| FunFan said: Enter the GeForce 830m. What so special about it? Two things: 1- It’s based on the Maxwell architecture. That is one of the rumored architectures the Switch custom GPU is based on. The other possible GPU architecture being the much improved Pascal. 2- Its rated at 526 gigaflops. The Tegra X-1 (also Maxwell) is rated at 512 gigaflops. |
1) The Geforce 830M has 57% less bandwidth, than Tegra. - Both are based on Maxwell, so both have the same bandwidth saving technology.
2) The Tegra has double the Render-Out-Put Pipelines. But they are also running 33% slower each, giving the Geforce 830M a theoretical Render-output-pipeline disadvantage of 49%.
So as you can see, FLOPS isn't everything. And you should probably stop using it in the context you are intending.
The Geforce 830M however does have a Texture Mapping Unit and Polymorph engine edge, leading the Tegra by 33.9%
*****
Basically the comparison you used can only be used as a "guestimate" not something that is accurate.
| Soundwave said: The Tegra X1 in the Switch is 384 GFLOPS in docked mode and 152 GFLOPS undocked ... and games have to be able to run in both modes. 500 GFLOPS is a hypothetical top tier performance for the X1, even in the Shield Console is can only hold 500 GFLOP performance for a few minutes before it throttles itself down to 384 GFLOPS. |
Even without throttling, FLOPS is a "Theoretical" number anyway, with no guarentee's it can be achieved in the real world.
| barneystinson69 said: Thats it? The XB1 is 1.3tflops and the PS4 is 1.8. Thats about the same power as the Wii U. |
There is more to a GPU than flops. So try looking past it.
The fact that the Switch has significantly more usable DRAM is a big bonus just there, which allows for bigger and better textures.
The fact it uses carts is a massive advantage for the Switch as well. Giving it a massive advantage in streaming performance over optical-based (Possibly mechanical disk? Haven't seen the Cart specs yet.) systems, so it should require less DRAM as less data needs to be stored in DRAM.
| shikamaru317 said: Well, that Witcher 3 and Dark Souls 3 footage is running at 17 fps, but then again, since it's on PC it wouldn't have the level of optimization that a console release would. But on the other hand, Switch may have less than 500 gflops even when docked, we just don't know yet. I do think we could see some pretty impressive graphics on Switch in it's lifetime once devs get used to it, nothing mind blowing, but still quite good for something that is portable. The fact that we're getting Wii U level graphics undocked is quite impressive already. |
The GPU's aren't identical anyway. The Geforce 830M in many aspects is slower than Tegra, it's to be used as a guide, to give you a "ballpark" idea of the Tegra's capability. Not something to be used in a literal fashion.
| Alkibiádēs said: If it was only slightly better it wouldn't run Mario Kart 8 at 1080p without a problem. |
Whilst you are right, to be fair, Mario Kart 8 isn't exactly the most graphical demanding game to grace the Wii U. :P
Zelda is more demanding... And partly because of it's render distance.
| curl-6 said: Switch graphics look fine to me. They may not match PS4 or Xbox One pixel for pixel, but honestly I think Mario Odyssey looks absolutely beautiful, and if that's the kind of visuals we can expect moving forwards, I'd be more than happy. |
I don't think anyone expect Xbox One levels of performance anyway. (And if they did, those expectations were simply unrealistic.)
I expected for the device to be more capable than it was though, for 3rd party's to consider it.
Nintendo's artistic flair should help cover the hardware deficiency though.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
