| jonathanalis said: helping the topic: If is soo weak, and so low clock setup, why would it need a cooler fan?(or even the passive cooling system while not docked) Tablets with higher pressets and clocks dont need that. |
Some parts of the world hit 40'C/104'F or more.
Nintendo may have made a cost cutting measure by removing metal heatsinks in favor of a cheaper fan.
The fan may also only engage under rare extreme instances.
The fan may not be in retail units.
And... It might be the only fan Nintendo has left. (Joking. :P)
| Zkuq said: 3. Why wouldn't everyone want it to succeed, and who says it won't succeed? Most likely a successful Switch can only increase software sales, and publishers want to be on Nintendo's good side and capable of developing efficiently for Switch. Also, Switch development ought to be cheaper due to weaker specs (and consequently lower expectations) (mind you, it could also be somewhat costly for games that try to push the hardware really, really hard, but I'd expect it to still be cheaper than PS4/XB1 development). |
If a developer is building a game for a High-End PC/Playstation 4 and Xbox One, the costs are going to be pretty static as there isn't massive reworking of assets, most of the time it's just Framerate/Resolution or both being the only main difference.
Porting those same games to the Switch will cost money as assets need to be reworked in order to get the game operational for the slower hardware.
If the switch used a full-blown Tegra, that wouldn't be as much of a concern, it would have been "good enough". - But when it's running at such hampered clock rates, then that hampers things significantly and will drive up the cost of downgrading games to run on it.
Now if the Switch is the leed platform for a game and a developer decides to port it to the Xbox One/Playstation 4 and improve the graphics whilst they are at it, then of course development costs will also increase.
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
