB is USD$150. And it's not like we can say it's locked behind the platform holder like Vita cards, either, WD and Seagate are competing brands offering the same storage and connection method.
Click to expand...
Xbox doing a weird semi proprietary thing makes it not the best comparison, since competition is only barely extant, and I don't think we know whether or not MS is taking a cut.

It seems odd to me to just assume that literally every CFe manufacturer would hold the line and refuse to compete on price at all. Competition is far from a perfect price control mechanism, but to assume none would even introduce a cheaper line seems quite extreme.
 
Hermii said:
There are exceptions to that rule. PS Portal was patented years ago, for the PS4.
Click to expand...
doubt it'll apply to anything regarding Switch 2 which is the main subject.
Accessories aren't nearly as important to keep secret prior to release by comparison (which the Playstation Portal would fall under).
 
Hermii said:
There are exceptions to that rule. PS Portal was patented years ago, for the PS4.
Click to expand...
Nintendo Labo had its patents published before reveal, of course, but I doubt we see something like that anytime soon.

I have some hope for improved cooling on NG Switch, but more so it can be miniaturised (like we just saw) in order to fit a bigger battery in the same body. If you consider the internals of Nintendo Switch, and move the SOC to be in-line with the fan, and get rid of the heat pipe altogether, you could reclaim a bit of that internal space for a battery.

I still doubt we see a more power hungry SOC than Tegra X1 on 20nm, the same power consumption maybe, but not more. Instead I expect them to use what they've learned for cooling such a device in a thin package to better optimise the design of NG Switch, like making it thinner, or having smaller vents.
 
mjayer said:
The patent lets us know, without a doubt, that Nintendo is working on novel cooling solutions for portable consoles. That is interesting information.
Click to expand...
This is as much a revelation as Nintendo Switch Has Games.

True, but we it's the working assumption.
 
kasparov77 said:
Is 350MHz portable, ~700Mhz docked a unrealistic expectation under 8nm drake?
Click to expand...
Can it be done? Yes

Are you lowering power consumption at 350MHz? Questionable

There's a point where lowering clock doesn't lower power consumption. That wraps back around to the "why make the gpu so big if you can't clock lower to save power" question people have for 8nm
 
kasparov77 said:
Is 350MHz portable, ~700Mhz docked a unrealistic expectation under 8nm drake?
Click to expand...
For portable? Absolutely. VCmin of 8N based on Orin is around 420MHz. Below that, you're not saving energy because of parasitic/static power. And based on Thraktor + others power curves extracted from T234, RTX 2050, etc, even at 420MHz GPU clock for HH, we're looking at 6W for GPU power budget Handheld. Tegra X1 Erista (20nm) used around 3W for the GPU iirc:

Thraktor said:
Code:
Code: 
Clock      W per TPC
0.42075    0.96
0.52275    1.14
0.62475    1.45
0.72675    1.82
0.82875    2.21
0.93075    2.73
1.03275    3.32
1.23675    4.89
1.30050    5.58
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Bonejack said:
I believe in 4nm simply because it's going so save Nintendo some money throughout ReDraketeds whole lifetime compared to some savings early on with 8nm.
Click to expand...

And it solves all the problems for a 12sm chip. On 8nm, it's very big but on 4N it's as small as the Tegra X1. On 8nm it's going to have high power draw making cooling an issue, On 4N the cooling setup from Switch is more than sufficient. Battery life even with low clocks will be bad on 8nm, but with 4N it could be as good as V2 Switch if Nintendo doesn't choose high clocks. On 8nm the ceiling for performance is well short of Xbox Series S, but on 4N it's within a stones throw.
 
I'll copy what I said elsewhere:
John Carmack said back on PS4/XOne days ( And Mark Cerny also said similar with PS5): A bigger but slower GPU might be lesser performant in real world scenario because it's harder for developers to leverage its performance. No GPU is 100% utilized. A smaller, but faster clocked GPU might win in real world due to being more easy to leverage performance and the higher clocks meaning that everything inside the GPU is running faster. It's the biggest reason why we're questioning SEC 8N for T239. Why would Nintendo design a GPU so big just for it to be clocked at Vmin clocks? Sure, there are concerns due to power efficiency, but a smaller but faster clocked GPU would be much more suitable on 8N and have better yields.

If they designed such a big GPU, they might have done so because they know they're fabbing it on a node which they can clock it at decent clocks and take advantage of the GPU performance. Otherwise, it makes zero sense for them to design and fab a 12 SM GPU on SEC8N. Unless they discovered some profound power and area optimizations and/or Switch 2 will be much more similar in size and weight to SteamDeck, ROG Ally, Legion Go, etc.
Click to expand...

That being said, Nintendo always had some problematic and somewhat puzzling decisions with hardware design, so who knows. Nintendo is doomed anyway...
 
Last edited:
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