ARM A57 was designed for 20nm.
So Nintendo rightfully opted to limit clockrates and voltages so that power consumption will always be in check for CPU loads.
I would be very surprised if the Switch 2 used anything less than a 6-core complex to be honest.
I think you might find that because of the large CPU performance delta between Xbox One/Playstation 4 and Xbox Two/Playstation 5, that the Switch 2 will struggle to get demanding ports, especially ports that leverage Ryzen to it's absolute fullest extent, that's not to say the Switch 2 won't get ports, it should get some, not every game is going to be running stupidly complex simulation on the CPU next gen... And the Switch 2 should get those if the developer/publisher bothers.
Indeed. Or Nintendo could have kept the same performance level and increased battery life substantially.
I think you are trying to paint to much of a black and white scene.
It's just one of those games that just makes sense for the platform. - Plus Overwatch is not technically demanding anyway, it can run on a toaster... And even when downscaled to low visual settings still looks semi-decent thanks to blizzards atypical strong art style.
Well you have A57 at 28/20/16 and 14nm. Tegra X2 is 16nm and it includes A57 cores also.
I am very aware of that, same like fact that A57 throttles (same like Tegra GPU) at higher speeds than 1.7/1.8GHz. But I already said that only reasons why Nintendo went with 1GHz and not for instance 1.5GHz are battery life and heating. But Tegra X2 and lower nm would allow them higher clokcs because we would have lower power consumption and power heating in any case.
Yeah, I also expecting at least 6-Core CPU for Switch 2, but my point is that we will talk about huge difference in any case compared to 4/3 Core A57 1GHz that operates in current Switch.
SoC that Switch 2 will have will most likely be adjusted much more to Nintendo needs and wishes, even if they again use already available chip from market, it will probably be much more customized than Tegra X1 in Switch has. Nintendo used available Tegra X1 because it was best suiting their needs for their first handheld, but with point that we will most likely have Switch 2 and Nintendo and Nvidia will have long term partnership, Nintendo and Nvidia will plan much better SoC for Switch 2.
From standpoint of games, I dont expecting huge jump in graphics on PS5/XB2 compared to PS4/XB1 games, I expecting little improved current gen games that will run at 4K resolution, so most of that power difference will go to much higher pixel count and maybe 60FPS that will devs maybe start pushing much more. So I do think that in plenty cases, Switch 2 will probably could run 4K PS5/XB2 games at least at 1080p maybe even at 1440p with some other cut backs (like lowered effects or maybe lower frame rate if we talking about some 60 FPS games..). Difference would be that 1080p or even 720p (for handheld mode maybe) sound much better compared what devs would need to with some current big games in order to run on current Switch where we have some AAA 3rd party games working below 720p (go down to 540p, 480p even to 360p in some sequences), because some devs just simple want cut so much resolution for their games and that their games run at those resolutions on big screen, but for instance 1080p is nice resolution in any case.
Probably will be larger jump, but Switch 2 will also have huge jump in CPU side in any case.
Well I guess its combination of points that Tegra X2 probably couldn't be ready on time for Switch and there were already some rumors that Nvidia had tons of unused Tegra X1 chips and that they apparently gave Nintendo very good offer.
Yeah, I mean it ending Win-Win situation for Nintendo and Nvidia, and Switch is doing its job.I am personally very interesting to see what Switch will have with its revisions, for instance Tegra X2 is very possible for Switch revisions, or would Nintendo go at lower NM with current Tegra X1 chip (that has less sense) that would allow them higher clocks.
I disagree, I just talking about objective look of Dev point of view when just he looks Switch specs, right away it obvious that CPU is biggest bottleneck followed by RAM bandwidth. But I agree that not all games are equally CPU or GPU intensive.
Yeah, I agree, especially because it seems that Diablo 3 is selling quite well so that will also push them more to bring Overwatch to Switch.Last edited by Miyamotoo - on 03 December 2018