• 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
Z0m3le said:
The UFS storage I'm talking about would be the internal storage. Yes I fully expect microsd card slot on the device, they will likely use internal storage for any games that require high speed storage, microsd cards can be used for anything else.
Click to expand...
Understood. The internal eUFS is a good choice. If I recall correctly, eUFS and UFS Card can share the same controller, thus lowering the cost and complexity. If the Switch revision is to adopt the eUFS, simultaneously replacing the microSD Card with UFS Card could actually be advantageous.
Dakhil said:
There's also UFS Card 3.0. However, I believe Samsung's the only company currently designing and manufacturing UFS cards. So unless Nintendo decides to aggressively adopt UFS cards as an external storage option for DLSS model* exclusive games and contact other companies (e.g. Kioxia, etc.) to manufacture UFS cards, I don't expect UFS cards to really drop in price, at least as quickly as SD/microSD cards.
Click to expand...
Phison can produce UFS Cards (see below) but I don't know if they have any OEM clients. What's more, according to Thraktor any eUFS manufacturers can pivot to UFS Card easily. So if Nintendo wants to release Switch-branded UFS Cards, they should be able to contract a partner to produce them at a reasonable cost.

TDQQoLh.png


By the way, the Orin X made its first public appearance through Zhiji Motors (a.k.a. IM Motors): "NVIDIA Orin X chip adopts brand-new NVIDIA GPU and 12-core ARM CPU, made of 7nm process, single-chip computing capacity is up to 254 TOPS per second. It is at the top level among the current mass-produced automotive-grade AI chips. It is reported that the single-chip computing power of this chip is about 10 times that of Mobileye's latest EyeQ5 and 3.5 times that of Tesla's HW3.0."

20210927104810_CZZbMFxCID.png
 
mariodk18 said:
UFS 3.0? Weren’t we discussing 2.0 recently? How much better and mite expensive is it?

I think it’s likely IF Nintendo does go with UFS or something similar they require installation. And to get a $399 price point they may go for 128 GB with 256 at $449? Also can game card speeds be as fast as UFS?
Click to expand...

UFS Card 3.0 is not the same as UFS 3.0. The sequential speeds for UFS Card 3.0 are more comparable to UFS 2.1 than UFS 3.0.

Game Cards could theoretically achieve similar sequential speeds as UFS 2.1, assuming there are grains of truth to the rumours about Nintendo sampling Macronix's 48-layer 3D NAND memory.

fwd-bwd said:
Phison can produce UFS Cards (see below) but I don't know if they have any OEM clients. What's more, according to Thraktor any eUFS manufacturers can pivot to UFS Card easily. So if Nintendo wants to release Switch-branded UFS Cards, they should be able to contract a partner to produce them at a reasonable cost.

TDQQoLh.png
Click to expand...
I was thinking in terms of already being offered to general customers.
 
0
Poll #1: When do you think is the earliest time Nintendo will launch the DLSS model*?
  • Index
    • fwd-bwd said:
    By the way, the Orin X made its first public appearance through Zhiji Motors (a.k.a. IM Motors): "[BGCOLOR=rgb(41, 41, 41)]NVIDIA Orin X chip adopts brand-new NVIDIA GPU and 12-core ARM CPU, made of 7nm process, single-chip computing capacity is up to 254 TOPS per second.[/BGCOLOR] It is at the top level among the current mass-produced automotive-grade AI chips. It is reported that the single-chip computing power of this chip is about 10 times that of Mobileye's latest EyeQ5 and 3.5 times that of Tesla's HW3.0."

    20210927104810_CZZbMFxCID.png
    Click to expand...
    I find it interesting that a 7 nm* process was mentioned. And I also find it interesting that there's mention of 'KR' in the labelling for Orin X, which definitely confirms that one of Samsung's sub-14 nm* (11 nm* and below) process nodes are used to fabricate Orin X, since 'KR' probably stands for (South) Korea.

    ~

    Anyway, I've made a poll asking "When do you think is the earliest time Nintendo will launch the DLSS model*?" I've seen so many different predictions from many people here in terms of when the DLSS model* will launch, which made me curious. (And when I mean launch, I mean release.)

    * foundry marketing nomenclature
     
    Last edited:
  • Index
    • ReddDreadtheLead said:
    Something to keep in mind is that Arm CPUs are based on reference designs that Arm sells to third parties, Nintendo can customize the A78 however they please if its the reference design, we just would not know what exactly they would change in this scenario. The help of nV +Nintendo could make it different than the standard used in flagships today.
    Click to expand...
    Would it significantly affect the performance we can expect though?
     
    fwd-bwd said:
    By the way, the Orin X made its first public appearance through Zhiji Motors (a.k.a. IM Motors): "[BGCOLOR=rgb(41, 41, 41)]NVIDIA Orin X chip adopts brand-new NVIDIA GPU and 12-core ARM CPU, made of 7nm process, single-chip computing capacity is up to 254 TOPS per second.[/BGCOLOR] It is at the top level among the current mass-produced automotive-grade AI chips. It is reported that the single-chip computing power of this chip is about 10 times that of Mobileye's latest EyeQ5 and 3.5 times that of Tesla's HW3.0."

    20210927104810_CZZbMFxCID.png
    Click to expand...
    Well if that is actually a prototype Orin X board, or even moreso, a Taped Out Orin X board, then that means Orin production is likely imminent, and Dane likely not too far behind.

    Someone should toss a text to Kopite about this lol, I want to know if this Orin X being 7nm has any meaning on if Dane has changed to it as well as based on the specs given for Orin X, it seems like it can be cut down into Dane about as easily as 8nm Dane would so it just becomes a matter of supply really.

    EDIT:
    Also looking at that TOPS Number...based on the core config and board shot it looks like it's a single Orin die... Yet it has over 2.5 times the TOPS of single Orin from the Orin Family chart
    EME52xMX0AA8BQH.jpg

    EDIT 2:
    And that's still 54 TOPs higher than the L2+ Autopilot board shown later.
    nvida_drive.jpg
     
    Last edited:
    0
    Hermii said:
    Would it significantly affect the performance we can expect though?
    Click to expand...
    It depends on what they did really, but at least minor tweaks can alter how performant it can be. Hell, having more L Cache is a modification from the basic design that can aid in performance.

    Take Qualcomm who has a semi-custom version of the LITTLE and big cores that arm offers. It’s possible considering that nVidia has an architectural license, but it depends if they find it necessary to do so.

    Not saying it’s a guarantee, just a possibility

    I noticed that I didn’t exactly answer your question, it can eek out ever so more performance, so not significant but for a device like this, any extra percent is a godsend.
    fwd-bwd said:
    I saw it on the following slide shared by Thraktor:

    MU9BEwV.png


    I also recall reading somewhere that Xavier supports UFS too.
    Click to expand...
    Huh, I somehow missed or forgot that.


    wouldn’t that mean that Dane will likely have eUFS support for it since Orin has it?
     
    Last edited:
    2-3 weeks ago on the Pipeline Discord, some of us talked about Nvidia's Clara AGX dev kit (for healthcare and life science) and the likelihood of it being repurposed as an interim dev kit for the Switch DLSS Model. It seems that by replacing the kit's RTX 6000 card with a T400 or T600 card, its performance level might be close enough for Switch 4K/DLSS development.

    For those wanting a closer look at the Clara AGX dev kit, Nvidia just published an unboxing and setup video:

     
    Last edited:
    fwd-bwd said:
    2-3 weeks ago on the Pipeline Discord, some of us talked about Nvidia's Clara AGX dev kit (for healthcare and life science) and the likelihood of it being repurposed as an interim dev kit for the Switch DLSS Model. It seems that by replacing the kit's RTX 6000 card with a T400 or T600 card, its performance level might be close enough for developmental purposes.

    For those wanting a closer look at the Clara AGX dev kit, Nvidia just published an unboxing and setup video:

    Click to expand...

    This would in theory allow for a GPU in the dock. Not that it would happen of course. We've already discussed the issues that would bring before. Do we think a 400$ price point would be reasonable? Considering the 350$ price of the OLED?
     
    Whatnoww said:
    This would in theory allow for a GPU in the dock. Not that it would happen of course. We've already discussed the issues that would bring before. Do we think a 400$ price point would be reasonable? Considering the 350$ price of the OLED?
    Click to expand...
    Maybe if Nintendo is willing to take low margins for a short time atleast once
     
    Whatnoww said:
    Well, it's not like there isn't any precedent. It's unusual for Nintendo not to give a console without a loss. The Switch is one of the few situations Nintendo has decided to make a profit on the console sale itself.
    Click to expand...

    Isn't that the wrong way around.

    Nintendo typically tries to make a profit right away on the hardware and very rarely uses it as a loss leader. The WII U actually being sold below cost was an aberration in Nintendos history, maybe the only example of one being priced that way at launch. The 3DS probably was after the somewhat desperate first year price cut though (or they somehow slashed a third of the price which would be an absurd profit margin).

    Certainly the Wii, DS, etc, were sold at a profit.
     

    • NateDrake believes Zynga's statement about not having a 4K devkit from Nintendo doesn't mean that Zynga didn't receive a 4K devkit from one of Zynga's publishing partners, who could have received a 4K devkit from Nintendo. Bigger publishing companies generally hire smaller companies as subcontractors and do send smaller companies devkits to work on games for certain platforms. But there's a possibility Zynga denied having a 4K devkit from Nintendo due to NDAs.
    • NateDrake thinks Nintendo's technically not lying to investors when saying Nintendo's not supplying tools for developing games for a Nintendo Switch model with 4K support, but Nintendo's also not telling the entire truth, especially since Nintendo won't simply call the model the Nintendo Switch, but rather add a moniker next to the Nintendo Switch name (e.g. Nintendo Switch 2, Nintendo Switch Pro, etc.).
    • NateDrake thinks Bloomberg was smart to obtain permission from a source in Zygna to name Zygna as the company that receive a 4K devkit, alongside mentioning that Bloomberg contacting 10 other third party developer companies, since Nintendo wouldn't be able to easily say Bloomberg's information is inaccurate.
    • NateDrake thinks that part of the denial from Nintendo comes down to the branding of the model.
    • NateDrake has heard from developer sources that the model's positioned as a revision, similar to the Game Boy Color and the New Nintendo 3DS.
    • NateDrake thinks the name Nintendo chooses for the model depends on if Nintendo wants the count the model as part of the Nintendo Switch family or as a separate platform when talking about hardware sales.
    • NateDrake believes that Nintendo is likely to have or will pressure Zynga to do an internal investigation, as well as Nintendo doing its own investigation, who's the source in Zynga who provided information to Bloomberg, which could damage Nintendo's relationship with Zynga.
    • MVG agrees with SciresM that backward compatibility with Nintendo Switch games is not possible with the Nintendo Switch 4K, assuming that the Nintendo Switch 4K uses a GPU not based on the Maxwell architecture, mentioning that every Nintendo Switch game contains custom versions of the Maxwell GPU driver embedded in the game, with all the shaders required pre-compiled, in one package. MVG also mentions that developers can't simply take that package and compile it on a GPU not based on the Maxwell architecture. Instead, developers would need to recompile every game and provide a patch, or not offer backwards compatibility at all.
    • MVG believes that the first possible solution is to provide patches for every game.
    • MVG thinks the second possible solution is to open up a specific tool for third party developers that streamlines the update process that allow developers to take the game package and repackage it as a native game package for the new SoC.
    • MVG believes the third possible solution is to add a Tegra X1 to the motherboard, citing the Nintendo Wii, the Nintendo 3DS, etc., as examples.
    • And MVG believes the fourth possible solution is that backwards compatibility is not offered at all, where Nintendo brands the Nintendo Switch 4K straight up as a next-gen console, and Nintendo wants third party developers to jump on board, although MVG thinks it seems far fetched that Nintendo would do so.
    • NateDrake believes that there's no way Nintendo won't provide backwards compatibility with Nintendo Switch games since it would send a message to consumers to not invest in digital games since Nintendo won't support consumers in the future.
    • NateDrake doesn't deny the possibility that Nintendo could add the Tegra X1 to the Nintendo Switch 4K's motherboard to achieve 100% backwards compatibility.
    • NateDrake also believes that there's a possibility Nintendo could be talking to Nvidia when designing Dane to add Maxwell GPU driver support to Dane, which could possibly achieve 99.9% backwards compatibility support.
    • MVG said that the second possibility that NateDrake mentioned in terms of how Nintendo could achieve backwards compatibility with the Nintendo Switch 4K is possible.
    • NateDrake believes that not offering backwards compatibility with Nintendo Switch games would cause Nintendo to lose a large amount of consumers since there's only so much bad business practices consumers can tolerate from Nintendo; and not offering backwards compatibility with Nintendo Switch games would be seen as one of the biggest anti-consumer moves.
    • NateDrake thinks there's a possibility that the Game Cards for the Nintendo Switch 4K could very well be the same as the Game Cards for the Nintendo Switch, with the highest capacity staying at 32 GB. NateDrake also thinks that the Game Cards for the Nintendo Switch 4K could be slightly different, physically, to the Game Cards for the Nintendo Switch, like with the Game Cards for New Nintendo 3DS exclusive games, with the highest capacity possibly being 64 GB.
    • NateDrake thinks Nintendo would announce the Nintendo Switch 4K six months before release. NateDrake also thinks that Nintendo could possibly announce the Nintendo Switch 4K on July 2022 with a release on October 2022, like with the OLED model, but at a risk at angering consumers who bought the OLED model, which NateDrake mentioned Nintendo has done before with Nintendo's previous products.
    • NateDrake has heard from developer sources that development for games for the Nintendo Switch 4K are being targeted for completion on late 2022.
    • MVG thinks that the Nintendo Switch 4K is more likely to be realistically released on early 2023.
    • MVG think that Nintendo's using a DisplayPort 1.4 to HDMI 2.0b converter chip for the OLED model's dock due to economics, since the Mobility DisplayPort 1.2a to HDMI 1.4a converter chips used on the Nintendo Switch dock, as well as the HDMI 1.4 cables, are becoming harder to source.
    • MVG's disappointed with the transfer speeds offered by the LAN port on the OLED model's dock.
    • NateDrake will no longer refer the model as the Nintendo Switch Pro, but rather as the Nintendo Switch 4K, since Nintendo's releasing new Nintendo Switch hardware, and it has 4K compatibility, which will be achieved with DLSS.
    • NateDrake doesn't know if the Nintendo Switch 4K will be marketed as a mid-gen refresh or a successor.
    • NateDrake has heard from developer sources that the release window for the Nintendo Switch 4K is targeted at late 2022 to early 2023.
    • NateDrake has heard a substantial amount of big third party developers received devkits in late 2020, and smaller third party developers received devkits on June 2021.
    • NateDrake has heard from developer sources that there are games that are exclusive to the Nintendo Switch 4K, and won't be released for the Nintendo Switch (and the Nintendo Switch Lite).
    • NateDrake has heard that developers are excited about the Nintendo Switch 4K.
    • NateDrake has also heard developers were confused when the OLED model was released since Nintendo didn't send out new devkits for the OLED model.
     
    Last edited:
    This system will sell regardless but Which naming convention will cause more backlash for Nintendo considering they just released the OLED model, Switch 2 or Switch (4K,Pro,Super,Plus, etc)?
     
    0
    Dakhil said:
    Click to expand...


    MVG sides with SciresM that Switch games won't be exactly be natively compatible with Ampere/Lovelace, so the either the entire Switch library has to be patched to run on Dane or Dane somehow embeds Maxwell alongside Ampere/Lovelace. The nightmare scenario is that the next Switch isn't backwards compatible, but that's unlikely unless Nintendo wants to invalidate all those digital purchases going forward.

    Of course, the only people who can answer the question are the engineers at Nvidia.
     
    These MVG takes on BC are quite spicy huh. No way they will add a TX1 for BC purposes or won't offer BC. IMO they will recompile and offer patches for some games(Mainly first-party). I wouldn't discount the possibility of a developer re-submission of their games patched to DANE Switch, but it does seems quite a big hassle.

    edit: Nate says publishers are building software for the next Switch with the idea of being finished by late 22. That doesn't mean Switch Next is launching late 22. October reveal to March release again(Oct 22 -> March 23)? I can see BoTW 2 being delayed.....................(Or Prime 4 launch title).

    edit2: Nate once again says based on his info, he doesn't refer to it as Switch Pro anymore but new Switch hardware. Don't know how it will be marketed. Could be Switch 4K or Switch 2. 4K compatibility to be achieved with DLSS. These are solid facts. For release window, 2H 22 with possibility of releasing late 22 or Q1 23. That's the 6 month window that Nintendo is thinking. Probably based on supply chain uncertainties.

    edit3: Devkits out to big partners in late 20. Continued this year to smaller partners. Isn't the case of a select few. A lot of devs have devkits by now. Games being developed to the new Switch hardware exclusively(Multiplatform games for PS and Xbox too!). Developers are quite excited about the hardware potential.
     
    Golden Darkness said:
    MVG sides with SciresM that Switch games won't be exactly be natively compatible with Ampere/Lovelace, so the either the entire Switch library has to be patched to run on Dane or Dane somehow embeds Maxwell alongside Ampere/Lovelace. The nightmare scenario is that the next Switch isn't backwards compatible, but that's unlikely unless Nintendo wants to invalidate all those digital purchases going forward.

    Of course, the only people who can answer the question are the engineers at Nvidia.
    Click to expand...
    there's always the option of hybrid emulation/native code. it would be good for <100% of games and wouldn't require developer implementation unless they're the portion that's not supported
     
    0
    Just watched the ifixit teardown of the OLED model which confirms that the display is made by Samsung - which I think corroborates the initial rumours we heard about the display months ago.
     
    Lukus99 said:
    Just watched the ifixit teardown of the OLED model which confirms that the display is made by Samsung - which I think corroborates the initial rumours we heard about the display months ago.
    Click to expand...
    Hadn't seen that the fan and heatpipe are smaller on the OLED Switch. Makes sense given that the thermal headroom Switch thermal solution had with Mariko was crazy. But sad to see the small dream of a new profile with slightly increased clocks down the drain. Welp, Xeno 3 going to be rough.
     
    0
    Ghostsonplanets said:
    These MVG takes on BC are quite spicy huh. No way they will add a TX1 for BC purposes or won't offer BC. IMO they will recompile and offer patches for some games(Mainly first-party). I wouldn't discount the possibility of a developer re-submission of their games patched to DANE Switch, but it does seems quite a big hassle.

    edit: Nate says publishers are building software for the next Switch with the idea of being finished by late 22. That doesn't mean Switch Next is launching late 22. October reveal to March release again(Oct 22 -> March 23)? I can see BoTW 2 being delayed.....................(Or Prime 4 launch title).

    edit2: Nate once again says based on his info, he doesn't refer to it as Switch Pro anymore but new Switch hardware. Don't know how it will be marketed. Could be Switch 4K or Switch 2. 4K compatibility to be achieved with DLSS. These are solid facts. For release window, 2H 22 with possibility of releasing late 22 or Q1 23. That's the 6 month window that Nintendo is thinking. Probably based on supply chain uncertainties.

    edit3: Devkits out to big partners in late 20. Continued this year to smaller partners. Isn't the case of a select few. A lot of devs have devkits by now. Games being developed to the new Switch hardware exclusively(Multiplatform games for PS and Xbox too!). Developers are quite excited about the hardware potential.
    Click to expand...

    I don't believe in recompilation, because it'll be on the onus on the developer, and asking every 3rd party developer to recompile won't guarantee every game released is supported. Not every dev is going to go back to games released back in 2017 and patch them If there is to be recompilation, might as well make the game natively take advantage of the next Switch's improved performance. And recompiling for another hardware doesn't make the game compatible for say the follow-up to the next Switch.
     
    Dakhil said:
    And temporarily the Nintendo 3DS when Nintendo reduced the MSRP from $249.99 to $169.99.
    Click to expand...
    Are we sure they sold it at a loss? Because the 3DS was the complete opposite of a high end handheld back in 2011 and $170 is still a lot of money.

    But, maybe they cut the price and retailers complained about their cut because they paid in full for their stock so Nintendo reduced their % of the sale. I’m just speculating though
     
    Golden Darkness said:
    I don't believe in recompilation, because it'll be on the onus on the developer, and asking every 3rd party developer to recompile won't guarantee every game released is supported. Not every dev is going to go back to games released back in 2017 and patch them If there is to be recompilation, might as well make the game natively take advantage of the next Switch's improved performance. And recompiling for another hardware doesn't make the game compatible for say the follow-up to the next Switch.
    Click to expand...
    Agree with you. Any solution needs to be on Nvidia and Nintendo end. Don't know how they will do this.
     
    0
    My general position on BC is people just need to chill about it. It's not going to be trivial, but it's something that will happen if Nintendo wants it to happen.
     
    Falcatops said:
    Uff. Nintendo got a really bad deal if a $170 handheld with bad hardware is selling at a loss. Or maybe the 3D screen was too expensive. Uff again.
    Click to expand...
    3D glasses free screen was a novelty. The hardware also had 3 cameras, 3 screens, R&D expenses, etc. 3DS hardware wasn't bad and certainly was the best they could make within the constraints. Problem is that they couldn't launch in 2010. The mobile explosion in terms of hardware advacements also started around 2011, so it was quite an unfortunate timing.
     
    That was 20+ years ago. And now they're competing with MS which has pretty much complete BC (as Nate mentioned, they've set the standard).
     
    0
    lemonfresh said:
    For people pissed at no BC were you also pissed when the Snes, N64 and the GC didnt have it? This isnt the first time it has happened.
    Click to expand...

    Times and standards have changed. Them not having any backwards compatibility would guarantee I’d never buy digitally from Nintendo ever again.

    I’m not too worried about backwards compatibility in the long run. Remember, there was an earlier article from Bloomberg on Nintendo requesting devs to keep their frame rates unlocked and prepped for a Switch 4K. That request in itself leads me to believe backwards compatibility is an issue they are are already ahead of.

    EDIT: In the event that there is no BC, this would be the first Nintendo handheld that denies that functionality. GBC had it, GBA had it. DS had it. 3DS had it. Digital purchases have only grown exponentially since then. Switch 4K will have it.
     
    All told I'm really, really happy to hear the window is Q4 2022 - Q1 2023. Q4 2022 will be here before we know it anyway - I mean, it's crazy to think we're in October of 2021 already.

    I was insanely hyped for this hardware this year but as long as the 'hype' train chugs with some consistency I'm sated. If a Q4 2022 launch is a possibility, eventually we'll be in prime time for more chatter about it next year. So the excitement at least could start well ahead of late 2022.

    @NateDrake, thank you so much for sharing what you've heard!
     
    Last edited:
    0
    lemonfresh said:
    For people pissed at no BC were you also pissed when the Snes, N64 and the GC didnt have it? This isnt the first time it has happened.
    Click to expand...
    I wouldn't really compare those since the SNES, N64 and GCN had all different architectures from different companies and thus different IP properties that made it difficult, plus the way games were coded back then is different from now, along with the time of back then being 20 years or more. The direct compatibility wasn't that easy other than literally putting the console inside the other console, like PS2 or the PS3. And the SNES had the hardware for BC, but issues prevented that, it wasn't missing BC intentionally, but as a result of the hardware limitations, it was supposed to play NES games.

    This with the Switch and Switch 4k is a different scenario altogether.

    The GBA had bc with the GB/C, but had to put them inside it basically, same with the DS and then same with the 3DS for its predecessor.
     
    Last edited:
    0
    Golden Darkness said:
    MVG sides with SciresM that Switch games won't be exactly be natively compatible with Ampere/Lovelace, so the either the entire Switch library has to be patched to run on Dane or Dane somehow embeds Maxwell alongside Ampere/Lovelace. The nightmare scenario is that the next Switch isn't backwards compatible, but that's unlikely unless Nintendo wants to invalidate all those digital purchases going forward.

    Of course, the only people who can answer the question are the engineers at Nvidia.
    Click to expand...
    I don't know how they can say that. Theres currently two consoles out doing BC just fine. There are great Switch emulators out for PC, and that is a heck of a lot more complicated.
     
    lemonfresh said:
    For people pissed at no BC were you also pissed when the Snes, N64 and the GC didnt have it? This isnt the first time it has happened.
    Click to expand...
    I didn’t have over 100 games for my N64 or GC , all digital and with the existence of basically every other product on the market having some type of BC at the moment. I wouldn’t really be pissed though , it just would be incredibly stupid.
     
    fwd-bwd said:
    By the way, the Orin X made its first public appearance through Zhiji Motors (a.k.a. IM Motors): "NVIDIA Orin X chip adopts brand-new NVIDIA GPU and 12-core ARM CPU, made of 7nm process, single-chip computing capacity is up to 254 TOPS per second. It is at the top level among the current mass-produced automotive-grade AI chips. It is reported that the single-chip computing power of this chip is about 10 times that of Mobileye's latest EyeQ5 and 3.5 times that of Tesla's HW3.0."

    20210927104810_CZZbMFxCID.png
    Click to expand...
    There's also a possibility that Zhiji Motors could have speculated that a 7 nm** process node (probably from Samsung, considering the chip label mentions 'KR') is used to fabricate Orin X, but in actuality, Nvidia's using Samsung's 8N process node to fabricate Orin X, similar to how Gainware speculated that consumer Ampere GPUs were fabricated using a 7 nm** process node, but in actuality, Nvidia's using Samsung's 8N process node to fabricate consumer Ampere GPUs.

    ** foundry marketing nomenclature

    Lukus99 said:
    Just watched the ifixit teardown of the OLED model which confirms that the display is made by Samsung - which I think corroborates the initial rumours we heard about the display months ago.
    Click to expand...


    It's interesting to see Nintendo use Micron's LPDDR4X chips at least for one of the OLED models. And the OLED model's motherboard does seem a little more compact than the Nintendo Switch's motherboard, although not significantly so.
    0sboICq.png
     
    Hermii said:
    I don't know how they can say that. Theres currently two consoles out doing BC just fine. There are great Switch emulators out for PC, and that is a heck of a lot more complicated.
    Click to expand...

    How they can say what?
     
    Dakhil said:
    NateDrake has heard that developers are excited about the Nintendo Switch 4K.
    Click to expand...
    This excites me personally, can't wait to see what they can do with it.

    Dakhil said:
    NateDrake doesn't deny the possibility that Nintendo could add the Tegra X1 to the Nintendo Switch 4K's motherboard to achieve 100% backwards compatibility.
    Click to expand...
    I find this part interesting, because of how it is phrased. They keep mentioning "100% compatibility", but don't allude to 50, 60, 80 or 95% compatibility. Not sure if that is intentional or not
    Dakhil said:
    mentioning that every Nintendo Switch game contains custom versions of the Maxwell GPU driver embedded in the game, with all the shaders required pre-compiled, in one package.
    Click to expand...
    This is new to me, but as they mentioned it isn't like they cannot have it for Lovelace in modification. I wouldn't really worry about BC folks.
     
    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