• 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
Lack of cross-gen seemingly implies that Drake might launch later than expected. However, I think it's exciting that Nintendo is keen on having exclusives for it (I would've probably complained about Switch holding games back)
 
Truno said:
Lack of cross-gen seemingly implies that Drake might launch later than expected. However, I think it's exciting that Nintendo is keen on having exclusives for it (I would've probably complained about Switch holding games back)
Click to expand...
don't think that's what is implied at all. they just want some software that sells the virtues of the platform. it doesn't discount cross-gen, but hint as some early exclusives
 
Is there any insight in these answers? they seem generic as hell, as per usual. Would the DLSS model even be a "next-gen" system? Nintendo is so fucking frustrating my god.
 
Actual Drake exclusives from Nintendo would surprise me, i expect(ed) a "phase-out" timeframe for the old Switch versions for ~1.5 years and afterwards Nintendo doing Drake exclusives.
 
0
CullenLX87 said:
Is there any insight in these answers? they seem generic as hell, as per usual. Would the DLSS model even be a "next-gen" system? Nintendo is so fucking frustrating my god.
Click to expand...
Nintendo follows a pattern of not hinting at anything. if it's not announced, it doesn't exist. even if it's announced the day after, they'll speak as if nothing is coming for the foreseeable future
 
CullenLX87 said:
Is there any insight in these answers? they seem generic as hell, as per usual. Would the DLSS model even be a "next-gen" system? Nintendo is so fucking frustrating my god.
Click to expand...

Yes. Re-affirmation of BC is always appreciated and their stance on cross-gen is interesting. The DLSS model is absolutely next-gen, but they're not gonna acknowledge it here
 
0
次世代機のことはまだお話できる段階にはありませんが
Click to expand...
We’re not at the point when we can talk about the next generation console.
edit: Actually, I think it’s a big step from the “the next generation console will release in 20xx” answer.
 
Last edited:
Obviously there will be unique exclusives for Drake, the real question is how many games will still release on Switch, which I think will probably be most, if not all, for the first year or so. Earlier exclusives has always been a possibility, though, especially if there are new hardware features beyond power that enable them.
 
0
I think anyone in this thread could have told you Nintendo isn't ready to talk about new hardware yet

that's kind of the whole problem
 
yeah...honestly. They have nothing to say...today. in a month? 3? 6? who knows.
Its literally just "were not gona release drake today, stop asking".
 
I will repeat again.

Seeing COD:MW2 numbers, It would be a very smart move for Nintendo to get a port of it (with the rumoured expansion) for Drake launch window, alongside Warzone 2 and past remasters.

COD + Rockstar stuff in year 1 would be a killer combination that can increase the appeal of nintendo systems in the west. In Asian market they have a very big advantage over competition but they need to strengthen themselves in overseas markets.
 
MP! said:
How would the nvidia driver on your PC interacting with the in game DLSS info be any different than the DLSS driver on nvn2 interacting with the in game info on a drake game?

Both a “come on guys” statement but also a genuine question cause I don’t know the answer and I’m not all that familiar with API and driver relations
Click to expand...
On PC, DLSS/Graphics APIs/GPU drivers are all different pieces of software that communicate with each other through generic interfaces that allow you to wire them up in different combinations, and let the OS perform various security checks. These security checks prevent a word document sent to your email from running on your graphics hardware and then gaining access to main memory, where it scans for your credit card number and sends it to a phisherman in Ethiopia.

On Drake there is only one combination, and the security checks aren't the same. So DLSS is (part of) the Graphics API which is the driver.

On PC the data flow looks kinda like this

Game -> DirectX -> OS -> Driver -> Hardware
| |
-> DLSS core -

On Drake it's something like

Game -> NVN2 w/ DLSS -> Hardware
 
0
LoneRanger said:
I will repeat again.

Seeing COD:MW2 numbers, It would be a very smart move for Nintendo to get a port of it (with the rumoured expansion) for Drake launch window, alongside Warzone 2 and past remasters.

COD + Rockstar stuff in year 1 would be a killer combination that can increase the appeal of nintendo systems in the west. In Asian market they have a very big advantage over competition but they need to strengthen themselves in overseas markets.
Click to expand...
Nintendo should try to get more games like Genshin as well

or make their own 👀
 
Nintendo's strength is in creating new games, so when we release new hardware in the future, we would like to propose unique games that cannot be realized on existing hardware. (Representative Director: Shigeru Miyamoto / Q&A Session at Financial Results Briefing for the Second Quarter of the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2023 )

Comment: Last time, I talked about stereoscopic 3D on my hypothetical SWITCH successor. I dream of a new controller that would have one or two buttons at the L/R position in a circular shape, and that would be manipulated in an infinite rotating way in both directions, with a purpose among others, to allow to change the objective (focus) of the camera in the game, giving the user the real 3D feeling.

We will also need to consider how we can better connect our core game business with the experiences of our customers outside of the dedicated game consoles via Nintendo Account.
We are not yet at the stage where we can talk about next-generation consoles, but what is most important to us is to create unique products that integrate hardware and software.
We hope that we will be able to successfully combine this with activities that utilize the Nintendo account. (Director, Senior Executive Officer: Koh Shiota / Q&A Session at Financial Results Briefing for the Second Quarter of the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2023)

Comment: Speaking of video game development, in the commercial version of Bravely Default (2012) the change of conventions of rpg video games is mentioned in the tutorial, surely those words inspired many developers to do the same. There are good franchises but very few changes between games, even between similar genres there are no major differences.
 
ILikeFeet said:
Way way stronger. Jaguar wasn't even that good against contemporary ARM cores (for the same performance, the A57 consumed less power, for example)
Click to expand...

I mean I figure it would be much stronger but I was wondering ball park. Like I know A78 is about 3x A57 clock for clock. So I was think core for core clock for clock A78 vs Jaguar would be about 3x. And 1.1 GHz vs 1.6 GHz should produce about double the performance roughly?

It's much more performant but I'm just trying to scale I guess.
 
Thraktor said:
The PS3/Xbox 360 generation isn't really comparable to the current generation in CPU terms, though. The PS3 and Xbox 360 CPUs were very, ahem, idiosyncratic CPUs which had a lot of theoretical performance but required code to be carefully tailored to actually achieve that.

The PS3's Cell CPU in particular is a CPU with massive theoretical performance, but made in such a way that achieving anywhere close to that theoretical performance is very challenging. While people have claimed that it was ahead of it's time in terms of moving to multi-core CPUs, in reality it represented a design philosophy which quickly became obsolete. The PPE was pretty typical of this philosophy, an in-order PowerPC core with a long pipeline and a high clock speed. The 7 SPEs, though, took this to the extreme. The SPEs:
  • Were in-order
  • Had a long pipeline
  • Had no cache
  • Had no branch predictor
If you weren't tailoring your code very carefully for the SPE, this is a recipe for horrible performance. IBM's paper on the SPE design rather nonchalantly refers to this:

An 18-cycle mispredict penalty when you don't even have a branch predictor is pretty scary stuff. The recommendation is, pretty much, just not to use branches. For example, on SPEs, the recommended approach for loops was to unroll them. That is, instead of having a standard for loop which iterates, say 100 times, you just duplicate the code 100 times instead, hence avoiding branches and avoiding the branch mispredict penalty.

The lack of cache was another thing that had to be carefully worked around. Each SPE had 256KB of SRAM, and there was a DMA engine to pull in data from main memory, so if you made sure the SPE always had the data it needed in SRAM you'd be okay, but if the SPE ever tried to access main memory the latency would be enormous and the SPE would stall completely until the data arrived.

The first line of the paper is actually quite telling about the design philosophy, as it calls the SPE a "11 FO4 streaming data processor". The phrase FO4 isn't something you hear too often these days about CPU designs, but was arguably the key metric for CPU designers in the early 2000s. FO4 refers to the complexity of each stage in a pipelined processor. A lower FO4means each stage in the pipeline is electrically simpler, which means signals propagate through them more quickly and therefore you can hit higher clock speeds. Chasing lower and lower FO4 values was the design philosophy of the time, motivated by the notion that you can reach a low enough FO4 to hit optimal theoretical performance. This meant longer and longer pipelines, and the Pentium 4, Xbox 360's Xenos, and PS3's Cell were all products of this design philosophy.

Another popular idea at the time was that compilers (or just software developers) would become smart enough to deal with the most esoteric design, so CPU designers could just focus on theoretical performance and leave it to someone else to figure out how to actually make us of it. Intel's ill-fated Itanium processors, with their VLIW design, were another example of this somewhat earlier than Cell.

And have CPUs since Cell followed it's lead in chasing low-FO4 designs with long pipelines and throwing out useless trinkets like caches and branch predictors? Well, no. In fact, CPU design recently has gone in exactly the opposite direction. The Core 2 Duo was an early example of this, already on the market just before PS3 hit. It's a shorter pipeline design with lower clock speeds than the preceding Pentium 4, but outperformed it in most real-world code, because it was designed around how real-world code would run on it, rather than theoretically optimal code.

If you look at the arguable leader in modern CPU design, Apple, and how they've managed to achieve that level of performance, it's by doing exactly the opposite of what Sony and IBM did with Cell. Rather than pushing long pipelines and high clock speeds, they've got large, low-latency caches, an extremely large re-order buffer for out-of-order execution, and very sophisticated branch prediction. Apple are pushing things a bit more than others in this direction, but this is representative of modern CPU design; try to make as much real-world code run as well as possible, rather than asking developers to contort themselves to reach the chip's theoretical performance.

Getting back to my original point, the Core 2 Duo was designed so that, if you were to just write some typical code without much care for what CPU it would run on, it would outperform the likes of a Pentium 4 or Xenos or Cell. Early games in the PS3/Xbox 360 generation wouldn't have been heavily optimised around the Xenos and Cell CPUs, however if there's one place where software developers get to tightly optimise their code around specific hardware it's the games industry. Over the course of the generation AAA developers were figuring out how to squeeze more and more out of those CPUs, and the likes of the Core 2 Duo wasn't able to keep up with performance you could get out of Xenos or Cell when code was extremely well optimised for them.

The PS5 and Xbox Series X/S are in a very different position. Not just because the CPU cores are the same or very similar to those used in many gaming PCs, but because the CPUs aren't weird esoteric designs which take years for developers to properly leverage. Developers will undoubtedly get more out of them over the generation, and as cross-gen games disappear and we see more 30fps current gen exclusives PCs will need more power to hit 60+fps, but it's not going to be anywhere near what we saw in the PS3/Xbox 360 generation.
Click to expand...
I agree that the difference won't be as dramatic as that gen, but I believe that developers sooner or later will start to optimize towards PS5/XBSX smaller caches and the difference in Perf/Clock between Ariel and Desktop Ryzen will lessen as the generation unfolds. Then I believe that the advantages that the PS5/XSX do have will make systems that do not outperform them on paper, like a system with lower core counts, start to age towards the end of the gen.

You are right that the PS3 is an extreme example, (the 360 less so), but just focusing on PC, multi-cores systems have aged better even though when at launch there was no difference in performance. I remember clearly the discussions around the 2600k vs 2500k, there was no difference at the time.
 
0
ReddDreadtheLead said:
Like a little over twice or so.

Clocking it that low isn’t doing any favors.

If you clocked it at 1.6GHz, it should be a bit over 3x the CPU performance.
Click to expand...

I was looking at the power consumption figures calculated some pages back and it looked like 1.1GHz was around the same consumption as the current Switch on the CPU side. That's why I chose those I would think ideally they go sonething like 1.5GHz or so but was just trying to see minimum performance improvement.

What's your major issue with clocking it that low?
 
With Nintendo’s change in FY forecast, does this cast any doubt on a March launch?

It feels like if anything, it would mean that the new systems sales would not be tracked in these numbers correct?

Yes I know the leading / convenient theory is May, just talking about the “early 2023” option that’s been floated for ages.
 
karmitt said:
With Nintendo’s change in FY forecast, does this cast any doubt on a March launch?

It feels like if anything, it would mean that the new systems sales would not be tracked in these numbers correct?

Yes I know the leading / convenient theory is May, just talking about the “early 2023” option that’s been floated for ages.
Click to expand...

Yes. Slashed forecast means doubt about supply chain. Q3 is always Nintendo's biggest season. If they slashed hardware by 2 million there is 0 chance they are launching a new system in March.
 
0
Gotdatmoneyy said:
I mean I figure it would be much stronger but I was wondering ball park. Like I know A78 is about 3x A57 clock for clock. So I was think core for core clock for clock A78 vs Jaguar would be about 3x. And 1.1 GHz vs 1.6 GHz should produce about double the performance roughly?

It's much more performant but I'm just trying to scale I guess.
Click to expand...
Lots of folks would look at IPC numbers, but you can't do that comparing x86 and arm architectures. Even if you could, it ignores things like Jaguar's weak cache design and remarkably bad branch predictor. There are some benchmarks however that suggest a 2.5x perf increase at the same clocks

ASUS All Series vs N/A - Geekbench

browser.geekbench.com

This is an Orin benchmark again once of the various Jaguar APUs. There are very few Orin benches out there, but this one tracks with some smart phone benches I've seen, and the user is well enough known in the Nvidia community I'm fairly certain he didn't screw up Orin's power config (which I've seen several benchmarkers do).
 
karmitt said:
With Nintendo’s change in FY forecast, does this cast any doubt on a March launch?

It feels like if anything, it would mean that the new systems sales would not be tracked in these numbers correct?

Yes I know the leading / convenient theory is May, just talking about the “early 2023” option that’s been floated for ages.
Click to expand...
I think anything in this FY was written off. If it was launching before April, we'd know by now, akin to the initial Switch reveal
 
ILikeFeet said:
I think anything in this FY was written off. If it was launching before April, we'd know by now, akin to the initial Switch reveal
Click to expand...

I see. I kind of assumed, especially given so many peoples’ stances on “they absolutely will not announce it this holiday at the risk of tanking sales” meant that it would need January or later reveal.

What you’re saying kind of implies March was never an option, but there’s been plenty of arguments for a reveal to launch timeframe of a couple months so I’m not sure why it’s not possible?
 
karmitt said:
I see. I kind of assumed, especially given so many peoples’ stances on “they absolutely will not announce it this holiday at the risk of tanking sales” meant that it would need January or later reveal.

What you’re saying kind of implies March was never an option, but there’s been plenty of arguments for a reveal to launch timeframe of a couple months so I’m not sure why it’s not possible?
Click to expand...
It's still possible, but I think it's unlikely. A two month window would be cutting it very close, and I believe leaks would be more full force than they are now. There was quite a bit we learned out the Switch prior to its October reveal
 
oldpuck said:
Lots of folks would look at IPC numbers, but you can't do that comparing x86 and arm architectures. Even if you could, it ignores things like Jaguar's weak cache design and remarkably bad branch predictor. There are some benchmarks however that suggest a 2.5x perf increase at the same clocks

ASUS All Series vs N/A - Geekbench

browser.geekbench.com

This is an Orin benchmark again once of the various Jaguar APUs. There are very few Orin benches out there, but this one tracks with some smart phone benches I've seen, and the user is well enough known in the Nvidia community I'm fairly certain he didn't screw up Orin's power config (which I've seen several benchmarkers do).
Click to expand...
And this isn’t even one of the better ORIN scores :p

Nvidia had one at 7773 MT and SkyJuice had one at I think 7800 or so in MT.
 
0
ILikeFeet said:
It's still possible, but I think it's unlikely. A two month window would be cutting it very close, and I believe leaks would be more full force than they are now. There was quite a bit we learned out the Switch prior to its October reveal
Click to expand...
I do think the lack of recent leaks is suspicious, but I also think the number of leaks we got through last year was substantial.

It wouldn’t surprise me if Nintendo did everything in their power to lock things down. They reacted publicly to the Bloomberg article, and there’s no way that article didn’t have a tangible impact on every developer using the kits. The question is, just how much could they possibly do? It’s not like other companies are super keen on having details leak, so is it all that likely that Nintendo would be more successful at the same game?
 
Look sorry if I get anything misspelled or something (I'm typing on my phone) but I think any launch after mid March to end of April is a really bad move, I mean based on graphs, timelines, and statistics out of the FOUR consoles that have been sold in May none of them did well and also one of those was the first "console" ever made. Following this information since those 4 consoles back in 1967-1972 those were the only consoles released in May, most consoles are released (based on the research I have scoured through for hours) in January, March, June, September, October, and also November. One reason that no matter what I look at pointing to why consoles don't release in the months excluded above is because May and all the others is the month where most people make and spend less money because of whatever reason why (I haven't gotten that far in research). So from what I know and what the info I have gathered says that it would not be benefecial to release in May.


STILL MARCH GNAG NO MATTER WHAT.
 
March announcement and new 3D Mario game reveal for September 2023 (just before Mario Movie comes out in April so Drake trailers are in front of every screening), May release along with ToTK.

If no announcement by the end of March 31st, well...then I know to hide this thread for my own well-being lol
 
Isn’t production improving? Really doubt that Nintendo would release a new console next year if they are starting to produce more switch, surely they will wait till early 2024 for a Drake reveal and release it during summer 2024 Most likely? By then Switch will have sold 130+ million without a price drop at least?
 
Mr Swine said:
Isn’t production improving? Really doubt that Nintendo would release a new console next year if they are starting to produce more switch, surely they will wait till early 2024 for a Drake reveal and release it during summer 2024 Most likely? By then Switch will have sold 130+ million without a price drop at least?
Click to expand...

2024 has no backing from leaks so you won’t find any support in here other than “gut feel.” It’s possible, but we don’t have anything to indicate that’s the case yet.

If Nintendo intends to sell the new device alongside the existing Switch, which we have no reason to believe that won’t be the case, improvements in production are still relevant.
 
yohoopzcrazy said:
I'm SO ready to consume every milissecond of every DF video about Drake, every comparison, every discussion, every frame...
Click to expand...
ij4iciT.jpg
 
Raccoon said:
Nintendo could have put Zelda anywhere. Why May 12?
Click to expand...

Because that’s when they think they can finish it? It’s a Friday, and the developers probably did reasonable estimates of work left with some buffer. I think the only prerequisite they’d have is on or after Drake launch…I’ll never forgive them or understand their decision making otherwise
 
karmitt said:
Because that’s when they think they can finish it? It’s a Friday, and the developers probably did reasonable estimates of work left with some buffer. I think the only prerequisite they’d have is on or after Drake launch…I’ll never forgive them or understand their decision making otherwise
Click to expand...
I guess I should say why not June? or late May even. it's a weird day
 
Raccoon said:
I guess I should say why not June? or late May even. it's a weird day
Click to expand...

Why is it so strange? Genuine question.

The game has more selling power with the core audiences than anything else in Nintendo's stable, and if Breath of the Wild's 30 million climb is any indication, it's going to have legs enough to be relevant for many holidays ahead of it. One concern they might have with the date is giving it a reasonable berth as not to compete with their own content too much, but month is probably a fair enough gap to accomplish that, and the release calendar is empty from Feb.
 
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