| superchunk said: CPU is better. The Jaguar CPU is a low-end x86 mobile chip. There are plenty of devices with just ARM A57s in them that show they are better than a Jaguar CPU. A57 is the min chip in the NS CPU though it may actually have A73 as well. LPDDR4 is better than DDR3 in the Xbox One. The difference is that NS will have 3.2GB vs 5GB avail for games and running at 26GB/s vs XboxOne's 68GB/s. This is why I say they are comparable. (PS4 has better GDDR4 as well as faster) However, in the long-haul of game develpment, PCs can run any current AAA game at low to mid-settings on just 2GB of RAM in the GPU. NS will be fine in this area. NS does in fact have active cooling. See the patent details if you wish. It runs at low speed during portable and high speed when docked so the system an run at max. The only significant difference is the GPU power from NS to XboxOne and PS4. Here it will be ~1/2 to 2/3 of Xbox One levels which as well all know is also lower than PS4... and that is not focusing on max Tegra can do, but normal. Max is actually equivalent to Xbox One. There is no reason, and devs in GAF have stated this as well, that 3rd parties would be prevented from porting to NS. I expect: Of course 1st party games will be 720p / 1080p. |
Errrrr.... a lot wrong with this post.
First off, I dont know where you or anyone is getting this impression that a tegra X1 arm CPU is more powerful than a Jaguar x86 cpu. that's not true.
and LPDDR4 is NOT better than DDR3 ram. Not even close. You know what the LP stands for right? And just look at your chart at the start of this thread. The quality of a memory solution is measured by its bandwidth. The higher the bandwidth the better he ram solution. Switch bandwidth is at what? 25-30GB? How can you say that's better than X1 which is at 60GB+? Only thing it does better is that it uses less power. period.
And memory bandwidth doesn't have the kind of size relationship you are drawing. 3GB of ram running at 25Gb/s doest make it comparable to 5GB of ram running at 50GB/s..... it just doesn't work that way.
Lastly, its not going to be as easy as you think for devs to carry a game like say COD/BF and port it over from the XB1 to the switch. Without going into too much detail, porting from the PC to the XB1/PS4 kinda means they tone down certain assets and find margins that the platforms are comfortable with. By they at least know they are working with platforms that have 6 available cpu cores, a GPUs that are for the .let part identical, and an identical allotment of ram. All that goes out the window when making a Switch version.
Not saying it's impossible. just saying its not as easy as you make it sound. And I wouldn't put stock in what devs or anyone say about hardware before the hardware actually comes out. Rememebr EA's unprecedented partnership with Nintendo? how did that play out?
