If it was actually that power it would be able to run Breath of the Wild at 1080p easily, but it caps off at 900p.

Soundwave said: If it was actually that power it would be able to run Breath of the Wild at 1080p easily, but it caps off at 900p.

Yup, this is all the evidence we need. Nintendo aren't incompetent developers, the Switch just isn't powerful enough to run Zelda at 1080p 30fps.

Switch is under 500Gflops docked. Eurogamer: 393GFlops  Foxconn: 471GFlops

Believe whichever figure you wish but it's certainly not 0.9TF.

Anything that says Windows at the top is instantly super shady.

That said, with my limited knowledge of Powershell, I can say the gflops numbers here are given by running a shell script named julia from some disk or Iso, probably a benchmark. If that's the case these would be real world results which can vary by software but are actual results. We can multiply shader cores by clockspeeds all day, but all we are going to get are theoretical numbers.

Barkley said: Soundwave said: If it was actually that power it would be able to run Breath of the Wild at 1080p easily, but it caps off at 900p. Yup, this is all the evidence we need. Nintendo aren't incompetent developers, the Switch just isn't powerful enough to run Zelda at 1080p 30fps. Switch is under 500Gflops docked. Eurogamer: 393GFlops  Foxconn: 471GFlops Believe whichever figure you wish but it's certainly not 0.9TF.

Zelda BotW on Switch cannot be evidence or proof of Switch hardware capabilities because it's game that was made from ground with Wii U hardware on mind and its just port to Switch, so Zelda BotW in any case doenst use most of Switch hardware.

Dont forget that many XB1 launch games were 720p/900p.

Miyamotoo said: Barkley said: Yup, this is all the evidence we need. Nintendo aren't incompetent developers, the Switch just isn't powerful enough to run Zelda at 1080p 30fps. Switch is under 500Gflops docked. Eurogamer: 393GFlops  Foxconn: 471GFlops Believe whichever figure you wish but it's certainly not 0.9TF. Zelda BotW on Switch cannot be evidence or proof of Switch hardware capabilities because it's game that was made from ground with Wii U hardware on mind and its just port to Switch, so Zelda BotW in any case doenst use most of Switch hardware.

That works both ways, it's a title designed around the constraints of a much weaker system yet it still can't attain 1080p on the Switch.

No it doesn't take full advantage of the Switch's capabilities, but equally porting a 720p 30fps WiiU title and only being able to attain 900p is a good indication that the Switch is not 0.9TF.

Soundwave said: If it was actually that power it would be able to run Breath of the Wild at 1080p easily, but it caps off at 900p.

There could be thousands of reasons as to why Nintendo went for 900p. Quite a few things point to bandwidth issues. Also the switch version has improvements in other aspects like audio etc. So Nintendo might have decided to favor those instead of 1080p. 

That said, claims in the OP are not supported by the FOXCON leak or the neogaf thread. 

Barkley said: Miyamotoo said: Zelda BotW on Switch cannot be evidence or proof of Switch hardware capabilities because it's game that was made from ground with Wii U hardware on mind and its just port to Switch, so Zelda BotW in any case doenst use most of Switch hardware. That works both ways, it's a title designed around the constraints of a much weaker system yet it can still can't attain 1080p on the Switch. No it doesn't take full advantage of the Switch's capabilities, but equally porting a 720p 30fps WiiU title and only being able to attain 900p is a good indication that the Switch is not 0.9TF.

Well to be fair Zelda BotW really pushes Wii U to its limits, its huge open world, with living life and it's full of physics, and actually have fps problems with Wii U version.

Also Zelda BotW is just one example, MK8 is 1080p, while Fast Racing Neo is 1080p, with better visuals with 60fps in 4 player mode, compared to 720p with worse visuals and 30 fps in 4 player mode.

Dont forget that lotsa launch XB1 games were 720p/900p. For instance AC Black Flag was 720p on Xbox 360 and 900p on XB1.

Random_Matt said: Nope, but thought Nintendo fans do not care about graphics, yet keep going on about this.

That is wrong assumption.
Ninty fans want a console way closer in term of power, they get tired of this, but Nintendo continues with it.

Barkley said: Miyamotoo said: Zelda BotW on Switch cannot be evidence or proof of Switch hardware capabilities because it's game that was made from ground with Wii U hardware on mind and its just port to Switch, so Zelda BotW in any case doenst use most of Switch hardware. That works both ways, it's a title designed around the constraints of a much weaker system yet it still can't attain 1080p on the Switch. No it doesn't take full advantage of the Switch's capabilities, but equally porting a 720p 30fps WiiU title and only being able to attain 900p is a good indication that the Switch is not 0.9TF.

 

I've played the remastered version of dishonoured on PS4 and that suffers from huge frame dips. A game ported from last gen hardware to a far superior machine, which is no benchmark to judge the machines power. I will judge the power of the Switch when I play something made from the ground up. Mario Odyssey seems like the best place to start because stuff like arms and Splatoon 2 are quite simplistic in design.

zippy said: I've played the remastered version of dishonoured on PS4 and that suffers from huge frame dips. A game ported from last gen hardware to a far superior machine, which is no benchmark to judge the machines power.

Because of improved assets (which BOTW doesn't have) and shoddy development, are you insinuating Nintendo did a crap job with the Switch version of Breath of the Wild?

But I admit it's not the best gauge of performance, doesn't change my opinion that the Switch is no where near 0.9TF docked. I'll stick with the Foxconn/EG leaks that are around the same ballpark.