By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Nuvendil said:
Nautilus said:
If thats true, and that lets say it has around 1 TF for handheld mode and close to the 1.5 TF in console mode(with it docked, it dosent have to worry about battery and thuis actives more GPU components/no need to underclock), then this will be a very good home console, and a beast of a handheld.It should put to rest, or at least ease, the fear of not being powerful enough for third parties.

The issue is the 1.5 would be hard to get out of the Parker in general.  That's double the GLFOPS and will also result in more heat which will require more cooling for which the Switch's fairly compact active cooling may not be able to properly supply.  It's much more likely they will just shoot for 1 to 1.1 TFLOPS and wring out every last drop of performance.  That's why you would go with Nvidia, efficiency.  

Basically, I could see augmenting the Parker to get a 35% performance boost to get real world performance parity or something close with Xbone.  I don't see how they could get a 100% performance boost without driving the price way too  high and within the design constraints of the Switch in general.

Well, Im nowhere near a tech expert, and Im actually quite uninformed in this subject, but with the "closer to the 1.5 TF" could could simple be that it manages to squeeze out 1 or two extra TF in terms of performance to rend the game closer to 1080p or/and at 60 fps instead of the 720p that suposedelly the handheld has.Again, Im supposing that is possible and please correct me if Im simly wrong.But isnt, according to the article, the Switch using full floating points, couldnt it theoretically with a cooling system that handles it, achieve the double of the efficency and getting close to the 2 TF? 



My (locked) thread about how difficulty should be a decision for the developers, not the gamers.

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=241866&page=1