By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - I flew too close to the 1TF sun and my Switch wings melted.

bigtakilla said:
zorg1000 said:

Wasn't Wii like 1/20th the power of PS3/360 and was able to handle some multiplats?

I don't really think the difference between 1/3 or 1/5 of PS4 is going to matter when it comes to getting ports. If they wont port games with 1/5 the power, I dont really think having 1/3 the power would mean much better support.

Well if they downgraded enough (and remember COD had an entire seperate dev team working on Wii ports) sure, not a problem. The issue was Wii sold like wildfire and Switch is coming out when the competition has 80+ mil in homes.

My point is that power is not what will decide whether or not Switch recieves 3rd party support, the ability for 3rd parties to make a profit will decide whether or not Switch recieves 3rd party support.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
CaptainExplosion said:
zorg1000 said:

At launch Vita was $300, PS4 was $400 & PS TV was  $100 so you needed to spend $800 and have 3 seperate devices to be able to play all games on the PS ecosystem at home or on the go.

Switch is rumored to be $250-300 at launch and os  the only device needed to play the full lineup of games in the Nintendo ecoystem on the go or at home.

Its a significantly more streamlined & accessible version of an existing concept. That doesnt mean its not innovative though, Wii & DS were not the first motion control or touch screen devices but they were the first to streamline and make them accessible to a mass market.

Doesn't fully negate our concerns for the system, but it's a start.

What concerns are you speaking of?



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

zorg1000 said:
potato_hamster said:

...what new option? I can play PS4 games on the go right now with my Vita.

At launch Vita was $300, PS4 was $400 & PS TV was  $100 so you needed to spend $800 and have 3 seperate devices to be able to play all games on the PS ecosystem at home or on the go.

Switch is rumored to be $250-300 at launch and os  the only device needed to play the full lineup of games in the Nintendo ecoystem on the go or at home.

Its a significantly more streamlined & accessible version of an existing concept. That doesnt mean its not innovative though, Wii & DS were not the first motion control or touch screen devices but they were the first to streamline and make them accessible to a mass market.

My point wasn't about price at all. Besides, I got one of my vitas on clearance for $50 (and my PS TV for a whopping $13), and the PS4 was on sale black friday for what? $230 at some places? So that's only $270 for that experience presently if you shop around . But that's really neither here nor there.

The point was about how this option currently exists. Sure Nintendo is taking it a step further, but they didn't exactly change the face of gaming as we know it by offering a better version of what others have been doing for years any more than Sony changed the face of gaming by releasing the PS4. It's a new iteration on an established idea using more current technologies.



Hey guys, I asked this in another thread but I'm gonna ask it here too... =)

Google Pixel C uses Tegra X1 at full speed (1.9GHz on CPU and 1GHz GPU I believe) and doesn't have active cooling. Why is Nintendo using active cooling on Switch if it's Tegra chip is so underclocked? Maybe the rumour is false and there's no active cooling then? Or maybe it's not so severely underclocked?

They would need active cooling for the sake of not throttling even with clocks so low (50% on CPU and 80% on GPU when docked)?



Not to raise anyone's hopes, but Thraktor from Gaf has done a write up that suggests the speculated flop data is way more malleable than the initial speculation implies. I'll post it here if you want, but it goes as high as 576 GF FP32 / 1,152 GF FP16 with 3 SMs (I have no idea what that means, but speculation was that Switch would have either 2 or 3 SMs).

AKA clock speeds aren't everything.



Around the Network
haqqaton said:
Hey guys, I asked this in another thread but I'm gonna ask it here too... =)

Google Pixel C uses Tegra X1 at full speed (1.9GHz on CPU and 1GHz GPU I believe) and doesn't have active cooling. Why is Nintendo using active cooling on Switch if it's Tegra chip is so underclocked? Maybe the rumour is false and there's no active cooling then? Or maybe it's not so severely underclocked?

They would need active cooling for the sake of not throttling even with clocks so low (50% on CPU and 80% on GPU when docked)?

To keep heat down. It's going to be in childrens hands.



haqqaton said:
Hey guys, I asked this in another thread but I'm gonna ask it here too... =)

Google Pixel C uses Tegra X1 at full speed (1.9GHz on CPU and 1GHz GPU I believe) and doesn't have active cooling. Why is Nintendo using active cooling on Switch if it's Tegra chip is so underclocked? Maybe the rumour is false and there's no active cooling then? Or maybe it's not so severely underclocked?

They would need active cooling for the sake of not throttling even with clocks so low (50% on CPU and 80% on GPU when docked)?

The Pixel C throttles the GPU if it gets too hot, don't think this is an option for a system running games. Keep in mind a tablet does 100 other tasks that are less intensive than running a video game. 

And actually the Tegra X1 in the Pixel C is not 100% clock, it's 80% of a full Tegra X1, so it's downclocked as well. 

The fan may be an emergency measure more than anything to prevent overheating/sudden system shut down. Lets say for example you have a portable battery pak or access to a USB terminal on a plane ... well theoretically you could then play for like 8 straight hours ... the heat build up in the system may become too much. 



bigtakilla said:
haqqaton said:
Hey guys, I asked this in another thread but I'm gonna ask it here too... =)

Google Pixel C uses Tegra X1 at full speed (1.9GHz on CPU and 1GHz GPU I believe) and doesn't have active cooling. Why is Nintendo using active cooling on Switch if it's Tegra chip is so underclocked? Maybe the rumour is false and there's no active cooling then? Or maybe it's not so severely underclocked?

They would need active cooling for the sake of not throttling even with clocks so low (50% on CPU and 80% on GPU when docked)?

To keep heat down. It's going to be in childrens hands.

Using active cooling and these clocks it'll reach sub-zero and hurt them even more. xD

Seriously, Pixel C is a tablet and will probably be in children hands too.



Soundwave said:
haqqaton said:
Hey guys, I asked this in another thread but I'm gonna ask it here too... =)

Google Pixel C uses Tegra X1 at full speed (1.9GHz on CPU and 1GHz GPU I believe) and doesn't have active cooling. Why is Nintendo using active cooling on Switch if it's Tegra chip is so underclocked? Maybe the rumour is false and there's no active cooling then? Or maybe it's not so severely underclocked?

They would need active cooling for the sake of not throttling even with clocks so low (50% on CPU and 80% on GPU when docked)?

The Pixel C throttles the GPU if it gets too hot, don't think this is an option for a system running games. Keep in mind a tablet does 100 other tasks that are less intensive than running a video game. 

And actually the Tegra X1 in the Pixel C is not 100% clock, it's 80% of a full Tegra X1, so it's downclocked as well. 

Oh.. I didn't know.



haqqaton said:
bigtakilla said:

To keep heat down. It's going to be in childrens hands.

Using active cooling and these clocks it'll reach sub-zero and hurt them even more. xD

Seriously, Pixel C is a tablet and will probably be in children hands too.

Are tou sure it's active all the time, or just while docked? Also, sub zero temps? On the casing? Doubt that.