By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JRPGfan on 20 December 2016
Edit Thread
Pemalite said:
curl-6 said:

You do get better performance per watt, yeah, but at the end of the day, Xbox One S can consume more than 70 watts when running a game, while a portable will have to make do with about a tenth of that in order to have decent battery life while not only powering the CPU/GPU/RAM, but also the screen.

And why would you deem such a scenario impossible? The Xbox One S is using old inefficient technology. (Not stating the Switch is using cutting edge either but.)

Again, Volta powered Tegra should drop next year, which should be Xbox One levels of performance, built at the same 16nm Finfet at TSMC and use a fraction of the energy.

nVidia has the efficiency edge even against AMD.
Even nVidia's 28nm maxwell chips can give AMD's 14nm Polaris chips a run for it's money in regards to performance/effeciency.

And there are a ton of reasons why.

That Nvidia coolaid :p

The Tegra X1 uses like 30watts of power to reach those 512 Gflops its able to do in the shield console.

Without powering a screen or anything extra.

Hell a Hard disk drive is 4-5watts alone, and PS4 & XB1 use those.

Even if Nvidia tried to do a 1teraflop Mobile chip, it would still be in the 50+watt range.

You make it sound like the Chips inside the PS4 & XB1 are bad, and their really not.

Not at the power levels of graphics they do.

 

 

This chart is useing old review scores, but AMD drivers for the 470/480 have done alot since it released.

And look at that the most effecient GPU chip at 1920x1080 resolutions is a RX 470!