• 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.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (New Staff Post, Please read)

That's because of storage. Trying to sell a 100GB game on consoles that have 64GB of built in storage is a disaster waiting to happen. Nintendo kinda screwed themselves here.
Wouldn't a Switch version of GTA 5 be based on the PS3/Xbox 360 version? Isn't it significantly smaller? They could have just released a single-player version, but unfortunately that's not in Take-Two's interests, as GTA Online brings in a lot of money.
 
Wouldn't a Switch version of GTA 5 be based on the PS3/Xbox 360 version? Isn't it significantly smaller? They could have just released a single-player version, but unfortunately that's not in Take-Two's interests, as GTA Online brings in a lot of money.
Nah, because I believe GTA Online has different vehicles/items/missions in the PS4/XBO version and Rockstar wouldn't be willing to go back and brave the PR nightmare that would spiral from that.
 
Original Switch was like 10W, with 7W for SoC

Read my post here.

The most taxing games are drawing like 6.8W~7W average (2h10min ~ 2h21min of battery life) with max brightness, max volume, wi-fi and BT off, joy-cons fully charged, and FAN speed between 25%~30%. That's more the reality of the V1 model.

So, I imagine the SoC is using like 4W~4.2W on these intensive games. The question is: was Nintendo happy with this battery life? Is Nintendo going to increase the power consumption in ~50% while also increasing the battery capacity in 50% (4310 mAh -> 6465 mAh) and keep the same battery life of the V1? Or is the V2 their target? Only Nintendo can answer that.

Personally, I wouldn't mind a 660 MHz profile (4.2W GPU / 2.8W CPU / 4W for the rest) giving us 2.5h of battery life if they can fit a 7500 [email protected] battery. But that's me. Nintendo may think differently.

Also, I believe we'll see again at least 3 GPU profiles, but this time we could even see some flexibility for the CPU too (like using 5~4 cores with higher clocks and the other 2~3 at the lowest clock possible, or a balance between rising CPU clocks while using a lower GPU profile for games that are more CPU bound)

Anyway, unless Nintendo is coming with a thicker console to fit a higher voltage battery (like we see with these AMD handhelds), I'm tempering my expectations about clocks. Even using TSMC 4N, the more extreme clocks are not easy to be achieved without a much bigger battery, and if Nintendo wants the V2 battery life, things get even more complex.
 
Read my post here.

The most taxing games are drawing like 6.8W~7W average (2h10min ~ 2h21min of battery life) with max brightness, max volume, wi-fi and BT off, joy-cons fully charged, and FAN speed between 25%~30%. That's more the reality of the V1 model.

So, I imagine the SoC is using like 4W~4.2W on these intensive games. The question is: was Nintendo happy with this battery life? Is Nintendo going to increase the power consumption in ~50% while also increasing the battery capacity in 50% (4310 mAh -> 6465 mAh) and keep the same battery life of the V1? Or is the V2 their target? Only Nintendo can answer that.

Personally, I wouldn't mind a 660 MHz profile (4.2W GPU / 2.8W CPU / 4W for the rest) giving us 2.5h of battery life if they can fit a 7500 [email protected] battery. But that's me. Nintendo may think differently.

Also, I believe we'll see again at least 3 GPU profiles, but this time we could even see some flexibility for the CPU too (like using 5~4 cores with higher clocks and the other 2~3 at the lowest clock possible, or a balance between rising CPU clocks while using a lower GPU profile for games that are more CPU bound)
1 core will be reserve for OS, devs will have 7 Cores to use
 
PS3&Xbox 360 Online have stop having updates after 2015 btw
Nah, because I believe GTA Online has different vehicles/items/missions in the PS4/XBO version and Rockstar wouldn't be willing to go back and brave the PR nightmare that would spiral from that.
That's unfortunate. I would have bought a pure single-player version immediately if a PS3/Xbox360 Port had been in the same quality as RDR.
 
here.

The most taxing games are drawing like 6.8W~7W average (2h10min ~ 2h21min of battery life) with max brightness, max volume, wi-fi and BT off, joy-cons fully charged, and FAN speed between 25%~30%. That's more the reality of the V1 model.

So, I imagine the SoC is using like 4W~4.2W on these intensive games. The question is: was Nintendo happy with this battery life? Is Nintendo going to increase the power consumption in ~50% while also increasing the battery capacity in 50% (4310 mAh -> 6465 mAh) and keep the same battery life of the V1? Or is the V2 their target? Only Nintendo can answer that.

[email protected] battery. But that's me. Nintendo may think differently.

Also, I believe we'll see again at least 3 GPU profiles, but this time we could even see some flexibility for the CPU too (like using 5~4 cores with higher clocks and the other 2~3 at the lowest clock possible, or a balance between rising CPU clocks while using a lower GPU profile for games that are more CPU bound)

Anyway, unless Nintendo is coming with a thicker console to fit a higher voltage battery (like we see with these AMD handhelds), I'm tempering my expectations about clocks. Even using TSMC 4N, the more extreme clocks are not easy to be achieved without a much bigger battery, and if Nintendo wants the V2 battery life, things get even more complex.
600mhz might be a reasonable choice.
 
Btw why we assume that Switch 2 battery will be 3.7v and not 7.7v like Steam Deck and Rog Ally

I believe the battery on the Ally is 2590 mAh @ 15.48v (40 Wh)


Anyway, I think size/weight and cost are the big questions for these batteries. Those AMD handhelds are much thicker than the Switch. If they keep the same thickness for Switch 2, I don't think we could realistically see batteries that large.

Also, maybe 3.7v batteries are more available in the market and that also have an impact over the cost?

I believe Nintendo will simply choose the best performance per watt, delivering a much lighter handheld than the ROG Ally for example, while having at least decent battery life. I think we have these targets for the clocks, but they are only in our minds; they're the desire of enthusiasts who want to see the SoC being used at its best. But the TX1 wasn't used at its best, and I don't think we gonna see this changing with T239.

I mean, I want that 2TF mark on handheld (with 2GHz for CPU). But if it was on me and I saw the power consumption increasing like crazy from 550 MHz to 660 MHz, I would probably stay with 550 MHz and get more gameplay time. I mean, if you want to buy a new GPU and you end up with 2 options where B is like 60% more expensive than A while only delivering 20% more performance, would you buy it? I certainly wouldn't. The same way, I would choose the best clocks for the T239 considering the power consumption per clock.

Anyway, I'll be very happy with 550 MHz @ 1.7GHz tbh. That will be a CRAZY jump from current Switch. Just imagine what they can do with all the raw performance and more advanced architecture (and DLSS helping out)
We about to eat good, my friend. And if it comes even better than this, then great!
 
According to this image, if I understand correctly, he is only responsible for TSMC's 5nm, 10nm, and larger nodes? It seems to completely exclude options other than 4n.
4N is a custom 4nm node designed in collaboration by Nvidia, and 4nm itself is a derivative of 5nm. There are other variations of 5nm like this, so it's basically a family of 5nm designs.
 

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *
These tested clocks are interesing, ik it dosent mean necessarily what will be final but it was at least tested
 
4N is a custom 4nm node designed in collaboration by Nvidia, and 4nm itself is a derivative of 5nm. There are other variations of 5nm like this, so it's basically a family of 5nm designs.
i mean,It seems to completely exclude options other than 4n(tsmc 5nm).
And he's not responsible for Samsung's chip work, which seems to rule out sec8n.
 
Last edited:
A bit of salt, he is a Nvidia leaker



As for the "frustated", i guess its because Nintendo want it cheap.


Jensen is frustrated that Nintendo only managed to sell 141 million units (as of March 31, 2024) using an SoC that wasn't going anywhere. He's also frustrated that we will see more than 100 million T239s in the hands of players around the world.
 
I believe the battery on the Ally is 2590 mAh @ 15.48v (40 Wh)


Anyway, I think size/weight and cost are the big questions for these batteries. Those AMD handhelds are much thicker than the Switch. If they keep the same thickness for Switch 2, I don't think we could realistically see batteries that large.

Also, maybe 3.7v batteries are more available in the market and that also have an impact over the cost?

I believe Nintendo will simply choose the best performance per watt, delivering a much lighter handheld than the ROG Ally for example, while having at least decent battery life. I think we have these targets for the clocks, but they are only in our minds; they're the desire of enthusiasts who want to see the SoC being used at its best. But the TX1 wasn't used at its best, and I don't think we gonna see this changing with T239.

I mean, I want that 2TF mark on handheld (with 2GHz for CPU). But if it was on me and I saw the power consumption increasing like crazy from 550 MHz to 660 MHz, I would probably stay with 550 MHz and get more gameplay time. I mean, if you want to buy a new GPU and you end up with 2 options where B is like 60% more expensive than A while only delivering 20% more performance, would you buy it? I certainly wouldn't. The same way, I would choose the best clocks for the T239 considering the power consumption per clock.

Anyway, I'll be very happy with 550 MHz @ 1.7GHz tbh. That will be a CRAZY jump from current Switch. Just imagine what they can do with all the raw performance and more advanced architecture (and DLSS helping out)
We about to eat good, my friend. And if it comes even better than this, then great!
Remember how modular the Switch V1 mainboard was? I think they used a lot more off-the-shelf parts than just the TX1, and we can see a lot of optimized space savings on the OLED model. None of those space savings went into the battery, however, prolly because it wasn't economic to redesign the whole thing with completely new parts, and the existing battery was more than good enough. So the OLED model ended up having comparatively more dead space inside.

Additionally, I don't think 4310 mAh was is currently the largest battery they could fit in there - they probably went with it back then because it was already available in plentiful supply for cheap. Modern smartphone batteries are physically smaller than the Switch's battery but have higher capacity at the same voltage. Heck, even my 2021 Galaxy A52 has a 4500mAh battery and it's smaller and thinner than the Switch's thicc battery. Though they could once again not opt for the largest possible unit for the Switch 2 for the same reasons as the Switch, but I'd like to think they had some more time to shop around this time. Battery density has also improved a lot since.

With the Switch 2 being purpose-built down to the SoC, I doubt we'll have such extravagant board design this time around, so I fully expect there to be a lot more space inside for the battery. They also increased the tablet's dimensions by 13mm vertically and 33mm horizontally, which I assume increases internal space by a proportional 34%

Do you think a 50-60% increase in battery capacity in this case is practical? What about, dare I say, double?
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't a Switch version of GTA 5 be based on the PS3/Xbox 360 version? Isn't it significantly smaller? They could have just released a single-player version, but unfortunately that's not in Take-Two's interests, as GTA Online brings in a lot of money.
Porting PS3 and Xb360 versions is likely quite expensive due to their exotic architectures. Downports from PS4/XB1 are probably easier to do.

The reason it didn't happen is probably that GTA Online started to expect XB1 as a baseline, and porting down further while maintaining content release cadence was considered too much work to keep up.
 
Remember how modular the Switch V1 mainboard was? I think they used a lot more off-the-shelf parts than just the TX1, and we can see a lot of optimized space savings on the OLED model. None of those space savings went into the battery, however, prolly because it wasn't economic to redesign the whole thing with completely new parts, and the existing battery was more than good enough. So the OLED model ended up having comparatively more dead space inside.

Additionally, I don't think 4310 mAh was the largest battery they could fit in there - they probably went with it because it was already available in plentiful supply for cheap. Modern smartphone batteries are physically smaller than the Switch's battery but have higher capacity at the same voltage. Heck, even my 2021 Galaxy A52 has a 4500mAh battery and it's smaller and thinner than the Switch's thicc battery. Though they could once again not opt for the largest possible unit for the Switch 2 for the same reasons as the Switch, but I'd like to think they had some more time to shop around this time.

With the Switch 2 being purpose-built down to the SoC, I doubt we'll have such extravagant board design this time around, so I fully expect there to be a lot more space inside for the battery. They also increased the tablet's dimensions by 13mm vertically and 33mm horizontally, which I assume increases internal space by a proportional 34%

Do you think a 50-60% increase in battery capacity in this case is practical?
I’m expect battery 5300-6000MaH personally is standard today
 
Perhaps he is frustrated due to the cancellation of the improved model of the Switch and the delay of the Switch 2.
I also thought about that. Imagine that nvidia was expecting to sell new console chips in 2022. Instead it's late 2024. That's not a short delay. Remember they had also a lot of R&D costs etc.
 
Personally, I think he simply collected some information on Weibo and then posted it on Twitter
Hidden content is only available for registered users. Sharing it outside of Famiboards is subject to moderation.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, for the ignorance, but who the fuck is Jensen and why being frustrated with Nintendo would be of any relevance?

Also, if it's someone from Nvidia, the only way i can see them frustrated by Nintendo is if Ninty got nitpicky with specs and features.
 
The idea that bigger is a net negative for portability is not one I'm in full agreement with, it has a real impact on its literal portability i.e. the ability to be carried for sure, I empathize. But that is just one aspect of the ergonomics when using it in handheld mode.

My original 3DS is a lovely pocketable Pokemon device, but my eyes strain when viewing scenes in Ocarina 3D that have faraway detail. Even with games that compensate with their FoV, often small screens don't work well with high detail or high resolution content. I've noticed this on the Switch Lite as well.

An 8 inch 1080p screen would be a very pixel dense and very comfortable viewing experience, a screen size larger than the Steam Decks screen, with higher resolution, while the console is still smaller and thinner than the Deck - I consider that a win. I'd have different feelings if the screen were still 720p, or if the device were larger than the Deck. Nor do I think a hypothetical 1440p screen should have an even larger display in the future, I think there's a reasonable limit to how large the overall console can be.
Apparently the switch 2 would meet the requirements for a retina display at an average viewing distance of 11", so for games that hit its native resolution there will be no pixelation whatsoever.
 
Between GTA 6 and Switch 2, it feels like next year is heaven and 2024 is purgatory

And for Xbox, it's always Inferno.

A bit of salt, he is a Nvidia leaker



As for the "frustated", i guess its because Nintendo want it cheap.


If this is legit, and if Jensen is angry because Nintendo wants their stuff for cheap, then maybe he should do some self-reflection on the catastrophe that was nVidias security fuck-ups with the OG Switch SoC.

It does put Nintendo in a rather advantageous negotiation position. ;]

Sorry, for the ignorance, but who the fuck is Jensen and why being frustrated with Nintendo would be of any relevance?

Also, if it's someone from Nvidia, the only way i can see them frustrated by Nintendo is if Ninty got nitpicky with specs and features.

Jensen Huang is the nVidia CEO, and a connoisseur of leather jackets.
 
Sorry, for the ignorance, but who the fuck is Jensen and why being frustrated with Nintendo would be of any relevance?

Also, if it's someone from Nvidia, the only way i can see them frustrated by Nintendo is if Ninty got nitpicky with specs and features.
Jensen Huang is Nvidia's CEO
 
I’m expect battery 5300-6000MaH personally is standard today
I'm wondering what exactly all that extra internal volume will be used for. Assuming a 34% increase in internal surface area, that's 34% for the entire tablet, not just the battery. If the chip's substrate size is the same as the Switch V1, and they're using the same number of similarly sized memory chips, there's really not much to do with more space. Switch OLED proved they could save even more space on the mainboard by optimizing and trimming excess fat.

Let's consider a hypothesis where all of that internal space went into the battery. How much bigger could the battery be, physically speaking? We know that the current Switch's internal battery bay has the dimensions 72mm x 77mm, or about 5544mm^2. Let's say the Switch V1 has an internal area of around 15000mm^2 which is roughly 85% of Switch V1 tablet's total area. Now taking the same 85% internal area of the Switch 2, we're looking at 0.85*(206mm*115mm) or 20,136mm^2 - an increase by over 5000mm^2. That's almost the same as the current Switch's battery, so if I were to add the two, we're now looking at over 10,000mm^2 for the Switch 2's battery. With the Switch's battery's (relatively low) energy density, we're still looking at around 8000mAh.

This is just a theory. In reality finding a battery that matches those exact dimensions would be challenging, and we don't know if all the extra space will actually be used for a bigger battery. Worst of all, if they decide to add a completely new piece of hardware that is not found inside the current Switch, it'll throw a monkey wrench into this theory. My calculations are wildly unscientific and I'm making a lot of assumptions here, do keep that in mind.
 
Last edited:
Additionally, I don't think 4310 mAh was the largest battery they could fit in there - they probably went with it because it was already available in plentiful supply for cheap.

You mean the OLED or the V1? If it's the V1, in 2016 the biggest capacity you would find in phones was 4000 mAh, with some tablets (bigger than the switch) having 4500. I believe they used the best battery they could fit on that small space (the V1 was really packed)

Do you think a 50-60% increase in battery capacity in this case is practical? What about, dare I say, double?

50% I believe it could be possible. But double? I have tried to find 8 inch tablets to compare but most are bigger.

I found some 10 inch with 7000 mAh; 12 inch with 8300 mAh; 7.71" with 4500 mAh; 11.5" with 7250 mAh. The best one I found was 11.61" with 9510 mAh.
And these are all from last year, from companies like Realme, Honor, Oppo, Xiaomi, Samsung...
I think 6500 mAh could be the limit for the Switch 2.
 
Okay, now I remember, Moore's Law is Dead mentioned this back in February at the end of his Switch 2 video: both the thing about Nvidia making a new handheld PC to breech that market and their frustration that the only console using on of their chips is the weakest one. From 16:50 onward:



So yeah, this is nothing new.
 
You mean the OLED or the V1? If it's the V1, in 2016 the biggest capacity you would find in phones was 4000 mAh, with some tablets (bigger than the switch) having 4500. I believe they used the best battery they could fit on that small space (the V1 was really packed)



50% I believe it could be possible. But double? I have tried to find 8 inch tablets to compare but most are bigger.

I found some 10 inch with 7000 mAh; 12 inch with 8300 mAh; 7.71" with 4500 mAh; 11.5" with 7250 mAh. The best one I found was 11.61" with 9510 mAh.
And these are all from last year, from companies like Realme, Honor, Oppo, Xiaomi, Samsung...
I think 6500 mAh could be the limit for the Switch 2.
You're right, I forgot to account for the V1's launch time battery density. But yes, by the time the OLED model came, they could fit a larger battery in there but didn't for good reasons. That gives me reason to expect a large bump in battery capacity for the Switch 2, because we're getting greater density and potentially physically larger battery.
 
Last edited:
You mean the OLED or the V1? If it's the V1, in 2016 the biggest capacity you would find in phones was 4000 mAh, with some tablets (bigger than the switch) having 4500. I believe they used the best battery they could fit on that small space (the V1 was really packed)



50% I believe it could be possible. But double? I have tried to find 8 inch tablets to compare but most are bigger.

I found some 10 inch with 7000 mAh; 12 inch with 8300 mAh; 7.71" with 4500 mAh; 11.5" with 7250 mAh. The best one I found was 11.61" with 9510 mAh.
And these are all from last year, from companies like Realme, Honor, Oppo, Xiaomi, Samsung...
I think 6500 mAh could be the limit for the Switch 2.
Did you account for thickness? Because the Switch's battery itself is as thick or thicker than most modern tablets and smartphones. Additionally, most tablets have a ton of empty space inside, for a good reason. They're not high power machines, and a bigger battery will make them unnecessarily heavy and run times unnecessarily long.
 
Sharp Q4 financials are out (plus some medium term direction). I couldnt find anything interesting related to gaming devices/Nintendo like some people here or press like Bloomberg did last year.
I would rule out Sharp as a supplier of the LCD. Or at least if it does, it will be a standard LCD...
Thanks for these posts. Yeah, Sharp had another disastrous fiscal year. They took a loss of US$1.9B, and US$1.6B of that was attributed to their display panel business. The situation is so dire that the Sharp management is going to drastically reorg the display business:
  • The production of large display panels (for TVs) will cease completely in the first fiscal half. They plan to transform the factory to an AI data center (LOL).
  • Cut costs of the small-medium display (for mobile devices) business
    • Reduce Kameyama LCD plant’s capacity from 2000 to 1500 units/day
    • Reduce Mie LCD plant’s capacity from 2280 to 1100 units/day
    • Close Sakai’s OLED production line
    • “Optimize personnel” (euphemism for layoffs)
As some known Nintendo suppliers seem to be gearing up for the Switch 2 production, Sharp’s deep cut of their display manufacturing capacity suggests that the company is not a supplier of Switch 2 panels. That notion was always a speculation on Mochizuki’s part, but somehow got reported as a fact.
 
A bit of salt, he is a Nvidia leaker



As for the "frustated", i guess its because Nintendo want it cheap.

Jensen is probably jealous of AMD Sony and Xbox deal and pc handhelds… one is doing fine, but the other is sadly in a grave and the other is a niche.

Also the only way I can see annoyance is by either the cancel pro model or the Switch 2 releasing next year, which is unlikely, but at the Nintendo is probably the best partner for Nvidia for the sole reason of them being able to utilised their tech.

Like the way Nintendo used an off shelf failure of a chip and created some of the most impressive looking games, is something that is impressive.
 
As someone who currently uses three different Nvidia Shield Pros (since launch), any similar peripherals are very obviously rock bottom priority for them.

They had a major volume control bug with their remote at launch. They didn't bother pushing the fix out until a year later. They don't care.
 
I've seen the IPC tables, and it's genuinely impressive. But IPC is only part of the equation; relatively low clocks can still bog you down, which is where my concern stems from. It is a low power tablet, after all. Current Switch's CPU is so massively underclocked that even a (admittedly poorly programmed) mobile game like Genshin could not run on it. Thus games like Dragons Dogma 2 feel uncertain.

Hmmm, I would say that Genshin impact is an outlier, because we of course had larger games that may have been more complex w.r.t. CPU side of things. Moreover, genshin is primary made for mobile phones, which were out around that time, even the PS4 with its poor CPU is relatively better so I guess that's just the nature of timing for that game specifically and Mihoyo likely also didn't want to spend resources in fine-combing what bottlenecks there are to reach a market that in their eyes was smaller compared to mobile phones 🤔 , especially considering now that they're going to reduce the visual settings on the SoC, which was considering a flagship (Snapdragon 865).
While it is a big game (marker and scope wise), in the end it'll find its footing on the successor.

With DD2, it's a bit similar, more of an outlier and also a title that'll hopefully be improved through post-launch patches.
Moreover, I think with DD2 I'd like to see more testing.

A bit of salt, he is a Nvidia leaker



As for the "frustated", i guess its because Nintendo want it cheap.


Jensen is not "frustrated", it's a very editorialized way of framing it imo, because there's no clear explanation of what he'd frustrated about.

NVIDIA's competition is the ever expanding market of laptops with iGPUs, being more competent year on year. Intel has entered with Meteor Lake, Apple already has found their footing and are dominating a certain base of the laptop user market, Qualcomm will enter this year and although I don't have mjuch hope, it's going to be interesting how they'll match price-competitively. AMD since vega APUs have been iterating year on year and their upcoming APUs are going all out (e.g Strix Halo) going by the rumours.
AMD especially has carved out their position in gaming consoles and pretty much dominate the PC gaming handheld market.
Nintendo's is NVIDIAs gateway into the gaming console business, and they likely want to expand to laptops, pcs and handhelds going by the rumours of this partnership. Because if any of their partners in the laptop space doesn't need an NVIDIA dGPU anymore, then that will mean a bunch of units in the middle laptop segment with nvidia GPUs may not be necessary anymore. I think this also doubles down on the on "AI-PC", strategy as they've tried to do whole diagrams comparing CPU, NPU and NVIDIA GPU.

Moreover, NVIDIA and mediatek for future PC's, laptops were also in the rumours and kind-of confirmed in one of their news reports around the arm acquissition days for NVIDIA;


This was in 2021;
In PCs, NVIDIA is partnering with MediaTek, one of the world’s largest suppliers of Arm-based SoCs, to create a reference platform supporting Chromium, Linux and NVIDIA SDKs. The combination of NVIDIA RTX GPUs with high-performance, energy-efficient Arm Cortex® processors will bring realistic ray-traced graphics and cutting-edge AI to a new class of laptops.

MediaTek CEO Rick Tsai said, “MediaTek is the world’s largest supplier of Arm chips, used to power everything from smartphones, Chromebooks and smart TVs. We look forward to using our technology and working with NVIDIA to bring the power of GPUs to the Arm PC platform for gaming, content creation and much more. GPU acceleration will be a huge boost for the entire Arm ecosystem.”

In PCs, NVIDIA is working with MediaTek, the world’s largest supplier of smartphone chips, to create a new class of notebooks powered by an Arm-based CPU alongside an NVIDIA RTX GPU.

The notebooks will use Arm cores and NVIDIA graphics to give consumers energy-efficient portables with no-compromise media capabilities based on a reference platform that supports Chromium, Linux and NVIDIA SDKs.

So there was a plan to do all of this, but we know what happened in 2022 as the ARM acquisition fell through and likely quite a few of their plans also. Yes it would be a reference platform of some sort (likely the one similar to the one they used with RTX and ARM, where an RTX 3060 was used with a MediaTek CPU), but it would mean that such plans did exist in 2021.

Nonetheless, NVIDIA and MediaTek have an established partnership in the automotive space and I think in general, there's a lot of knowledge transfer and expanding the drivers that will apply to the development of a SoC, which can be used in a (windows) laptop.
 
Jensen is frustrated that Nintendo only managed to sell 141 million units (as of March 31, 2024) using an SoC that wasn't going anywhere. He's also frustrated that we will see more than 100 million T239s in the hands of players around the world.
You got it wrong mate, frustated in the meaning of getting a small % of profits in every SoC sold unlike all of their gaming segment where they get a BIG chunk.
 

The kid is only 17 now, not ageist or anything, but unless he has an uncle who works for Nvidia, his information is not credible

What is worse, a large amount of information of this person comes from the Chinese Internet, and a lot of information on the Chinese Internet is reproduced from the non-Chinese Internet and Twitter, which means that the information he got may be the "third batch".

This could very well be an "export to domestic sales".
 
Please read this new, consolidated staff post before posting.

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


Back
Top Bottom