| Soundwave said: The Tegra X1 uses 10 watts alone, sometimes more. There's no way it's using 1.5 watt for dick all other than playing SNES Virtual Console. |
Are you calling Anandtech a liar? One of the best sources of information for technology on the internet?
Sure. Whatever mate. I have provided evidence of this before. So if you failed to check the Article out, then that is your own fault, live believing otherwise.
| Soundwave said: Also other high end mobile GPUs throttle like crazy too ... the Apple A10 which is basically the highest end other mobile SoC throttles a lot: http://wccftech.com/apple-a10-fusion-gpu-breakdown/ The A10 uses a souped up GT7600 which PowerVR rates about as strong as an XBox 360, though even that is probably misleading because it throttles a lot. It only hits that performance envelope in absolute ideal conditions and can only hold that performance for minutes before it has to clock down.
|
Why do you keep using Apple as a comparison?
The A10 has a CPU that is much faster than Tegra and actually runs at it's full rate.
It has more memory bandwidth than Tegra.
It has a higher resolution display.
It has various modems and logic for various tasks.
Apple has also modified the A10's GPU, thrown out various blocks and implemented it's own propriety design.
Common I expect better than that from you. When will you learn that such comparisons are utterly pointless and not representative of each other?
| Soundwave said: Performance well beyond a PS3/360 *sustained* without throttling in a mobile chip running on battery power simply isn't easily doable today, you would need a form factor more equivalent to a laptop with a battery that's well over 10,000 MaH and a large active fan. |
You keep saying that. But Tegra is built on an old 20nm Planar process. It doesn't even use Finfet.
The Switch is also using a CPU that is operating at only 1ghz. (Massive power saving there.)
Is using a small 6-7" 720P screen. (Power saving also there.)
Doesn't have any LTE/3G/2G modems. (Power saving there.)
Ergo. It is entirely possibly to have performance that exceeds the Switch. Sustained without a 10,000MaH battery.
| Soundwave said: The Snapdragon 820 is the big mobile and that is basically a wash with the Tegra X1: http://wccftech.com/snapdragon-820-benchmarks/ There is no mythical mobile chip right now that's pushes PS4/XB1 graphics. It doesn't exist, sorry. Even Nvidia's Tegra X1 claims are somewhat dubious .... it's not really a 500 GFLOP processor since it can only hold that performance for like 8-10 minutes max. It's a 384 gigaflop GPU max, which is better than an XBox 360, but to hit that it still needs to gobble down 10+ watts, so your entire SoC is approaching 20 watts total, which is a monstrous amount of electricity for a mobile chip. |
You just lost all credability by using flops in such a pointless, inaccurate manner. Please stop it.
You do know that a 500Gflop GPU can be faster than a 1 Teraflop GPU? Right? You do know that there is more to a GPU than their theoretical single precision floating point performance, right? right?
And not once have I ever stated that I expect Playstation 4/Xbox One graphics out of the Switch. I expect "good enough" which the Switch clearly is not.
| Soundwave said: The chip has to be downclocked to 307 MHz in portable, why would you think it's remotely possibly to have it run at full clock in portable mode? You would get 1 hour of battery life even with a relatively large-ish battery (say 5000-6000 MaH). |
It doesn't have to be downclocked to 307mhz. It is what Nintendo chose. There is a difference.
The technology exists today where the chip could have been faster and use less power. That is an undeniable fact.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
